I usually always agree with you, but Reese was over his head and arrogant. Six years and he can't rebuild an OL, even when spending three high draft picks on the position? Linebackers? Don't need them. Re-signing players like John Jerry?
Remember too.....it's human nature to get cocky when you win two SB's - however they were won. That's some hardware to back you up when any comes after you and criticizes.
You start believing your way is the only way..........
The ‘11 SB win was a blessing and a curse. The OL struggled all year, Reese pulled Blackburn off his couch and they still won the championship. After that, Reese probably thought he could get the team “in the tournament” consistently with subpar OL play and JAGs at LB.
Jerry earned that promotion with his sterling work as scouting director, and it's not as if he were a disaster from day one. He had his successes.
I never bought into the Reese hype of him as a top three GM. I don't buy into him being a garbage GM now, either. I can certainly see him go elsewhere and have success - and I wanted his ouster.
I was a bit stunned to see him fired before the season was over. He must have had a larger role in the Eli mess than let on.
Not necessarily, if you're absolutely sure you're getting rid of the coach, and 80/20 on getting rid of the GM once you make the decision to get rid of the coach before the end of the season you pretty much need to get the GM search started so you can move on coaches after black monday.
Most of those names are interesting to me because they are Â
connected to the Trader Joes in the NFL. I want an aggressive GM who is not afraid to listen to trade offers. Someone who is not afraid to pick up a phone!
expressed and others. He ignored the deterioration of the offensive line or its aging and tried to fill with lower round draft picks. But, at the same time, he let the defensive line deteriorate thus forcing a $200M expenditure.
But what I believe is even worse is that there never seemed to be a plan on what Reese wanted the Giants to be. Under TC/Gilbride, the Giants ran the ball and made a lot of big plays. We had Shockey, then Boss, then Ballard as our tight ends. They were also good blockers. But we could not run the ball as the line got older and we did not replenish guys like Snee, McKenzie, Diehl, Seubert. Baas was a bad signing in that he was virtually injured from day one.
I firmly believe you have to have a philosophy of how you want to build your team and keep to that philosophy as much as you can. Thus, having a philosophy directs you to the type of player you want to draft etc. Everything revolves around that philosophy...not just players but coaches and scouts also. You don't waste your time, for the most part, looking at players who you believe do not fit your philosophy.
The Giants, historically, have been a team built on defense. New York fans appreciate that and recognize its value hence we should always be looking, drafting or signing players that continue to keep the defense strong. I also believe that in the NorthEast you have to be able to run the ball, especially with the winds at the Meadowlands. What I am getting at is I have no idea what the Giants philosophy is or what they are looking for? When I look at Pittsburgh, I know exactly what their philosophy is and how they want to build their team. They draft accordingly and it has been pretty successful for them.
To me, the biggest issue for a new GM and then a new coach is what kind of team do we want to be. Then you sign players, draft players, get free agents that match that philosophy and you keep doing that, year after year. That way you maintain consistency and players know, when they are drafted by the Giants, what is expected from them and how they are supposed to play. Until we rediscover that, I think we will continue to suffer. You can't keep bouncing back from one way of playing to another. You have to have consistency as an organization in terms of how you want to play and therefore the type of players you seek.
will not be the choice. McDaniels did some weird stuff in a brief stint with Denver but he has been solid as a rock with the Patriots. I think he was young and had to much on his plate in Denver.
times. It seemed Reese had a philosophy of building from the outside in...getting skill players etc but basically ignoring the interior line etc. I would venture to say this was his downfall. You build a football team from the inside out...in other words, you make sure your lines are strong on both sides of the ball.
I hate to keep referring to it but our great teams of the 80's had strong offensive lines, excellent tight ends, average wide receivers and good running backs. Our D had a ferocious front seven but relatively average defensive backs or certainly no Pro Bowlers.
Yet we won and won consistently. In fact, I remember watching those games and being very confident on our ability to wear other teams down and win in the 4th quarter. I still believe that philosophy works today and I also believe that is what the philosophy of the New York Giants should always be.
You don't keep your job for over a decade and win 2 super bowls if you're doing everything wrong. We can split hairs about how much of the successes were from luck or other factors and how much of his failures are all on him. However there's enough of a body of work there to grade him for what he was - an OK to solid GM with some flaws. If he fixes those flaws, he can be a great hire for another organization. Keep in mind, I wanted him fired as well.
In terms of the next GM, I'd like to see them go outside of the organization, so I'm not keen on Abrams, Ross or Gettleman. I think the Giants are in desperate need of some fresh perspective. Decosta, Dorsey and Caserio are my current favorites.
the criticism of Reese being an "outside in" talent acquirer is Â
accurate. When he took over in 2007 it worked because a solid OL was already in place. As the line deteriorated he proved at first unwilling and later on incapable of rebuilding it.
many people better than Abrahms from a cap management standpoint. I'd be fine if he focused on that aspect and had somebody for personnel evaluation, but perhaps Abrahms is good there too - I don't know.
But he's proven that he's excellent in managing the numbers.
McClay is the reason the Cowboys have drafted better the last 3 or 4 years not Steven Jones or Jerry Jones.
Might be an option to the names mentioned as GM candidates in the Glauber article.
Hit the nail on the head, Reese inherited a great OLine and a franchise QB, he also inherited a great DLine, he only needed to fill in the holes at the skill positions, Reese was great at drafting wide receivers, that is why I never gave Reese the credit for the first Super Bowl, that was Ernie's, almost every position on that tam was an Ernie pick, he added Bradshaw, Smith, and Boss and they helped out a little that season. The second was a 9-7 team and just got hot at the right time, they were more lucky, Reese never built a dominant team, ever. But like it was said, he was great at picking wide receivers. Smith, Hicks, Manningham, Beckham, and Cruz. But other then that position, he was not good at all.
that is why I never gave Reese the credit for the first Super Bowl, that was Ernie's, almost every position on that tam was an Ernie pick, he added Bradshaw, Smith, and Boss and they helped out a little that season.
Ernie didn't pick shit aside from Eli. Reese ran the draft 2003-2007. Yes, Ernie was the driving force behind acquiring Eli. Aside from that, he went with Reese's draft board. Look at the dramatic upgrade in draft success once Reese supplanted the Rug/Marv Sunderland duo. Accorsi and Sunderland presided over a series of drafts from 1998-2002 that were unspeakably bad. The only reason Accorsi wasn't run out of town on a rail at that point was the talent he inherited from George Young - Strahan, Armstead, Sehorn, Tiki, Ron Stone.
RE: I've been wanting Reese fired for five years...for the reasons Eric Â
expressed and others. He ignored the deterioration of the offensive line or its aging and tried to fill with lower round draft picks. But, at the same time, he let the defensive line deteriorate thus forcing a $200M expenditure.
But what I believe is even worse is that there never seemed to be a plan on what Reese wanted the Giants to be. Under TC/Gilbride, the Giants ran the ball and made a lot of big plays. We had Shockey, then Boss, then Ballard as our tight ends. They were also good blockers. But we could not run the ball as the line got older and we did not replenish guys like Snee, McKenzie, Diehl, Seubert. Baas was a bad signing in that he was virtually injured from day one.
I firmly believe you have to have a philosophy of how you want to build your team and keep to that philosophy as much as you can. Thus, having a philosophy directs you to the type of player you want to draft etc. Everything revolves around that philosophy...not just players but coaches and scouts also. You don't waste your time, for the most part, looking at players who you believe do not fit your philosophy.
The Giants, historically, have been a team built on defense. New York fans appreciate that and recognize its value hence we should always be looking, drafting or signing players that continue to keep the defense strong. I also believe that in the NorthEast you have to be able to run the ball, especially with the winds at the Meadowlands. What I am getting at is I have no idea what the Giants philosophy is or what they are looking for? When I look at Pittsburgh, I know exactly what their philosophy is and how they want to build their team. They draft accordingly and it has been pretty successful for them.
To me, the biggest issue for a new GM and then a new coach is what kind of team do we want to be. Then you sign players, draft players, get free agents that match that philosophy and you keep doing that, year after year. That way you maintain consistency and players know, when they are drafted by the Giants, what is expected from them and how they are supposed to play. Until we rediscover that, I think we will continue to suffer. You can't keep bouncing back from one way of playing to another. You have to have consistency as an organization in terms of how you want to play and therefore the type of players you seek.
Rather than a long term "vision" (borrowing a business concept), Jerry seemed year to year to adopt erratic short term strategies, e.g. "team captains" or worse, finding "hidden gems" (the JPP of TEs) that only he of the other GMs knew about.
speaks to the fact that they want a new direction. EA was brought in to help with candidates OUTSIDE the organization. This is a fresh start. A painful one for the fans (and Mara too as he alluded to), but a fresh one. Personally, I would welcome a return to defense, run the ball, big pass plays on offense. Befits a northeast team in the cold and wind.
i'm always surprised when people make this distinction. accorsi has said numerous times that in his view, it's a passing league, and that means you need a QB, and you need a top DL and DBs to defend against the pass. he didnt' invest in LBs, and he believed you could build an OL without investing high draft picks. the only 1st round OL he ever drafted was Petitgout. and he only ever spent two other premium picks (3rd or higher) on OL - Snee in an incredibly deep draft, and the immortal Jeff Hatch. when he signed O'Hara, no one thought he was getting an all-pro. and let's not pretend they knew what Seubert - a street free agent - was going to become.
the OL difference in those year wasn't about a different philosophy - it was about player selection. O'Hara, Snee, Seubert all became terrific players. Diehl was the late round OL pick that Reese could never find as GM. McKenzie was the free agent signing that worked. to me, this was the organizations' great failing under reese. at some point, they stopped effectively evaluating OL prospects - it's been chronic for a while now. and there's not a lot of evidence that really ever acknowledged that or tried to figure that out. flowers was the culmination - they spent a top 10 pick on a player that no on else in the league expected to be a building block left tackle, and have paid the price.
Reese’s big gamble was that the OL would come together this year. If Flowers, Pugh, Richburg played as he expected, we would have a decent running game with Eli throwing to healthy receivers. The defense would not be on the field all day and that team would contend. With the OL sucking, in part because of injuries and no depth, Reese was a goner.
People here knock him for screwing up with late round picks that’s and while that’s true, the bigger problem was losing Nicks, Phillips and Wilson to go along with draft busts like Austin, Sintim, and Barden. If you don’t lose Nicks then you might draft Zack Martin. If you don’t lose Phillips you don’t overspend for Rolle. Couple extraordinary bad luck with high picks with losers and Reese’s stubbornness re the OL and this us the result. The proof of the pudding for me ignoring the OL in the draft. When he took Engram instead of an OL and didn’t sign s free agent, he was on borrowed time.
i'm always surprised when people make this distinction. accorsi has said numerous times that in his view, it's a passing league, and that means you need a QB, and you need a top DL and DBs to defend against the pass. he didnt' invest in LBs, and he believed you could build an OL without investing high draft picks. the only 1st round OL he ever drafted was Petitgout. and he only ever spent two other premium picks (3rd or higher) on OL - Snee in an incredibly deep draft, and the immortal Jeff Hatch. when he signed O'Hara, no one thought he was getting an all-pro. and let's not pretend they knew what Seubert - a street free agent - was going to become.
the OL difference in those year wasn't about a different philosophy - it was about player selection. O'Hara, Snee, Seubert all became terrific players. Diehl was the late round OL pick that Reese could never find as GM. McKenzie was the free agent signing that worked. to me, this was the organizations' great failing under reese. at some point, they stopped effectively evaluating OL prospects - it's been chronic for a while now. and there's not a lot of evidence that really ever acknowledged that or tried to figure that out. flowers was the culmination - they spent a top 10 pick on a player that no on else in the league expected to be a building block left tackle, and have paid the price.
I remember reading something about Ernie that he believed OL could be manufactured. He had an extremely high opinion of OL coach Jim McNally and thought he could turn anyone with the basic tools into a competent player. Remember we went into camp in 2003 with Ian Allen and Tam Hopkins as our starters on the right side of the line. By early season they weren't starting but the thought that those guys were adequate was as every bit as bizarre as thinking Hart and Flowers would get it done this year.
i'm always surprised when people make this distinction. accorsi has said numerous times that in his view, it's a passing league, and that means you need a QB, and you need a top DL and DBs to defend against the pass. he didnt' invest in LBs, and he believed you could build an OL without investing high draft picks. the only 1st round OL he ever drafted was Petitgout. and he only ever spent two other premium picks (3rd or higher) on OL - Snee in an incredibly deep draft, and the immortal Jeff Hatch. when he signed O'Hara, no one thought he was getting an all-pro. and let's not pretend they knew what Seubert - a street free agent - was going to become.
the OL difference in those year wasn't about a different philosophy - it was about player selection. O'Hara, Snee, Seubert all became terrific players. Diehl was the late round OL pick that Reese could never find as GM. McKenzie was the free agent signing that worked. to me, this was the organizations' great failing under reese. at some point, they stopped effectively evaluating OL prospects - it's been chronic for a while now. and there's not a lot of evidence that really ever acknowledged that or tried to figure that out. flowers was the culmination - they spent a top 10 pick on a player that no on else in the league expected to be a building block left tackle, and have paid the price.
I remember reading something about Ernie that he believed OL could be manufactured. He had an extremely high opinion of OL coach Jim McNally and thought he could turn anyone with the basic tools into a competent player. Remember we went into camp in 2003 with Ian Allen and Tam Hopkins as our starters on the right side of the line. By early season they weren't starting but the thought that those guys were adequate was as every bit as bizarre as thinking Hart and Flowers would get it done this year.
Flowers is light years ahead of Allen. Not even a legitimate comparison.
And lets not forget JPP in 2011 who may have been leagues best defender
Reese definitely deserved to be fired anytime after 2013 for the reasons already stated
I
But that doesnt mean we should regret he was ever hired
2007 was Accorsi’s. Reese walked into it.
Reese switched Diehl in to replace Petitgout at left tackle, taking a lot of criticism for doing so. He traded for Lawrence Tynes, moved Kiwanuka to linebacker, brought in Kawika Mitchell, and had seven of his eight draft picks get significant starting time through the season. Kevin Boss put up the longest play of Super Bowl XLII that led to the Giants' first touchdown in that game. Jay Alford provided the exclamation point to end the game and win the championship.
Reese definitely benefited from Accorsi's roster in 2007, but he put in some significant pieces on his own.
A good talent evaluater at the skill positions. But really struggled keeping the lines in top shape.
The Giants decision to go for it in 2012 is at the root of most of the Giants problems. They kept an obviously deteriorating OL together hoping it would be enough. It failed spectacularly and every OL pick since then has been mediocre. Drafting is a crap shoot, and the OL picks just did not work out for the Giants. Reese paid the price for sins in his control and out of his control.
that is why I never gave Reese the credit for the first Super Bowl, that was Ernie's, almost every position on that tam was an Ernie pick, he added Bradshaw, Smith, and Boss and they helped out a little that season.
Ernie didn't pick shit aside from Eli. Reese ran the draft 2003-2007. Yes, Ernie was the driving force behind acquiring Eli. Aside from that, he went with Reese's draft board. Look at the dramatic upgrade in draft success once Reese supplanted the Rug/Marv Sunderland duo. Accorsi and Sunderland presided over a series of drafts from 1998-2002 that were unspeakably bad. The only reason Accorsi wasn't run out of town on a rail at that point was the talent he inherited from George Young - Strahan, Armstead, Sehorn, Tiki, Ron Stone.
Great post! I am glad you posted this. I posted this many times in the past. EA with Reese was better than when he was with Sunderland. I give props for what Reese did to the scouting department.
granted late career George Young but GY's entire philosophy was what he called the elephant theory. That there were only so many large people on the planet and that a football team needed as many good ones as possible. Reese never got that memo.
All shine and no substance. You can't determine if the moves he makes are any good or if they are only good because of where they are being brought in to (their special "system", ie the cheating).
McDaniels was an absolute disaster in Denver even though he tried to bring the cheating system along with him (not as good at employing it as BB). Then he was a nightmare with the Rams. He only seems to work out in NE - he likely couldn't have even gotten another job after the Rams position if he didn't get cleansed again back in NE. It's fools gold.
I'd be worried about that same effect with Caserio. Look elsewhere.
All shine and no substance. You can't determine if the moves he makes are any good or if they are only good because of where they are being brought in to (their special "system", ie the cheating).
McDaniels was an absolute disaster in Denver even though he tried to bring the cheating system along with him (not as good at employing it as BB). Then he was a nightmare with the Rams. He only seems to work out in NE - he likely couldn't have even gotten another job after the Rams position if he didn't get cleansed again back in NE. It's fools gold.
I'd be worried about that same effect with Caserio. Look elsewhere.
To be fair, the Rams had Steven Jackson and nothing else on offense that year. Brandon Lloyd and Danario Alexander were their top wideouts.
All shine and no substance. You can't determine if the moves he makes are any good or if they are only good because of where they are being brought in to (their special "system", ie the cheating).
McDaniels was an absolute disaster in Denver even though he tried to bring the cheating system along with him (not as good at employing it as BB). Then he was a nightmare with the Rams. He only seems to work out in NE - he likely couldn't have even gotten another job after the Rams position if he didn't get cleansed again back in NE. It's fools gold.
I'd be worried about that same effect with Caserio. Look elsewhere.
To be fair, the Rams had Steven Jackson and nothing else on offense that year. Brandon Lloyd and Danario Alexander were their top wideouts.
Yes, but in almost all offensive categories they declined under his tenure. So he took a not great situation and made it worse. We've seen that happen here with recently exited HC, we don't need to see a repeat. Plenty of new HCs around the league are taking sub-par talent and putting up improved output. That's what we should be looking for...someone who has that ability rather than the opposite.
or McDaniels here, a lot easier working with arguably
the greatest coach and QB of all time. McDaniels seems
a bit thin skinned to me, you can't have that in NYC either.
Of the names listed, Eliot Wolf is an interesting choice possibly?
Quote:
I usually always agree with you, but Reese was over his head and arrogant. Six years and he can't rebuild an OL, even when spending three high draft picks on the position? Linebackers? Don't need them. Re-signing players like John Jerry?
Remember too.....it's human nature to get cocky when you win two SB's - however they were won. That's some hardware to back you up when any comes after you and criticizes.
You start believing your way is the only way..........
The ‘11 SB win was a blessing and a curse. The OL struggled all year, Reese pulled Blackburn off his couch and they still won the championship. After that, Reese probably thought he could get the team “in the tournament” consistently with subpar OL play and JAGs at LB.
Quote:
Jerry earned that promotion with his sterling work as scouting director, and it's not as if he were a disaster from day one. He had his successes.
I never bought into the Reese hype of him as a top three GM. I don't buy into him being a garbage GM now, either. I can certainly see him go elsewhere and have success - and I wanted his ouster.
I was a bit stunned to see him fired before the season was over. He must have had a larger role in the Eli mess than let on.
Not necessarily, if you're absolutely sure you're getting rid of the coach, and 80/20 on getting rid of the GM once you make the decision to get rid of the coach before the end of the season you pretty much need to get the GM search started so you can move on coaches after black monday.
But what I believe is even worse is that there never seemed to be a plan on what Reese wanted the Giants to be. Under TC/Gilbride, the Giants ran the ball and made a lot of big plays. We had Shockey, then Boss, then Ballard as our tight ends. They were also good blockers. But we could not run the ball as the line got older and we did not replenish guys like Snee, McKenzie, Diehl, Seubert. Baas was a bad signing in that he was virtually injured from day one.
I firmly believe you have to have a philosophy of how you want to build your team and keep to that philosophy as much as you can. Thus, having a philosophy directs you to the type of player you want to draft etc. Everything revolves around that philosophy...not just players but coaches and scouts also. You don't waste your time, for the most part, looking at players who you believe do not fit your philosophy.
The Giants, historically, have been a team built on defense. New York fans appreciate that and recognize its value hence we should always be looking, drafting or signing players that continue to keep the defense strong. I also believe that in the NorthEast you have to be able to run the ball, especially with the winds at the Meadowlands. What I am getting at is I have no idea what the Giants philosophy is or what they are looking for? When I look at Pittsburgh, I know exactly what their philosophy is and how they want to build their team. They draft accordingly and it has been pretty successful for them.
To me, the biggest issue for a new GM and then a new coach is what kind of team do we want to be. Then you sign players, draft players, get free agents that match that philosophy and you keep doing that, year after year. That way you maintain consistency and players know, when they are drafted by the Giants, what is expected from them and how they are supposed to play. Until we rediscover that, I think we will continue to suffer. You can't keep bouncing back from one way of playing to another. You have to have consistency as an organization in terms of how you want to play and therefore the type of players you seek.
I hate to keep referring to it but our great teams of the 80's had strong offensive lines, excellent tight ends, average wide receivers and good running backs. Our D had a ferocious front seven but relatively average defensive backs or certainly no Pro Bowlers.
Yet we won and won consistently. In fact, I remember watching those games and being very confident on our ability to wear other teams down and win in the 4th quarter. I still believe that philosophy works today and I also believe that is what the philosophy of the New York Giants should always be.
Here's to drafting an OL and a LB this season!
In terms of the next GM, I'd like to see them go outside of the organization, so I'm not keen on Abrams, Ross or Gettleman. I think the Giants are in desperate need of some fresh perspective. Decosta, Dorsey and Caserio are my current favorites.
But he's proven that he's excellent in managing the numbers.
Might be an option to the names mentioned as GM candidates in the Glauber article.
Ernie didn't pick shit aside from Eli. Reese ran the draft 2003-2007. Yes, Ernie was the driving force behind acquiring Eli. Aside from that, he went with Reese's draft board. Look at the dramatic upgrade in draft success once Reese supplanted the Rug/Marv Sunderland duo. Accorsi and Sunderland presided over a series of drafts from 1998-2002 that were unspeakably bad. The only reason Accorsi wasn't run out of town on a rail at that point was the talent he inherited from George Young - Strahan, Armstead, Sehorn, Tiki, Ron Stone.
But what I believe is even worse is that there never seemed to be a plan on what Reese wanted the Giants to be. Under TC/Gilbride, the Giants ran the ball and made a lot of big plays. We had Shockey, then Boss, then Ballard as our tight ends. They were also good blockers. But we could not run the ball as the line got older and we did not replenish guys like Snee, McKenzie, Diehl, Seubert. Baas was a bad signing in that he was virtually injured from day one.
I firmly believe you have to have a philosophy of how you want to build your team and keep to that philosophy as much as you can. Thus, having a philosophy directs you to the type of player you want to draft etc. Everything revolves around that philosophy...not just players but coaches and scouts also. You don't waste your time, for the most part, looking at players who you believe do not fit your philosophy.
The Giants, historically, have been a team built on defense. New York fans appreciate that and recognize its value hence we should always be looking, drafting or signing players that continue to keep the defense strong. I also believe that in the NorthEast you have to be able to run the ball, especially with the winds at the Meadowlands. What I am getting at is I have no idea what the Giants philosophy is or what they are looking for? When I look at Pittsburgh, I know exactly what their philosophy is and how they want to build their team. They draft accordingly and it has been pretty successful for them.
To me, the biggest issue for a new GM and then a new coach is what kind of team do we want to be. Then you sign players, draft players, get free agents that match that philosophy and you keep doing that, year after year. That way you maintain consistency and players know, when they are drafted by the Giants, what is expected from them and how they are supposed to play. Until we rediscover that, I think we will continue to suffer. You can't keep bouncing back from one way of playing to another. You have to have consistency as an organization in terms of how you want to play and therefore the type of players you seek.
Rather than a long term "vision" (borrowing a business concept), Jerry seemed year to year to adopt erratic short term strategies, e.g. "team captains" or worse, finding "hidden gems" (the JPP of TEs) that only he of the other GMs knew about.
And lets not forget JPP in 2011 who may have been leagues best defender
Reese definitely deserved to be fired anytime after 2013 for the reasons already stated
But that doesnt mean we should regret he was ever hired
Perkins?
the OL difference in those year wasn't about a different philosophy - it was about player selection. O'Hara, Snee, Seubert all became terrific players. Diehl was the late round OL pick that Reese could never find as GM. McKenzie was the free agent signing that worked. to me, this was the organizations' great failing under reese. at some point, they stopped effectively evaluating OL prospects - it's been chronic for a while now. and there's not a lot of evidence that really ever acknowledged that or tried to figure that out. flowers was the culmination - they spent a top 10 pick on a player that no on else in the league expected to be a building block left tackle, and have paid the price.
Pioli would be my 2nd choice.
People here knock him for screwing up with late round picks that’s and while that’s true, the bigger problem was losing Nicks, Phillips and Wilson to go along with draft busts like Austin, Sintim, and Barden. If you don’t lose Nicks then you might draft Zack Martin. If you don’t lose Phillips you don’t overspend for Rolle. Couple extraordinary bad luck with high picks with losers and Reese’s stubbornness re the OL and this us the result. The proof of the pudding for me ignoring the OL in the draft. When he took Engram instead of an OL and didn’t sign s free agent, he was on borrowed time.
Gettleman because he has done a good job with the Giants and Panthers
O'Brien because Francesca sold me on him
the OL difference in those year wasn't about a different philosophy - it was about player selection. O'Hara, Snee, Seubert all became terrific players. Diehl was the late round OL pick that Reese could never find as GM. McKenzie was the free agent signing that worked. to me, this was the organizations' great failing under reese. at some point, they stopped effectively evaluating OL prospects - it's been chronic for a while now. and there's not a lot of evidence that really ever acknowledged that or tried to figure that out. flowers was the culmination - they spent a top 10 pick on a player that no on else in the league expected to be a building block left tackle, and have paid the price.
I remember reading something about Ernie that he believed OL could be manufactured. He had an extremely high opinion of OL coach Jim McNally and thought he could turn anyone with the basic tools into a competent player. Remember we went into camp in 2003 with Ian Allen and Tam Hopkins as our starters on the right side of the line. By early season they weren't starting but the thought that those guys were adequate was as every bit as bizarre as thinking Hart and Flowers would get it done this year.
And lets not forget JPP in 2011 who may have been leagues best defender
Reese definitely deserved to be fired anytime after 2013 for the reasons already stated
I
But that doesnt mean we should regret he was ever hired
2007 was Accorsi’s. Reese walked into it.
That would be a DEMOTION from his current job.
Quote:
i'm always surprised when people make this distinction. accorsi has said numerous times that in his view, it's a passing league, and that means you need a QB, and you need a top DL and DBs to defend against the pass. he didnt' invest in LBs, and he believed you could build an OL without investing high draft picks. the only 1st round OL he ever drafted was Petitgout. and he only ever spent two other premium picks (3rd or higher) on OL - Snee in an incredibly deep draft, and the immortal Jeff Hatch. when he signed O'Hara, no one thought he was getting an all-pro. and let's not pretend they knew what Seubert - a street free agent - was going to become.
the OL difference in those year wasn't about a different philosophy - it was about player selection. O'Hara, Snee, Seubert all became terrific players. Diehl was the late round OL pick that Reese could never find as GM. McKenzie was the free agent signing that worked. to me, this was the organizations' great failing under reese. at some point, they stopped effectively evaluating OL prospects - it's been chronic for a while now. and there's not a lot of evidence that really ever acknowledged that or tried to figure that out. flowers was the culmination - they spent a top 10 pick on a player that no on else in the league expected to be a building block left tackle, and have paid the price.
I remember reading something about Ernie that he believed OL could be manufactured. He had an extremely high opinion of OL coach Jim McNally and thought he could turn anyone with the basic tools into a competent player. Remember we went into camp in 2003 with Ian Allen and Tam Hopkins as our starters on the right side of the line. By early season they weren't starting but the thought that those guys were adequate was as every bit as bizarre as thinking Hart and Flowers would get it done this year.
Flowers is light years ahead of Allen. Not even a legitimate comparison.
Quote:
And the Giants dont likely win 2 SBs
And lets not forget JPP in 2011 who may have been leagues best defender
Reese definitely deserved to be fired anytime after 2013 for the reasons already stated
I
But that doesnt mean we should regret he was ever hired
2007 was Accorsi’s. Reese walked into it.
Reese switched Diehl in to replace Petitgout at left tackle, taking a lot of criticism for doing so. He traded for Lawrence Tynes, moved Kiwanuka to linebacker, brought in Kawika Mitchell, and had seven of his eight draft picks get significant starting time through the season. Kevin Boss put up the longest play of Super Bowl XLII that led to the Giants' first touchdown in that game. Jay Alford provided the exclamation point to end the game and win the championship.
Reese definitely benefited from Accorsi's roster in 2007, but he put in some significant pieces on his own.
The Giants decision to go for it in 2012 is at the root of most of the Giants problems. They kept an obviously deteriorating OL together hoping it would be enough. It failed spectacularly and every OL pick since then has been mediocre. Drafting is a crap shoot, and the OL picks just did not work out for the Giants. Reese paid the price for sins in his control and out of his control.
2007 was Accorsi’s. Reese walked into it.
If Accorsi didn't have Reese running the draft, he would have been fired before 2007. His pre-Reese drafts were atrocious.
Quote:
And the Giants dont likely win 2 SBs
And lets not forget JPP in 2011 who may have been leagues best defender
Reese definitely deserved to be fired anytime after 2013 for the reasons already stated
I
But that doesnt mean we should regret he was ever hired
2007 was Accorsi’s. Reese walked into it.
Then why didn't we win before?
Although with that said,I might take a look at Pioli(Tony Soprano).
Quote:
that is why I never gave Reese the credit for the first Super Bowl, that was Ernie's, almost every position on that tam was an Ernie pick, he added Bradshaw, Smith, and Boss and they helped out a little that season.
Ernie didn't pick shit aside from Eli. Reese ran the draft 2003-2007. Yes, Ernie was the driving force behind acquiring Eli. Aside from that, he went with Reese's draft board. Look at the dramatic upgrade in draft success once Reese supplanted the Rug/Marv Sunderland duo. Accorsi and Sunderland presided over a series of drafts from 1998-2002 that were unspeakably bad. The only reason Accorsi wasn't run out of town on a rail at that point was the talent he inherited from George Young - Strahan, Armstead, Sehorn, Tiki, Ron Stone.
Great post! I am glad you posted this. I posted this many times in the past. EA with Reese was better than when he was with Sunderland. I give props for what Reese did to the scouting department.
Giants Try Dancing Without Elephants - ( New Window )
BUT
The fact is he did do some things like Bradshaw, Smith, Boss, Mitchell, Madison, etc.
A different GM brings in different players, maybe even “better” players and who knows if Giants win.
The Giants won a super Bowl with Reese, not because of him and not in spite of him but with him. Change that piece and you likely change the result.
If I gave a calculation- I’d give Jerry Reese 15% to 20% credit on the Super Bowl. Accorsi did the had parts.
In comment 13725818 jeff57 said:
Quote:
And the Giants dont likely win 2 SBs
And lets not forget JPP in 2011 who may have been leagues best defender
Reese definitely deserved to be fired anytime after 2013 for the reasons already stated
I
But that doesnt mean we should regret he was ever hired
2007 was Accorsi’s. Reese walked into it.
McDaniels was an absolute disaster in Denver even though he tried to bring the cheating system along with him (not as good at employing it as BB). Then he was a nightmare with the Rams. He only seems to work out in NE - he likely couldn't have even gotten another job after the Rams position if he didn't get cleansed again back in NE. It's fools gold.
I'd be worried about that same effect with Caserio. Look elsewhere.
McDaniels was an absolute disaster in Denver even though he tried to bring the cheating system along with him (not as good at employing it as BB). Then he was a nightmare with the Rams. He only seems to work out in NE - he likely couldn't have even gotten another job after the Rams position if he didn't get cleansed again back in NE. It's fools gold.
I'd be worried about that same effect with Caserio. Look elsewhere.
To be fair, the Rams had Steven Jackson and nothing else on offense that year. Brandon Lloyd and Danario Alexander were their top wideouts.
Quote:
All shine and no substance. You can't determine if the moves he makes are any good or if they are only good because of where they are being brought in to (their special "system", ie the cheating).
McDaniels was an absolute disaster in Denver even though he tried to bring the cheating system along with him (not as good at employing it as BB). Then he was a nightmare with the Rams. He only seems to work out in NE - he likely couldn't have even gotten another job after the Rams position if he didn't get cleansed again back in NE. It's fools gold.
I'd be worried about that same effect with Caserio. Look elsewhere.
To be fair, the Rams had Steven Jackson and nothing else on offense that year. Brandon Lloyd and Danario Alexander were their top wideouts.
Yes, but in almost all offensive categories they declined under his tenure. So he took a not great situation and made it worse. We've seen that happen here with recently exited HC, we don't need to see a repeat. Plenty of new HCs around the league are taking sub-par talent and putting up improved output. That's what we should be looking for...someone who has that ability rather than the opposite.
the greatest coach and QB of all time. McDaniels seems
a bit thin skinned to me, you can't have that in NYC either.
Of the names listed, Eliot Wolf is an interesting choice possibly?