for display only
Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner

Archived Thread

One Minor Irritant - Short Yardage

gmen99 : 8/15/2011 7:05 am
Ok so it's the first preseason game and I'm not the type to get worked up over it. We had a few good moments, a bunch of bad ones, and a lot of correctable mistakes. I was just happy to see the young guys get playing time.

But short yardage still bothers me, and it's a Coughlin / Gilbride problem. Brandon Jacobs *is not* a good short yardage back. He's proven this time and time again over the last several years. Sure, I would love to see him run more decisively and physically in 3rd or 4th and 1, but sometimes you've just got to accept certain limitations on players and move on.

Jacobs flat out stinks in short yardage. Part of it is him, and part of it is just being a huge guy. His size works against him (contrary to Coughlin's belief in short yardage power) because he's such a big target, and he takes longer to start churning his legs. He has also repeatedly made bad running decisions in these situations, bouncing runs a little too wide or turning his body sideways to make him an easier tackle.

I know its not the regular season yet. But we gave Jacobs our first short yardage opportunity, and we didn't convert. I'm really hoping Coughlin and Gilbride can overcome this one stubborn aspect of their play calling philosophy and use Bradshaw, or Ware, or some one else to handle short yardage. It's been a major flaw of our offense the last few years, and without looking at the data, it must be overwhelmingly clear that it's not working.

Anyone know where to find short yardage data? I would like to see it and confirm...

I think part of it is the play calling as well...  
Pete from Woodstock : 8/15/2011 7:18 am : link
we never seem to just go striaght ahead... its always Jacobs to the right or left...which kills him for a big guy, he needs to be a battering ram.

Also on a side note... I would have liked to see Coughlin go for it on that 4th and 1" during the game. But no, we punted (good to give the punter practice I guess) but it would have been nice to pump up our OL a bit...
This is a major irritant IMO  
GiantBlue : 8/15/2011 7:26 am : link
Why do we always think Jacobs can get more than 2-3 yards on a 3rd and 3? In the SB, on the winning drive, he just barely fell over the first down mark and other than that, can count on my first hand how many times on 3rd or 4th and short he has gotten the first down.

When you play a team that either controls field position or runs up and down the field, holding onto the ball is paramount and I feel like we give up on 3rd and short by just trying to force Jacobs (outside mostly) to try and get the yardage.

Can we please develop a screen pass or some type of short post that can move the chains and re-set the offense for first down rather than showcasing Dodge or Coughlin on the sideline trying to decide whether Tynes can make the kick or not!

I agree  
CT Charlie : 8/15/2011 7:31 am : link
and I'd like to see reporters interview TC and KG about their philosophy (and results) sometime in the offseason. During the season, they're understandably defensive and secretive.
.  
Wellington : 8/15/2011 8:04 am : link
Maybe I'm mistaken but I blame the playcalling on that one. The OL was clearly not firing on all cylinders and they call a sweep left with Jacobs. He's not going to turn the corner there without help from his blocking. The Panther LBs and DL were shedding blocks like crazy all game. I don't know what Gilbride was trying to look at there.
stubborn  
richinpa : 8/15/2011 8:28 am : link
It's called old school stubborn. Let's pull out the same play book from the past 5 years and call the same damn ass play. Yeah...players need to block and execute but if we know it's coming, so do the other players
I agree that Jacobs is not a good short yardage runner.  
Section331 : 8/15/2011 8:36 am : link
Despite his bulk, he runs too straight up and has trouble getting leverage in tight areas. I think Andre Brown would be a terrific short yardage guy.
A major irritant  
ZogZerg : 8/15/2011 8:38 am : link
The giants almost never short yardage by running the ball. Yet, they keep trying over and over. You'd think they would have figured something out by now.
Keep reading your first sentence  
Randy in CT : 8/15/2011 8:40 am : link
over and over.
Not only the first preseason game  
Davisian : 8/15/2011 8:51 am : link
But first action with a new center who was already struggling. Up he middle gets blown up as well.

We will be better in short yardaage this year  
old timer : 8/15/2011 8:53 am : link
The new OL is not in sync yet. But the interior of the OC and LG will be stronger and get better push than Seubert and O'Hara.

Better personnel will result in better results.
So true  
giantsfan39 : 8/15/2011 9:00 am : link
Can we get Bradshaw or another speedy back to handle these situations? We could also try a run up the middle. Jacobs is nothing without blocking. On 3rd and 1 you want a back who can get that yard even if the blocking breaks down.
short yardage  
3xchamps : 8/15/2011 9:23 am : link
shame on the Giants to have a back like Jacobs so good a down hill runner and not get a superior fullback and TE to block for him. That and only that is the mystery as to how the Giants win short yardage situations. Teams load up knowing they have to stop Jacobs so the giants have to be dominant at the point of attack. This pass heavy flow the Giants lean toward on offense kills the mandate for superior blocking. We have the most dynamic backs in the NFL with their skill sets, give them superior FB/TE blocking to lead the way and watch the us lead the NFL in rushing. Maybe Superbowl bound, help Eli cut down on errors, win field position game, football is still physical, passing era or not.
Randy, Davisian  
gmen99 : 8/15/2011 9:26 am : link
C'mon guys. The substance of my post isn't "OMG 1 Preseason Game And I'm Freaking Out." The point about the one play in the preseason game was a minor one to illustrate the bigger picture. The larger point is that we've been really unsuccessful over the last few years in short yardage, especially when we use Jacobs.

Brandon Jacobs has demonstrated over and over that he is a terrible short yardage back. Otherwise, he's a very good player and important to our offense. But it's just a skill he doesn't have, and at this point in his career, we are better off trying something different.

I realize that a lot of people over react to meaningless games like the one against Carolina, and this place can get cluttered with BS threads. But this is something we've been doing for 4+ years, and seeing it again this preseason (even once) was alarming to me.

The funny thing  
gmen99 : 8/15/2011 9:27 am : link
is Bradshaw has looked awesome in short yardage. He's very good at wiggling free of tackles and falling forward. But he doesn't get enough opportunities, especially around the goal line.
I never understood cramming the LOS with big boddies  
jlukes : 8/15/2011 9:28 am : link
and then asking Jacobs to squeeze through them.

IMO, we should have two short yardage packages.

One with "big" personnel and AB as the back - AB with this personnel would be more efficient as he can fine smaller creases and bounce out of closed run lanes faster.

The second with 40 or 31 personnel with Jacobs as the back. This would spread the defense and give Jacobs a much better chance of picking up the yardage. If the defense still packs it in tight, Eli could check to a quick pass.

Maybe I am over simplifying things, but it's what I would do.
Jlukes  
gmen99 : 8/15/2011 9:29 am : link
I co-sign that 100%. I'm not a football X and O guy either, but I've been saying it for years. Big Bodies + Big Jacobs is a horrible idea in small spaces.
Any place to find comparison stats on short yardage?  
Lawyer in NYC : 8/15/2011 9:36 am : link
I know it drives me batty to see how we struggle in 3rd and short, but then again every time I watch other teams it seems like they struggle in 3rd and short too. I'd like to compare how other teams fare in 3rd and short, especially if that could be broken down as to how they do in "jumbo" formations. Defenses may just be too big and too quick to overpower them when they know precisely where you are going, as in the typical "jumbo" set, unless you are looking for less than 1 yard, but I'd like to see some stats on that and can't find any.
Lawyer  
gmen99 : 8/15/2011 9:38 am : link
I looked on Football Outsiders and Pro Football Reference and couldn't find anything. I was surprised, I thought both of those sites would have them. If anyone knows where to find the #s, specifically Jacobs in 3rd / 4th and 3 or less, I would love to see them.
should read 10 peronnel and 11 personnel for Jacobs  
jlukes : 8/15/2011 9:40 am : link
AB should be in packages with 23, 22 and 13.

You can mix and match with 12 and 21 personnel
I think changing up could help as well as featuring Ahmad  
GiantBlue : 8/15/2011 9:43 am : link
If the Giants could throw it deep on 3rd and 1 or 2 a few times it may make teams hesitate to fill the box. Additionally, the ideas listed above about putting Ahmad in for the short yardage is a great idea. He is quicker to the point of attack and shiftier when it comes to breaking that first tackle.

I love Jacobs running style, but not on short yardage. It takes so long for him to get back to the LOS that it feels like a slow motion replay.
So many start out by saying:  
Big Blue '56 : 8/15/2011 9:48 am : link
Quote:
Ok so it's the first preseason game and I'm not the type to get worked up over it. ...


and they wind up getting worked up over it..It's like clockwork
BB56  
gmen99 : 8/15/2011 9:57 am : link
Read it how you will, but I think the substance of the thread is about more than over-reacting to a preseason game. Read the follow up comments and you'll see that I'm not the only one who has noticed this problem over the last 4+ years.

If anything, starting with that qualifier distracted from the point of the thread. My mistake. Let's talk about football.
Found the stat I'm looking for - "Power Success"  
Lawyer in NYC : 8/15/2011 9:58 am : link
Football outsiders defines, "Power Success" as:

Percentage of runs on third or fourth down, two yards or less to go, that achieved a first down or touchdown. Also includes runs on first-and-goal or second-and-goal from the two-yard line or closer.

The 2010 stats say that the Giants are below average at Power Success - a team ranking of 59% vs. a league average of 61%. Considering our team rushes for one of the highest averages per rush in the league, that implies that it isn't just a predictability issue - we simply don't do power running as well as most other teams do. The decision to go with a more "powerful" center in Baas suggests the coaches view that as much a personnel issue as a scheme issue.

Football Outsiders OLine Stats

You only have 1 minor irritant?  
87giants91 : 8/15/2011 10:12 am : link
clearly, you're not married!
I'll make this brief:  
Big Blue '56 : 8/15/2011 10:18 am : link
The Giants have had one of the best offenses in the NFL..Stupidity and TOs are the major culprits..We were thisclose from having a bye and playoff seeding last year..I'll take the minor irtitant every year and finish 11-5 all day long..

We're not perfect. Sure I'd like to pick up 3rd and very short all the time. Deficient in some areas, proficient in others. The way of the NFL for every team
irritant  
Big Blue '56 : 8/15/2011 10:18 am : link
.
Now we're talking!  
gmen99 : 8/15/2011 10:28 am : link
Nice post BB56.

So I'm with you on all of that. I realize we've been fortunate to have a pretty great offense the last several years, and at some points these criticisms do become nitpicky. We've basically been a top 10 team each of the last 5 years. Off memory I'd say that our last 16x5 games have been meaningful. Was our last "meaningless" regular season game against NE in 2007? If so that's pretty cool.

That being said, this just feels like such an obvious and easy change to make. It's not a schematic change, or a wholesale philosophy change. It's just that one specific player continues to be placed in a role where he hasn't found success. Just my opinion.
It's hard to run for a first down...  
SB : 8/15/2011 10:29 am : link
...when your TE completely fails at his block and his man tackles BJ from behind. That's what happened on the 3-1 play.

Jacobs is an enigma....  
Doomster : 8/15/2011 10:35 am : link
For a guy his size, you would think he could help move the pile on 3rd and 1.....but he doesn't....he just doesn't....I think it's more technique in his running style(runs too upright), than anything else.....he doesn't get low and move that shoulder into the pile to move it....has anyone ever seen our linemen submarine the DL and have Jacobs with a head of steam leap over them? I can't recall that....

But the frustration of him going wide gives a defensive team time to react, and any power he has is neutralized, going east/west, rather than north/south....
Doomster - Jacobs is great at moving the pile when get gets  
jlukes : 8/15/2011 10:47 am : link
up to the LOS.

Jacobs (and the team's) biggest failures come when the pile/LOS get pushed into the backfield and get to Jacobs before he can get any sort of forward momentum.

Re-watch the  
AnishPatel : 8/15/2011 11:09 am : link
3rd and 1 play again.. The formation was I PRO LEFT wing left, and the wing player messed up his block, allowing the defender to disengage and make a play on Jacobs by going at his ankles.

That's on the wing player for not sustaining his block. However, Jacobs is 6'4 264 damn lbs! You can't go down that easily when someone goes at your ankles. But, technically that's on the offensive player at the wing. He got owned, and the defender made a great play.

If you can stop a 6'4 264 lb back 1 on 1 by going at his ankles and someone stopping him to fall 1 yard, you deserve props.
Right so the play against Carolina  
gmen99 : 8/15/2011 11:12 am : link
wasn't Jacobs' fault. I'm not disagreeing - the point is more that Jacobs would be in there in the first place.

Anish - you're a football guy. What is your take on Jacobs in short yardage generally?
I am biased..  
AnishPatel : 8/15/2011 11:17 am : link
I can't stand Jacobs as a player. I never was a fan of him. I thought he was over rated. So I'd rather have Bradshaw in there. But I understand his fumbles worry people, my included. At least, I feel confident that if the play goes to shit, he can create something out of nothing. Plus he can make people miss. All you need is 1 god damn yard. Even if the defender gets 1 ankle and you can extend the ball then you got the first down.

Like I said, Carolina wasn't Jacobs fault, but how does a 6'4 giant not get 1 yard? Somehow the player wrapped up both ankles and stopped him. That's one play you just shake your head and wonder how a man that big and strong gets stopped by his ankles.
couple of points  
alligatorpie : 8/15/2011 11:32 am : link
1. agree with JJUKes, Jacobs as a back makes sense as the lone setback in a spread. he has the size for good pass protection service and profits from the space to get 'churning' as one of you mentioned.

Bradshaw and maybe Dscott or somebody may suit the power formations better.

both can be run on 3rd and short and both demand good oline play.

2. the run blocking problem has been a few years in the making. I mocked petrus, he seems ok so far, but also wanted us to draft a guard high this year.

however, that's not how the draft broke down and JR was correct to get the guys he did.

3. you can bet that TC wants to improve the simple short yardage game and direct off guard running attack...and will have to make sure that Gilbride does not try to rely just on 'fancy' for another year.

4. all this may entail moving DD back to tackle and Boothe to left guard for a while.

run first is where we need to get at this time.
Two different but related subjects here  
SwirlingEddie : 8/15/2011 11:37 am : link
The short yardage 'problem' has been a slightly below average performance (59% vs. 61% last year) in an admittedly very important situation. The poor execution at OL, TE and RB and even play calling at times contributes. The OL and TE weren't routinely getting the push needed, Eli can't/won't sneak to save his life and Jacobs is not a particularly effective short-yardage back. Which brings us to Brandon Jacobs.

Jacobs is a real plus/minus kind of player. His big plus is momentum. Once he gets that mass of his moving up the field he moves with impressive speed and force. The negatives are that he is not effective at changing direction, finding and exploiting narrow gaps and most importantly has relatively poor balance. A short yardage power play as most of us imagine it favors a back who can work in a crowded space by finding and working through a bubble or crack in the line. Jacobs, despite his size (or even because of it) is not that player. His lack of balance is what frustrates me the most, while his straight line speed is what always surprises me.
Great post Swirling Eddie  
gmen99 : 8/15/2011 11:46 am : link
Very well put.

The one thing I would caution against is the 59% vs. 61% thing. Until we see more granular statistics, we can't assume that tells us anything about our short yardage situation.

First, it's important to know which backs have which success rates. That's just on the team level, so it doesn't say anything about Jacobs.

Second, it's important to know when these opportunities happen (which part of game, where on the field). There are times where we are running out the clock and it happens to be 3rd and 1. Those count in this statistic.

Third, the formation we used at the time. We use a shotgun RB draw for a lot of 3rd down running plays. Those count in this statistic.

Fourth, its only 2010. My position is that this has been a problem for at least 3 years.

So there's a lot of noise in that team level statistic, and introducing it into this argument really doesn't give us much clarity (although thanks to Lawyer for finding it)
.  
FJ : 8/15/2011 11:52 am : link
I don't have concrete statistics but I bet if we could find them, we'd see the following:

1) That Bradshaw hasn't had much more success than Jaconbs in converting short-yardage situations.

2) That the Giants numbers in short-yardage statistics are not much different than most teams in the league (i.e., that we aren't as horrible in those situations as most people here seem to think we are).
It has been a problem for several years  
SwirlingEddie : 8/15/2011 12:02 pm : link
From the Football Outsiders statistics linked above, you will see the Giants ranking in 'Power Success':

2008 - 23
2009 - 20
2010 - 18

At least it has been improving!
SwirlingEddie  
FJ : 8/15/2011 12:10 pm : link
Thanks. However, I'd like to see the comparison to other teams. For example, if we rank 18th, but the difference between numbers 10 and 20 is negligible, then it's not so bad.

Also, nobody has yet been able to make a statistical comparison between Bradshaw and Jacobs. I think you believe, as do I, that it's a team problem, not a RB problem. The Giants line with guys like Seubert and O'Hara has been effective at pulling, but not as stong bulling ahead. Perhaps putting Baas and Diehl inside will help remedy that.
FJ - I agree  
Lawyer in NYC : 8/15/2011 12:29 pm : link
its hard to find "isolated" stats like that, but that's really what we need. But I agree with your anecdotal take - the strenght of our line was in mobility and identifying blocking targets on the move. So on "slow developing" run plays, we actually have an advantage because our guys are on the move and figuring out who to block before the defense figures out where the blockers are coming from. But on straightforward push, we lose that matchup because our guys are not physically dominant.
Enter Mr. Baas  
jlukes : 8/15/2011 12:32 pm : link
.
SwirlingEddie  
FJ : 8/15/2011 12:34 pm : link
Further to my post above, I looked at the numbers at Football Outsiders.

For 2010, the top 9 Power Ranked teams had a Power Success of 68% or better. The majority of the teams (rank 10 through 26) were between 54% and 66%, all stradling the NFL's 61% average. The bottom 7 teams were 52% or worse.

Those numbers don't reflect the number of opportunities, or a number of other pertinent facts about the situation. Also, note that GB was only at 55%, as was Baltimore (considered a power running team). Also, several of the top teams in this category (Miami, Cleveland, Arizona, Minnesota, Houston, Buffalo) did not necessarily have successful seasons overall.
lacking: a known slot player  
alligatorpie : 8/15/2011 12:40 pm : link
lacking a true two way, or receiving TE that can block

lacking a receiving scatback (although daryl scott may be one)

and having some big play wrs....

being: a team that has trived on play action

being: a team that has won when it can eat the clock

all this BEGs for better than average short yardage game...not lesser than.

this must be fixed.

1. accept that beatty cannot get it done
2. accept that DD is a better tackle than guard
3. get over 'boothe does not look the part'

(or maybe i am wrong)

4. put the onus on run blocking for the rest of the preseason, let EM And the WRS get to one field...and the starting OLine to another. run run run and run.
FJ  
gmen99 : 8/15/2011 12:40 pm : link
I agree with your premise generally, and I also agree with you about our offensive line being built around athleticism and misdirection rather than brute strength. Perhaps it is a problem at the team level (and not Jacobs v. Bradshaw), and perhaps it is a schematic trade off when you choose one type of offensive line over another.

But I'm still not sure I like the way the Football Outsiders Power Rushing stat is being used here ...I just don't see how its helping us frame the conversation.
Gilbride is brilliant but that can be a curse  
alligatorpie : 8/15/2011 12:48 pm : link
he may feel that he needs to cook soup with the ingredients that have been served him. and he may be overconfident in his ability to work around the situation.

TC may have wanted to massive guards this year...who were all drafted before our spots.

I am more confident with a line of:

Deihl, Boothe, Bass, Snee, Mac

and adding back an element of smash mouth.

at a certain point...the finesse needs to be set up by the threat of smash mouth...and if you cannot do the simple shit nobody will fall for the fancy shit.

FJ  
SwirlingEddie : 8/15/2011 1:04 pm : link
I don't really disagree with you. As we both know there is much confirmation bias in that we a fans tend to 'see' what confirms our beliefs and ignore things that don't. The FO statistics support the contention that the team has a short yardage problem, but it certainly doesn't prove it, nor does it pinpoint the source of the problem. And it's not clear how serious a problem it is. I would consider most short yardage plays however to be above average in importance and I suspect this is why they stand out so much in my mind. It's a good conversation.
In terms of just  
PaulBlakeTSU : 8/15/2011 1:09 pm : link
Brandon Jacobs in short yardage situations, I think the problem was two fold.

1. The Giants offensive line was not brutish, but more of a finesse and quick line that is great at pulling and getting to the outside. However, they get pushed back in power runs up the gut.

2. At 6'4, it takes Jacobs a while to accelerate, far longer than smaller backs-- This is what makes Usain Bolt such a freak. No one at his height should be able to get off to such a quick acceleration burst. So because the O-line hasn't pushed the D-line back, Jacobs is not at a high enough acceleration to hit the hole at hte point of contact.
Back to the Corner