By the mood of this board today, I think most of you are pissed that the Giants didn't fit your narrative last night. Just curious, did you want us to lay down on national TV and get blown out? Because I saw Giants football last night and it was fucking tremendous. And for those that are going to say "well all this proves is we still suck" or "it's pathetic that McAdoo didn't do this earlier" or "well the offense still kinda sucked"....Denver is a very good defensive team and we beat them up in the trenches on both sides. Eli didn't need to throw the ball 30 times for us to win this game. We got a 3 score lead late in the 3rd quarter, it's almost impossible to give that up if you play smart, and that's what happened. Not sure about everyone else but I'm going to enjoy this one and look forward to Seattle.
The Giants have only won at Mile High one other time in the series history, and that was 1989.
If we had any semblance of that in the first 5 games, we wouldn't be so far behind the 8 ball.
I'm never going to root for them to lose. Even if I think they would be better off doing so.
All this draft-pick nonsense... Look, good teams--teams that regularly make the playoffs--never have great draft picks. But they perpetually put together a BETTER team than a lot of weaker teams with higher picks.
Great game last night. Loved it!
This really is an indictment on the coaching staff though. The stubbornness in not shuffling the deck on the OL sooner. The unwillingness to give up the play calling until now. We will never know but you would think some of that was forced upon McAdoo.
If not for the injury to Perkins, he still may be getting most of the touches.
If the team was really poor and there was a drastic plateau of talent in the draft after first few picks I'd understand tanking but that's not the case. This is not the NBA.
The tear it down crowd not looking particularly good after pst night.
All this draft-pick nonsense... Look, good teams--teams that regularly make the playoffs--never have great draft picks. But they perpetually put together a BETTER team than a lot of weaker teams with higher picks.
I do see your point, however...
the weaker teams are always looking for a QB and the better teams usually have an established QB...the pats/packers/steelers/seahawks...so on make bad picks to but they have had elite qb's.
The better teams are perpetually better because of the QB's not always because they are getting steals later in the draft.
Once Eli is gone we will struggle until we find another franchise QB too regardless of where we pick.
Point is, hopefully we will not be a top 5 worse team very often so when you are dealt that hand might as well make the most of it. The win vs DEN just isn't sustainable.
If the team was really poor and there was a drastic plateau of talent in the draft after first few picks I'd understand tanking but that's not the case. This is not the NBA.
The tear it down crowd not looking particularly good after pst night.
Unfortunately, it still needs to be torn down. One win doesn't change a season and a half of offensive futility.
It doesn't change the fact that the offensive line is still a wreck after 6 years trying to fix it.
And while I'm glad he finally did it, McAdoo not handing over playcalling duties until the season was lost, with all of our starting WR's gone, and it actually looking successful, doesn't make him look that great, either.
Since the Giants were 12 point underdogs against the #1 defense in the NFL and struggled on offense, defense and special teams... you have to be a little happy and a little surprised at the game.
If we had any semblance of that in the first 5 games, we wouldn't be so far behind the 8 ball.
I'm never going to root for them to lose. Even if I think they would be better off doing so.
+1000
Everyone around here needs to predict the future and make grand statements. Maybe we should just take it in one week at a time.
How exactly was it CLEAR that Eli had a different comfort level with Sully calling the plays?
I'm glad they made the switch to Sully and I hope it works out, but when McAdoo was calling the plays he had...
- Perkins as his #1 RB
- A different OL lineup
- Flowers not playing well
- A defense that did not force turnovers, score points or play well
- Special teams that was not playing well
To be fair, McAdoo also had all his WRs for 4 1/2 games (although OBJ missed 1+ game and was sub par for two or three others) and Sully did not.
But I don't know how anyone could say unequivocally that Sully did a better job than Mac, let alone that it was CLEAR that Eli had a different (better) comfort level with Sully.
It sure is easier for an OC to call a game when your team's D is playing well and scoring points, and your running game is working.
And the fact is...when a particular play, a series of plays or an entire game of play calling "works" it often has far more to do with execution than it does play selection.
but I'm a fan -- and watching the Giants lose every game is not copacetic in my DNA
Last night's win was what I expected to see out of this team coming into the season. This team has a lot of talent and there was no reason to believe the defense couldn't play like this - they've been playing like dog crap for 5 games...
But watching the Offense pound the ball - especially breaking it through for a first down in the final drive and sealing the deal, an Oline making some plays -- and the Defense making some stops -- that was fun to see. I had zero expectations the Giants could win last night and they pleasantly surprised me
- Perkins as his #1 RB
- A different OL lineup
- Flowers not playing well
- A defense that did not force turnovers, score points or play well
- Special teams that was not playing well
Who chose to put that offensive lineup out there? Who chose to start Perkins week after week? Who's responsible for Flowers not playing well?
They scored on their opening drive for the first time this year. They put up a lead and held it.
All of this without their 3 starting receivers.
How can it NOT be clear that the offense was running better with Sullivan calling the plays?
but I'm a fan -- and watching the Giants lose every game is not copacetic in my DNA
Last night's win was what I expected to see out of this team coming into the season. This team has a lot of talent and there was no reason to believe the defense couldn't play like this - they've been playing like dog crap for 5 games...
But watching the Offense pound the ball - especially breaking it through for a first down in the final drive and sealing the deal, an Oline making some plays -- and the Defense making some stops -- that was fun to see. I had zero expectations the Giants could win last night and they pleasantly surprised me
100% agree. My immediate sentiment (other than the thrill of watching them play good football) was regret we didn't make some of the changes like on the Oline and the play-calling much earlier. At 1-5 it may be too little too late. I will still root my ass off every week for wins though.
They'll get Shep back at some point.
I'm happy they played with an identity last night. They looked like an 80s Giants team.
I'm never going to root for them to lose. Even if I think they would be better off doing so.
My feelings too. Even in 2003, I was rooting for wins with Jesse Palmer playing QB.
This was a good win, but the Broncos were the perfect opponent in a way. They have inconsistent QB play, we have an excellent defense. As good as their defense is, they struggle v. the run, so the new OL configuration was a godsend; I hope it is the line up here on out.
That said, you're not going to win too many games with 2 catches and 5 targets to your WR's.
Quote:
the reality is that we are insanely thin at WR and there is no help coming there. I would have liked to see what Sullivan/Eli could do with a full compliment of the weapons they should have.
They'll get Shep back at some point.
I'm happy they played with an identity last night. They looked like an 80s Giants team.
That's a perfect way to put it.
They finally played with an identity on offense, last night.
They scored on their opening drive for the first time this year. They put up a lead and held it.
All of this without their 3 starting receivers.
How can it NOT be clear that the offense was running better with Sullivan calling the plays?
Well you didn't actually say that the offense was running better with Sully. You SAID that it was clear that Eli had a different comfort level with Sullivan and I was challenging how that could possibly be "clear" to you.
But if you prefer to discuss how could it not be clear that the O was running better with Sullivan calling the plays...I would simply say that it can't possibly be clear because you don't fact "execution" into the equation.
A play caller can call the perfect play but what happens when an O-lineman misses a block, a runner doesn't see the hole, a QB overthrows the WR or the WR drops a catchable pass? That's NOT the play callers fault.
It is entirely possible that the reason the offense looked better last night was because of execution and not because of play calling. Plus when you compare how the D played last night to their previous efforts, the O simply didn't have to do as much as in previous games.
I'm not saying Sully didn't call a better game. I just don't think it's as cut and dry as, "the plays worked better...so it HAS to be the OC."
Quote:
of yards.
They scored on their opening drive for the first time this year. They put up a lead and held it.
All of this without their 3 starting receivers.
How can it NOT be clear that the offense was running better with Sullivan calling the plays?
Well you didn't actually say that the offense was running better with Sully. You SAID that it was clear that Eli had a different comfort level with Sullivan and I was challenging how that could possibly be "clear" to you.
But if you prefer to discuss how could it not be clear that the O was running better with Sullivan calling the plays...I would simply say that it can't possibly be clear because you don't fact "execution" into the equation.
A play caller can call the perfect play but what happens when an O-lineman misses a block, a runner doesn't see the hole, a QB overthrows the WR or the WR drops a catchable pass? That's NOT the play callers fault.
It is entirely possible that the reason the offense looked better last night was because of execution and not because of play calling. Plus when you compare how the D played last night to their previous efforts, the O simply didn't have to do as much as in previous games.
I'm not saying Sully didn't call a better game. I just don't think it's as cut and dry as, "the plays worked better...so it HAS to be the OC."
That's a lot of words to argue something that most on the board thought was pretty clear ie: Sullivan looking better than McAdoo at calling the plays.
Eli looked more comfortable to me. Especially to start the game.
Quote:
of yards.
They scored on their opening drive for the first time this year. They put up a lead and held it.
All of this without their 3 starting receivers.
How can it NOT be clear that the offense was running better with Sullivan calling the plays?
Well you didn't actually say that the offense was running better with Sully. You SAID that it was clear that Eli had a different comfort level with Sullivan and I was challenging how that could possibly be "clear" to you.
But if you prefer to discuss how could it not be clear that the O was running better with Sullivan calling the plays...I would simply say that it can't possibly be clear because you don't fact "execution" into the equation.
A play caller can call the perfect play but what happens when an O-lineman misses a block, a runner doesn't see the hole, a QB overthrows the WR or the WR drops a catchable pass? That's NOT the play callers fault.
It is entirely possible that the reason the offense looked better last night was because of execution and not because of play calling. Plus when you compare how the D played last night to their previous efforts, the O simply didn't have to do as much as in previous games.
I'm not saying Sully didn't call a better game. I just don't think it's as cut and dry as, "the plays worked better...so it HAS to be the OC."
I saw a variety of run plays that we didn't see with McAdoo calling the plays. Different personnel groups, different blocking schemes, etc. Example would be the inside trap play when Darkwa broke off a nice run up the gut. When was the last time a guard pulled on an interior run with McAdoo calling the plays?
Sullivan featured the TE, and the week before Engram saw zero targets.
I'm not saying Sullivan is the second coming, but last night it looked like he had a better feel for the pulse of the offense than McAdoo.
We are 3Xs removed from the team but could tell
our best run blocker was Fluker
Our best tackles is Pugh
Our best RB were Darkwa and Gallman
McAdoo should have given up play calling
I have no idea where defense has been...but they looked a ton better last night....not sure what was done....
All would be forgiven If they win 11 straight
We are 3Xs removed from the team but could tell
our best run blocker was Fluker
Our best tackles is Pugh
Our best RB were Darkwa and Gallman
McAdoo should have given up play calling
I have no idea where defense has been...but they looked a ton better last night....not sure what was done....
All would be forgiven If they win 11 straight
This. All fucking day, this.
Not to mention also factoring in the QB changing the play at the line of scrimmage or the opposing D missing a tackle, blowing coverage, etc.
All most fans know is...
The play works = Great call by the OC
The play fails = Bad call by the OC
And the fact that you thought, expression-less, stone-faced Eli looked "more comfortable" to you (especially at the beginning of the game) I think has more to do with confirmation bias than anything else.
You thought all along that Sully should have been calling the plays so you consciously and subconsciously looked for "facts" to support that stance.
So I am torn, it is nice to see a good game being played. But we sure could use to draft a new QB for the future. 5+ wins does not help that cause.
on the road is no picnic .
The frustrating part is how long it's taken to get some kind
of a run game going and the offense is still very limited in
the ability to score it's the same script as last season
tonight we finally got a couple of picks and Jack Rabbits
pick six allowed us to run the ball a little more .
Two passes to the WR's isn't gonna cut it and we have to
remain healthy . I don't see the defense repeating what they
did last season nor do I see the scoring improve .
As long as they play hard and with pride thats all you can ask but were a bit handcuffed now . So it was an enjoyable win but It's not hard to wish for a chance at some premier
talent coming out in the draft in April .
Not to mention also factoring in the QB changing the play at the line of scrimmage or the opposing D missing a tackle, blowing coverage, etc.
All most fans know is...
The play works = Great call by the OC
The play fails = Bad call by the OC
And the fact that you thought, expression-less, stone-faced Eli looked "more comfortable" to you (especially at the beginning of the game) I think has more to do with confirmation bias than anything else.
You thought all along that Sully should have been calling the plays so you consciously and subconsciously looked for "facts" to support that stance.
Without our 3 starting WR's, we scored on our opening drive for the first time this season, and then again a drive later, both chain moving, time consuming drives with an identity. We utilized our TE in our gameplan after he got zero targets last week.
They rolled the pocket a few times to buy Eli time. That looked comfortable to me.
Who was also coming off a Bye
#1 defense, at home, without your starting 3 WR's.
They came out poised and took a 10-0 lead which they never relinquished.
That's the bottom line, and something they've failed to do all year.
It was a well coached game. We jumped out to a lead and the defense played confident. What I wonder is, does Sullivan have full say when it comes to kicking FG’s/going for it on 4th down? I say that because I loved the call to kick the 51 yard FG- that was such an important kick to set the tone for the second half and go up 20-3. I feel McAdoo would not have elected to kick that.
The revamped line, was able to open holes....
Darkwa, got hit a few times, and got up slowly, and I thought, oh, oh, here we go again.....but he managed to stay in the game this time....to think we would have a 100 yard rusher this year, just did not compute...against Denver no less....
But the offense only scored 13 points, which was enough for this game.....it has to score more to win....
Can the defense play at the same level next week?
Will DRC play?
Wilson needs to be contained.....
And can the running game continue to produce?
A win against Seattle and who knows?
Normally I would agree with you 100%, but right now, we need to draft Eli's successor. Having a top draft pick would make that feasible. I will be disappointed if we win just enough games to fuck us out of a chance to draft a blue chip QB prospect.
Brutal! I agree, but tough to lay the blame on the defense for those 2 or 3 losses. I'd say the Tampa and SD losses were certainly tough for the defense. The Philly loss...we looked like a pop warner offense in the first half, so tough to lay it entirely on the D.
In any case, it SUCKS we aren't 2-4 or 3-3. On to Seattle and let's see what happens.
this would suggest to me 'cant miss' prospects, etc. is mostly draft junkie jabber. I agree with GT wholeheartedly.
Quote:
Besides, drafting well has little to do with where you are in the draft. It's not about a single pick.
Normally I would agree with you 100%, but right now, we need to draft Eli's successor. Having a top draft pick would make that feasible. I will be disappointed if we win just enough games to fuck us out of a chance to draft a blue chip QB prospect.
If there is conviction for a guy, trade for him. See Carson Wentz & Patrick Mahomes. Also, the NFL is different now. Franchise QB’s don’t need to be taken with the top 3 picks.
What can I say? When you're right, you're right :)
Not just because of the draft picks, but because this team, such as it's run, will look for any reason to not make the hard changes that a team that consistently misses the playoffs (7/9 years) and will finish sub .500 for the fourth time in five years should be making.
I'm not going to pretend that's not the case and I'm not going to start handing out brownie points to a head coach whose abject failures this season helped make them a non-contender before October came close to ending because they finally won one game where they had 12 first downs, no matter the opponent.
I don't expect the players to give up, because that's not how they're wired, though. Or at least not how they should be wired.
I don't want to be embarrassing anymore. I enjoyed last night. It was nice watching the Giants to a man get the monkey off its back.
I keep going back to seasons like 1988 and 2006. They were brutally tough seasons...but they led to better things. At the time there was very little proof that these seasons were anything more than mere evidence that the team under-achieved. Maybe they did...but they showed fight. If this team can come out of the ashes with some hope and maybe an identity, we'd have to take it and run.
I know we all want scorched earth. Fire everyone...get the young QB...all that...but we don't really want that. If this team gets off the mat and battles to a competitive finish it would show that maybe things aren't as dire as they seem. Let's see what happens. Gotta have hope.
Exactly. It's how you scout and who you pick.
You need to hit on picks other than your first rounder..........
The other issue is I am not confident the current front office would get the pick right anyway. I would want to trade down.
Regardless, I will not root for losses.
The way the league is rigged is if you are in middle you will stay in middle.
Look at Redskins or Eagles . When is last time they made serious run in payoffs? Always end up somewhere around 8-8.
Giants need to seriously look at Webb and all other young players. If the are "Players" keep them . If not drop em.
Eli is finished. Talk in Denver is maybe trade for Eli.
They scored on their opening drive for the first time this year. They put up a lead and held it.
All of this without their 3 starting receivers.
How can it NOT be clear that the offense was running better with Sullivan calling the plays?
I thought the offense looked much different last night and that was before I knew that Sullivan was calling the plays, why in hell was BMac so stubborn about giving up the play calling.....
So I am torn, it is nice to see a good game being played. But we sure could use to draft a new QB for the future. 5+ wins does not help that cause.
No, we should be 1-5. They put a shit team on the field and they played like shit for most of the time in those games. Don't get caught up in overstating the last minute of a few ball games. They weren't ready to play competitive football when the season started in September and that's on McAdoo and his players because we know they have more ability than showed. Remember that the next time some idiot tells you how you look in preseason is meaningless.
A shame this season is near over for the home team and it isn't even Halloween yet...
The NFC and NFL are both a fucking mess. A little run and a little Help and this season still has teeth. I’ve long stopped worrying about sucking into the top of the draft. Would rather see us pull together and make a run at the WC. So far from over.
So we get to avoid the disappointment that would come from finishing 3-13 or 4-12 and still not getting a young franchise QB out of the deal. Now we can focus on winning instead of having mixed feelings that would've gone for naught anyway.
Eagles look fairly competitive this year-they moved up to get their qb. And they had a few 10-6 seasons under chip kelly so dont know what people are saying. I also remember the aughts as being pretty damn good for the Eagles.