Â
|
|
Quote: |
Jordan Raanan ESPN Staff Writer EAST RUTHERFORD, N.J. -- It wasn’t just the bloated number of runs that was different for the New York Giants on Sunday. It also was the type of runs that were being called. They weren’t the same that we’ve seen from this team the first five games of this season and most of the past three years. The Giants’ run game looked different in Sunday’s 23-10 win over the Denver Broncos. There was more variety than the usual “power” running plays they seem to favor. There were traps (see Orleans Darkwa’s 47-yard run early in the second quarter), quick dives and an increased diet of outside zone. The placement of the running back also was more varied. The backs were more often lined up 5 yards behind the line of scrimmage instead of seven. |
11 personel plays were way too predictable and every D coordinator we played against has figured it out since 2015.
The "new" Giants running game wasn't on display until Sunday night. Seattle's bye week didn't give them any planning advantage
What would you expect, especially in the NFL. It got to the point where defenses knew the plays we were running before the snap.
Quote:
To see if this running game is in fact real or not. The Seahawks coming off a bye were able to gameplan for this running game now. It will be very interesting to see if the Giants can stick with the running game again. I have my doubts, but this is a great test for the OL and RBs.
The "new" Giants running game wasn't on display until Sunday night. Seattle's bye week didn't give them any planning advantage
Right, but they did know that the Giants were going to have NO credible Wide Receivers for this game, so they have been able to gameplan to stop the Giants running game. They knew that before Denver, and even moreso now. Teams are now going to stack the box and dare Eli to beat them. Funny because we would have begged for this situation last year and earlier this year.
Under MacAdoo, have we ever run play action on the first play of a game?
I've seen it work beautifully for other teams over the years.
Of course you don't want to do it every game, but a run play on the first play is pretty predictable and play action takes advantage of that.
I guess he's a modern day Jim Lee Howell who can't coach offense or defense.
Quote:
Ben McAdoo.
I guess he's a modern day Jim Lee Howell who can't coach offense or defense.
If the team has as much success as they did under Howell, I'll take it. Isn't this also basically the knock Terry Bradshaw threw at Mike Tomlin?
There's worse things then a HC who just manages things at a high level and let's the his assistants deal with the X's and O's. Gotta have the right coordinators though.
. . . Peggy.
and
So we have MMQB @ SI saying that the Giants gave a blueprint by avoiding zone runs and rushing inside. We have Raanan @ ESPN saying that the Giants changed this up by (among other things) "an increased diet of outside zone runs".
I don't have enough information to point out if anyone is wrong here, but they do seem to contradict each other at least in part. Thoughts?
To Defenderdawg's thread on the article. - ( New Window )
McAdoo has been terrible at play design, game planning and scheming and its clear as day that McAdoo isn't an X's and O's guy. Our best hope to salvage something from these McAdoo years is that he's some kind of a motivational guy like Parcells was. But the obstinance Ben displayed by refusing to give up play calling - even when it was well past obvious that he wasn't having any success as a play caller - is not a good sign that McAdoo has the self awareness to improve. I just don't understand how it took him so long to turn over play calling to someone else.
McAdoo's obstinance and arrogance basically cost the Giants this entire season. And I don't care what Mara says - obviously giving up play calling wasn't McAdoo's decision. I'll bet if ownership hadn't told him to give up play calling the Giants would have gone into Denver with the same 11 personnel sets and slants to the WRs that McAdoo's been running for years.
Teams know what Dallas is going to run. They know what GB is going to run with Rodgers. Still can't always stop them.
Giants offense wasn't predictable as much as it was just plain bad. McAdoo's system was broken. He used the wrong personnel at the wrong times and had zero feel for tempo.
Some of the best offenses of all time were predictable.
Quote:
Zone running schemes don’t do well against this club; they’re laterally quick and extremely aggressive on the backside with Shaquil Barrett and Von Miller mopping up a ton of ball-carriers from behind.
and
Quote:
To beat these men, you have to run at them. Check that. You have to run at everyone but Miller. One-cut running, right up the gut. And that just what the Giants did, with their shuffled and reshuffled offensive line. Of New York’s 32 rushing attempts, seven carries went for more than five yards, and all seven went away from Miller’s side of the field. The Giants discovered favorable matchups on the interior with Denver tackles Domato Peko and Adam Gotsis, Wolfe’s interior line counterparts.
So we have MMQB @ SI saying that the Giants gave a blueprint by avoiding zone runs and rushing inside. We have Raanan @ ESPN saying that the Giants changed this up by (among other things) "an increased diet of outside zone runs".
I don't have enough information to point out if anyone is wrong here, but they do seem to contradict each other at least in part. Thoughts?
To Defenderdawg's thread on the article. - ( New Window )
My thought is nobody actually knows what goes on at the line of scrimmage without knowing the playcalls or having firsthand knowledge, but virtually everyone who claims they do know is absolutely certain that they're right.