The problem is the qb. In the two recent Superbowl seasons, the qb played at a hall of fame caliber, especially during the post season. We cant take that away from him. We can NEVER take that away from him. However, he is now a shell of that guy. He's jittery in the pocket, he cant move, he cant even step away from pressure, he rushes his reads. Even when he has adequate time, he still doesn't go through his progressions, and takes dump offs prematurely. Unfortunately when you have a below avg line and a below avg running game, the qb must pick up the slack Our qb does not. In fact, he's now become part of the problem.It started last year in the Minnesota game. Check the tape of Eli. Until the Giants improve the line and/or the running game, Eli will be a BELOW AVERAGE qb in this offense. We need someone with mobility or else we will not be able to make another Superbowl run, in spite of the current stellar defense.
Sorry in advance to all the Eli apologists
The pats have built a money machine around him with businesses and low rent per square foot with his shops etc.
It might be on the salary cap / football books as less. But Brady is not taking less money.
If everyone blames the OL why do so many on here, who don't know the assignments or internals of the game, rush to blame Eli? I think the Papacast is great where Diehl is ripping the line. I side with those guys who have played. If Eli is getting skiddish as the game goes on, well he likely should with the lousy line. Again, Brady was skiddish last week too after his line failed.
Without pass protection no QB can function.
The OL is not without blame, so they definitely deserve to be called out. The OL is the easy scapegoat, and a lot of these analysts don't do any actual work, they just parrot each other. But if you haven't read any analysts positing that Eli bears some responsibility, I'm sorry but you're living in an echo chamber.
The pats have built a money machine around him with businesses and low rent per square foot with his shops etc.
It might be on the salary cap / football books as less. But Brady is not taking less money.
I couldn't agree more. But the point is, Brady is counting less against the cap than any other established franchise QB. At what point has Eli earned enough? He's already right at the $200MM level - when does he start to care about his legacy as much as his fans do?
Of course it wouldn't. How do you think the two of them ended up #1 and #2 in the NFL's all-time earning's list. But it doesn't make roster construction any easier, and it shouldn't earn any sympathy for a weaker supporting cast.
Last year, the NFL MVP was Matt Ryan. According to the writers, he was the "best" QB last year, or best performing QB.
If Eli is the problem, then surely Matt Ryan on this Giants team would make the offense hum. Afterall, he's the MVP.
So with this offensive line that cannot open up running lanes or push the defensive line back, and with this offensive line that gives up sacks and cannot maintain a pocket against 4! down linemen, how would Matt Ryan make this offense a success? Whene Matt Ryan is under duress immediately not knowing who the worst OL is going to be on any particular play, and he has to quickly get rid of the ball and throw against 6 and 7 defenders in coverage because the defense does not have to worry about a run or long-developing plays, where is he going with the ball?
What would Matt Ryan do in this situation that would be different from Eli?
Would you mind if I posited a different view? Maybe the team isn't constructed to have a "franchise" QB in terms of dollars. With the amount of money already committed to the defense, the amount that will have to be reserved for upcoming contracts for young talent like Beckham and Collins and the need to boost the offensive line, something has to give. We saw this team win 11 games last year with a middling offense. Maybe it's just time to reconsider the importance of the QB to the construction of the roster. I believe that's why the Giants drafted Webb this past year, and I believe that if this season goes down the tubes, they'll double down with another franchise QB prospect.
He has gotten sacked less by almost half since the arrival of McAdoo compared to under TC/KG. Try again.
Quote:
For some of you Eli is the easy scapegoat. Just because you can view the game from your couch you can apparently ignore the pass rush. I'm sure the view is different from behind center.
He has gotten sacked less by almost half since the arrival of McAdoo compared to under TC/KG. Try again.
Quote:
In comment 13598707 GeorgeAdams33 said:
Quote:
For some of you Eli is the easy scapegoat. Just because you can view the game from your couch you can apparently ignore the pass rush. I'm sure the view is different from behind center.
He has gotten sacked less by almost half since the arrival of McAdoo compared to under TC/KG. Try again.
Yes but the big plays are down and the offense is producing 3 and outs at an alarming rate.
Absolutely correct. The offensive system is the same. The playcaller is the same. What has changed?
Eli's age.
I couldn't agree more. But the point is, Brady is counting less against the cap than any other established franchise QB. At what point has Eli earned enough? He's already right at the $200MM level - when does he start to care about his legacy as much as his fans do?
Should he play for free? Sure, Brady takes less, maybe Eli should start his own nutrition company and have the Giants spend millions on it like the Pats do with Brady's TB12.
Quote:
I couldn't agree more. But the point is, Brady is counting less against the cap than any other established franchise QB. At what point has Eli earned enough? He's already right at the $200MM level - when does he start to care about his legacy as much as his fans do?
Should he play for free? Sure, Brady takes less, maybe Eli should start his own nutrition company and have the Giants spend millions on it like the Pats do with Brady's TB12.
Side note - unrelated to whether or not he's an issue or should take less - if other teams are doing this, then the Giants should absolutely go the shady route. Why the hell not?
Quote:
I couldn't agree more. But the point is, Brady is counting less against the cap than any other established franchise QB. At what point has Eli earned enough? He's already right at the $200MM level - when does he start to care about his legacy as much as his fans do?
Should he play for free? Sure, Brady takes less, maybe Eli should start his own nutrition company and have the Giants spend millions on it like the Pats do with Brady's TB12.
There are a lot of dollars between free and $20MM. Maybe Eli should care as much about his legacy as his fans do and take a little less to afford some OL help. Could Eli play for $14MM like Brady and give the Giants a chance to sign a Whitworth? Of course he could.
But he won't. Mannings don't play for a penny less than full price.
There are a lot of dollars between free and $20MM. Maybe Eli should care as much about his legacy as his fans do and take a little less to afford some OL help. Could Eli play for $14MM like Brady and give the Giants a chance to sign a Whitworth? Of course he could.
But he won't. Mannings don't play for a penny less than full price.
He can't. The CBA won't allow for players to take less money on an existing contract. They can restructure, which Eli has already done, and he can only do it once within an existing agreement. Your hatred of the Mannings is a little odd coming from a supposed Giant fan.
Quote:
There are a lot of dollars between free and $20MM. Maybe Eli should care as much about his legacy as his fans do and take a little less to afford some OL help. Could Eli play for $14MM like Brady and give the Giants a chance to sign a Whitworth? Of course he could.
But he won't. Mannings don't play for a penny less than full price.
He can't. The CBA won't allow for players to take less money on an existing contract. They can restructure, which Eli has already done, and he can only do it once within an existing agreement. Your hatred of the Mannings is a little odd coming from a supposed Giant fan.
He has not restructured during this contract. He has only restructured once in his career - in 2012.
I don't hate the Mannings; I'm just pointing out a well-known truth, which is that they don't take a penny less than full price.
As for the CBA, tell that to JT Thomas and Dwayne Harris.
Quote:
For some of you Eli is the easy scapegoat. Just because you can view the game from your couch you can apparently ignore the pass rush. I'm sure the view is different from behind center.
He has gotten sacked less by almost half since the arrival of McAdoo compared to under TC/KG. Try again.
You guys want Eli to be someone he's not. And it seems that the team does as well, because for 5 years they haven't upgraded the OL.
Where are you getting your sack numbers because that is simply not the case.
He's looking at one year of the TC/KG era, 2013, when Eli was sacked 39 times, by FAR the most in his career. Since McAdoo has taken over (even as OC), Eli sack numbers have been in line with his career numbers. Don't expect fair accounting from GD.
Quote:
Where are you getting your sack numbers because that is simply not the case.
He's looking at one year of the TC/KG era, 2013, when Eli was sacked 39 times, by FAR the most in his career. Since McAdoo has taken over (even as OC), Eli sack numbers have been in line with his career numbers. Don't expect fair accounting from GD.
One year? Try 9 years. Sorry if a spreadsheet is confusing.
Quote:
In comment 13598822 HomerJones45 said:
Quote:
Where are you getting your sack numbers because that is simply not the case.
He's looking at one year of the TC/KG era, 2013, when Eli was sacked 39 times, by FAR the most in his career. Since McAdoo has taken over (even as OC), Eli sack numbers have been in line with his career numbers. Don't expect fair accounting from GD.
One year? Try 9 years. Sorry if a spreadsheet is confusing.
Here's the data:
According to Football Reference here are the actual sack numbers for Eli's career: 13, 28, 25, 27, 27, 30, 16, 28, 19, 39// McAdoo era: 28, 27, 21. Interestingly, Eli was sacked 25.2 times per season during the Gilbride era and has been sacked 25 times per year during the McAdoo era.
Although these calculations were performed with pen, paper and my trust Radio Shack Dual Powered Solar Calculaor, there does not appear to have been any halving of the sack totals as you asserted.
According to Football Reference here are the actual sack numbers for Eli's career: 13, 28, 25, 27, 27, 30, 16, 28, 19, 39// McAdoo era: 28, 27, 21. Interestingly, Eli was sacked 25.2 times per season during the Gilbride era and has been sacked 25 times per year during the McAdoo era.
Although these calculations were performed with pen, paper and my trust Radio Shack Dual Powered Solar Calculaor, there does not appear to have been any halving of the sack totals as you asserted.
First of all, remove 2004 as he only played 9 games and started 7. Secondly, you're right, I didn't normalize the delta against 100%. So when it shows 100%, that's effectively flat. I was picking up the spreadsheet from the "Eli washed up? Not by the numbers!" thread and just re-parsed the data.
Quote:
how does going from an average of 27 to 26 yield a delta of 100%?
According to Football Reference here are the actual sack numbers for Eli's career: 13, 28, 25, 27, 27, 30, 16, 28, 19, 39// McAdoo era: 28, 27, 21. Interestingly, Eli was sacked 25.2 times per season during the Gilbride era and has been sacked 25 times per year during the McAdoo era.
Although these calculations were performed with pen, paper and my trust Radio Shack Dual Powered Solar Calculaor, athere does not appear to have been any halving of the sack totals as you asserted.
First of all, remove 2004 as he only played 9 games and started 7. Secondly, you're right, I didn't normalize the delta against 100%. So when it shows 100%, that's effectively flat. I was picking up the spreadsheet from the "Eli washed up? Not by the numbers!" thread and just re-parsed the data.
And you're right, it hasn't decreased by half. But it has decreased. It decreased when BMc took over for KG, and then decreased even further when BMc took over for TC. So for the narrative that Eli is under such duress that he can't possibly perform, there's evidence here to suggest that earlier in his career, Eli was more willing to wait for plays to come open. And add to that the decreasing Y/A and Y/C and you start to see a trend of checking down (which I think many of us can anecdotally attest to as well).
I continue to say that I am not absolving the OL of any responsibility, but if you're not willing to see that Eli bears some of the responsibility himself, you're just choosing not to see the whole picture.
I hear you about McAdoo but it's hard to dictate anything when only one of your lineman (Pugh) is winning his battle on a consistent basis.