I'm posting this a bit after the fact. Apologies for that. I was on my way out of town when I heard it on Fox radio Saturday and ended up at a friend's cottage where we had spotty Internet, tons of booze and a lake full of bass.
Anthony Gargano and Lincoln Kennedy are known on their radio show as The Fellas. They were talking around the league and they made it to the Giants and the first thing they started talking about was how impressive the receivers are this year. They mentioned the obvious three then Engram as well. Said they think he will impress, as will Shep. But of course they had to throw in the question: are there enough footballs to go around? I just don't get to that point with this team. I realize we have a bit of a diva at the number one, but I don't think he's going to squawk at all if the Giants are winning football games and he has six receptions for 73 yards here and there.
They got into the RBs and praised the draft choice out of Clemson, but questioned whether the UCLA guy (Perkins) could "carry the load." Felt like saying, who cares? We might have 3-4 guys touching the football out of the backfield.
Then it went to the OL. Mentioned Flowers as a guy who has disappointed, and said little else. Nothing about continuity, which some of us believe will be a positive in the long run and even this year if we are lucky, and nothing about things Sy has pointed out, such as Pugh emerging as an Alpha dog, Richburg being healthy and solid, and some other decent pieces, plus Fluker dropping weight and seeming to be making strides.
Summed that segment up saying the Giants have a quarterback who's been very durable then they "do nothing" to solidify the O line, and for that reason they sum up ... the Giants are going nowhere.
Big picture, means diddly, I realize. Still irritated me.
(The Fellas are) but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
Except Biff Tannen.
Over the past few years when I've noticed the most about national talk show hosts trying to make assessments on NFL teams in early August is that they don't know anything whatsoever. It's bothersome and I don't know whether try to even put it out there because you would think that any knowledgeable fans would not get right back in their faces. But the bottom line is, and I am sure most of you agree with this, maybe less than 3% of the fan base of any NFL team, including this one, actually know anything about the team.
How many times have you folks been talking to someone, whether it's at a Little League game or a party or at work, and they tried to tell you all about the Giants and they don't know jack shit about anything.
Even for some of us that aren't in-depth X's and O's guys, know a shit load more than just about everybody out there. Here we are in August and we are right here, reading and eating up every ounce of information that we can get. I try to have intelligent conversations with people at work, the few of them that are Giants fans, and they tell me that they are in baseball mode. Um, OK.
Frustrating when the national talkers are those guys too.
Continuity PLUS all that. Gotta be a plus.
:-)
That was supposed to happen years ago with Cruz and it didn't. And in 2011 the Giants had Cruz, Nicks, and Manningham and it was never a problem once.
If you consume sports media long enough, you learn to recognize all the go-to moves used to fill time. "There's only one football" is one of them.
I think they're gonna be wicked awesome!
--Percy Finster Farstoosis.
Saying they are relying on development and continuity is another wy of saying they did nothing. If continuity and development were all that's needed, every team in the league would have a good OL if they just gave it time--which is nonsense.
I'm hopeful the OL will improve but if it doesn't the Giants are fucked.
Obviously it needs to be better, but it's not like the 2016 offense should have been expected to be this high flying offense and a bad offensive line just fucked it all up.
They didn't have the talent to offset an injured offensive line that was weak at a couple of spots. Now they kind of do.
Yes, ON PAPER . . .
the TEs SHOULD help
Keeping a FB WILL help -- if they do.
The individual OLs MAY be incrementally better than last year. (Fluker, btw, has not cracked the starting lineup -- i.e. beaten out Jerry.)
The OL depth MAY be better.
And all they have to really do is get from really bad, to middle of the pack, so it's not Everest. Just run block better and give Eli time to take a 5 step drop.
But it's all speculative.
Until the games are real, no one will know if it's really any better.
- They say we are going to use RB by committee
- They say that our weakness is the O-line
- We have a durable QB but that's not going to be enough.
Seems like a fair summation of the offense at least.
Are you just upset they didn't pick us to win the SuperBowl?
Yep. He's an Eagles boy. Hard to listen to.
Ellison, a fb, and different personnel alignment (diversity..instead of always "11 personnel") will be big if theyvworkout...but ol needs more consistency and not consistent breakdowns by either 1 or the group that has taken place for past few seasons. They also need an attitude a mean streak in them not to ok with the failures
With regard to Pugh emerging as Alpha dog, Richburg being healthy, Fluker dropping weight, etc., seriously, come on. I'm not saying these things won't help, but EVERY team has these same narratives in the offseason. How many years have I listened to Jets and Cowboy fans tell me why this is their year and any weakness I bring up that weren't addressed it's all --some unknown scrub is tearing it up in camp, so and so is finally focused, some guy's been working out like an animal, dropped 30 lbs, added 20 lbs of muscle, looks sharper/quicker, young guys are improving, another year in the system, etc, etc, etc.
Sometimes these things do pan out. More often than not they don't. If you put stock in the offseason spin, there wouldn't be a team out there with a weakness. Every team and most every player is doing everything they can to improve, especially the guys on the bubble or fighting for starting positions. This is their livelihood. But its like those disclaimers you hear on the legal commercials past performance doesn't guarantee results. The things you're reading about are necessary for improvement but they are not sufficient. There are no guarantees of results here.
But that's mostly because he was taking 3 step drops MOST of the time. He rarely had time for 5 and 7 step drops (i.e. no time for deep routes to develop, fewer big plays), and without a run game, the Play Action game (typically a big Eli weapon), was non-existent. So I contend that the pass protection needs to improve pretty dramatically, too. All these receiving options won't mean much, if Eli doesn't have time to get the ball downfield.
I agree that being able to change up the formations so they aren't in 11 95% of the time WILL be a huge upgrade for all aspects of the offense.
A large part of the problem next to the pass rush last season was only having one offensive player that could break coverage. As much of a Cruz fan as I am, it was painful to watch him trying to separate from a defender and not be able to do so.
One of the keys for me is that Mike Solari runs 'power' zone schemes. Flowers, Hart, Fluker are the kind of guys who are finishers; they aren't the finese style of guys common around the league but are the type of guys who will pound you.
These are the kind of guys who excel in the run game. The lack of a ground game last year really but Flowers and Hart in more situations that exposed their weaknesses rather than played to their strengths.
As far as Flowers goes, let's remember he is still young and often it can take LTs three years to really get it all together. Let's see what he can do on the pitch.
Sure the OL has to improve quite a lot, lets see how they go.
Ellison, a fb, and different personnel alignment (diversity..instead of always "11 personnel") will be big if theyvworkout...but ol needs more consistency and not consistent breakdowns by either 1 or the group that has taken place for past few seasons. They also need an attitude a mean streak in them not to ok with the failures
I will say this regarding both Fluker and Flowers -- when moving forward and even pulling they are beasts in camp -- they both blast into the second level easily against anyone -- run blocking is not the problem -- the question is pass protection. We've seen some improvement from Flowers on that front though
Quote:
But more on opening running lanes and allowing for a more consistent and productive running game..run blocking was the major problem with them.
Ellison, a fb, and different personnel alignment (diversity..instead of always "11 personnel") will be big if theyvworkout...but ol needs more consistency and not consistent breakdowns by either 1 or the group that has taken place for past few seasons. They also need an attitude a mean streak in them not to ok with the failures
I will say this regarding both Fluker and Flowers -- when moving forward and even pulling they are beasts in camp -- they both blast into the second level easily against anyone -- run blocking is not the problem -- the question is pass protection. We've seen some improvement from Flowers on that front though
Gidie...with my recent health issues I haven't been on to read most daily campnreports ..just sparingly unfortunately..between you and sy, what is the overall feeling or look to this point in this year's camp (know it's very early somewhat still) of the ol and noticeable if any difference that you can remember than the past..iflowers really improving on tech, etc etc...you think they can or will be more consistent line this season barring any unforeseen occurrences? Thanks
The OL, well, if healthy it will be improved for just these reasons alone:
1. Continuity - 2nd year of coach Solari, 3rd year offense
2. Flowers/Hart - worked hard off-season, should show some dividends. Maybe not studs but serviceable?
3. Pugh/Richburg - contracts...great, healthy play?
4. TE Ellison - can help the OT's vs top pass rushers
I just think, if healthy (the key...) we have a true shot to be "good enough" to move the ball consistently.
Quote:
In comment 13551303 micky said:
Quote:
But more on opening running lanes and allowing for a more consistent and productive running game..run blocking was the major problem with them.
Ellison, a fb, and different personnel alignment (diversity..instead of always "11 personnel") will be big if theyvworkout...but ol needs more consistency and not consistent breakdowns by either 1 or the group that has taken place for past few seasons. They also need an attitude a mean streak in them not to ok with the failures
I will say this regarding both Fluker and Flowers -- when moving forward and even pulling they are beasts in camp -- they both blast into the second level easily against anyone -- run blocking is not the problem -- the question is pass protection. We've seen some improvement from Flowers on that front though
Gidie...with my recent health issues I haven't been on to read most daily campnreports ..just sparingly unfortunately..between you and sy, what is the overall feeling or look to this point in this year's camp (know it's very early somewhat still) of the ol and noticeable if any difference that you can remember than the past..iflowers really improving on tech, etc etc...you think they can or will be more consistent line this season barring any unforeseen occurrences? Thanks
The feeling is that Pugh, RIchburg and Jerry are solid, that Hart is a much improved player and that FLowers started out kind of slow but has been improving each day