This has been a hot topic of debate on this board, and amongst Giant fans for some time.
So I decided to research the topic, by getting to the bottom of this, and going back to the original manuscripts from November of 2017 when this all went down.
Here are some direct quotes from John Mara himself,
and I quote...
"The point was we did not want him on the bench. We wanted him to start the game and play some portion of the game and at some point work the other guys in. Again, it was his decision, which I completely respect, to go with."
"He’s got to play a meaningful part of the game, whether that was half or three quarters or whatever."
"But what I did not expect, and this is my fault, I was probably naïve, I did not expect Eli to react by saying, ‘Go ahead and start the other guys.’ And again, especially after speaking to him today, I completely understand that. But that took me by surprise a little bit and, yeah, maybe I would have handled that a little bit different."
"We’re 2-9. We’re 2-9, okay? I’m embarrassed about that. Nobody’s doing a good job."
"I did, I did have some pause, but then having talked with Jerry about it and accepted the fact that Eli had slept on it overnight and had time to think about it. He and I texted each other, I wanted to talk to him over the phone, but he preferred to do it face to face because I couldn’t get here until today. So yeah, it did give me some pause, but once I realized that he had slept on it overnight and that was his decision, we went ahead with it."
So what did we learn?
While it is true that the Giants benched Eli Manning for the 3rd and 4th quarter, they did not bench him for the 1st and 2nd quarter.
Mara, Reese and management, wanted him starting, they did not want him on the bench, they wanted him keeping his streak alive, and playing a meaningful part of the game.
As Mara said, it was Eli's decision, and he made this decision after sleeping on it all night, this was not a rash decision.
Therefore it was Eli, and Eli Manning alone who willfully benched himself for the 1st half.
It was Eli Manning, who by his own free will and choice ended his own streak.
I believe he let or allowed his emotions to blind him, to the point where his feelings consumed him so intensely that he ended his own streak.
Eli was being paid 21 million dollars, all he had to do was play the first half, let the other guys come in, and none of that media firestorm would have happened.
Mcadoo and Reese would have been let go anyway at the end of the year, and Eli would have kept his steak alive.
But somehow the media, and some of the fanbase has spun this that the Giants are the ones who ended Eli Manning's streak, and that is not the truth.
So down the road, if and when this topic comes up, it was Eli Manning, and Eli alone, who willfully ended his own streak, and benched himself for the first half.
Hope this helps...
Quote:
He never said he wouldn't play half a game. He said going into a game with that mentality is not hiw he was taught to play football. He said even if they were winning that he could be pulled just because made no sense to him. He was always taught to give his best and go out there to win every game regardless of the situation. This mentality brought us two super bowls.
So, all he said was if you feel he doesn't give the team the best chamce to win then go with the guy that does. If McAdoo thought Geno gave them a better shot then treat Geno like the starting QB and let him prepare that way. Imo, a player shouldn't have to say that to a coach. McAdoo was in over his head.
Eli laid out hlw football should be played amd McAdoo amd Reese still decided that Geno was the better chance and benched Manning. McAdoo has no balls and threw this back on Eli. This wasn't a situation of a team blowing us out and another QB getting reps. This was a situation of we could be up by 10 points and then Geno was coming in just because.
Do we all forget that these are football players and in thjs sport you are trained to fight, compete, and never give up? I'd be extremely disappointed in any player that didn't have that instilled in them. They didn't expect Eli to say what he did? Why? I'd expect every player to be unhappy if this conversation happened. But, ultimately, it is every HC's decision for who starts and who doesn't. Any HC that deflects that blame is a fuckin pussy.
Exactly.
Can anybody give me a prior precedent where a QB was only going to play the half of a game for the rest of a season, predetermined whether winning or losing, in order to play other guys?
I've always thought the game as it was played dictated the situation. As in you work in younger players when the game is out of hand one way or the other. This is how they play it all the way down to the pee wee level.
Not a predetermined time set before the game is ever played.
The whole idea was half cocked from the get go, and a perfect example of how incompetent McAdoo was.
I dont think any other team has been in this predicament.
If the team heads down the same path this year as last year, at least it will be easier to make a clean switch to one of the young guys.
I think if McAdoo had gone to Eli and told Eli he wanted to get Webb Some reps, they could have worked something out. Instead, McAdoo went ahead with an absurd scheme to give Geno Smith some run, while paying lip service to getting Webb Some reps, even though Webb hadn't even gotten reps in practice to that point. It was an enormous bungling by an inept HC, end of story.
Did you happen to watch, two weeks later, when Eli put up 3 TD's and over 400 yards on the eventual Superbowl champions with the same handicapped team?
not one that won 2 SBs and has the current consecutive game streak running.
A sh-t team is a sh-t team. You could pick any number of guys back there and there would have been similar results.
It's not an indictment on Manning, it's an indictment on the roster and coaching.
Eli Manning is going to make a lot of you eat your words this upcoming season. I hope you come back to eat your gigantic plate of crow and not run and hide or backtrack on your very strong and definitive hot takes.
It's statistically untrue that backups with bad lines and receivers register a 89 QB rating (I won't even bring up the pff stuff). That kind of performance under those circumstances is rare.
I won't say it's an indictment of Manning, but we do have to consider other options, and shouldn't put all our eggs in one basketball. We also shouldn't insult Geno Smith for his valiant effort - and venerate the politics and BS which punished him for good play.
Ball doesn't lie.
I just believed at the time, that benching Eli was going to lead to Geno and Webb playing; I think that was what they said.
At that point in the season I felt it was the correct thing to do.
Context matters. Rodger's game was unusually full of screen passes, what kind of grade does he deserve for that? In the end, Rodgers' game was top of the league, so it evened out. You can't use an exception game to say invalidate all PFF grades.
Geno led 2 TD drives, one where he threw the TD himself and another drive where he marched the team down the field to punch it in. On the fumble, Geno led us into the red zone. You can't blame the fumble on him entirely because he was under heavy pressure all game and fumbles are bound to happen in that hostile environment. The line wasn't blocking until Pugh came into the game and silenced Mack. Later, Geno was leading a good drive until a fumble, and he had a good late drive after that.
As far as pass depth is concerned, let me explain NFL QB'ing to you. Geno's short pass depth comes from his getting the ball out quickly in response to a bad line. We saw Geno throw farther to Shepperd when his line solidified.
Eli last year had terrible pass depth for the same reason as Geno - and I've never heard you criticize Eli for it. This kind of bias and myopia is why talking football with some of you is like discussing religion with heretics.
NFL GMs and coaches make bad QB decisions all the time. There are a couple next season who will get fired for choosing the wrong QB. So your argument that "why wasn't Geno signed as starter???" is bunk on that basis alone. I bet you said the same about Pugh, who signed a humungous contract. Not bad for a terrible guard, right?
There is so much wrong with this post, its damn right hysterical.
1. Context matters with Rodgers game? He threw nothing but screen passes in a 5 TD game? Got proof on that? The fact is Geno did not throw ONE pass down the field against the Raiders. Not one.
2. Geno led us into the red zone right before he fumbled? Um, wrong. The punter for Oakland fumbled the snap and was tackled leading us to get the ball inside the 5. Geno fumbled the ball away 2 plays later. Your excuses for him as why its ok to fumble is really cute as well.
3. Geno's short passes came as a result of him being a terrible QB and not being able to read defenses - one of the reasons why the Jets cut bait with him. He was terrible with them.
4. Pugh did not solidfy the line against Oakland. In fact, he didnt even play!!!!!
http://www.nfl.com/inactives?team=NYG
5. My argument is bunk on why Smith hasnt been signed to start? Well its been 2 years now, and no one wants him to start, and there is a good chance the chargers wont even want him on the team. You know why? Because he sucks donkey balls.
6. I wasnt around here last year to talk about Eli and his throws. And by your register date - November of 2017 - it doesnt seem like you were either. Well, at least under this name.
7.
I cant use it, but you can? Well done!!!!
8. You know why you find it hard to talk football with people here? Because you dont know what you are talking about and just make up shit as you go. But then again, you knew Pugh solidified the line once he played against Oakland, right? I never laughed so hard when you said Pugh silenced Mack.
We've had a million backups over the years come in and light us up. How long have you been watching?
I just believed at the time, that benching Eli was going to lead to Geno and Webb playing; I think that was what they said.
At that point in the season I felt it was the correct thing to do.
I would have been fine with them pulling Manning once the game gets out of hand and the season is lost.
That's how it's always been done, and the right way to do things.
What they did, however, was complete bullsh-t meant to save their ass. It backfired and they got what they deserved.
Geno Smith QBR against Oakland..... 39.2!!!! One of the worst in the league!!!
Oh wait, am I not allowed to use this one?
Geno Smith sucks donkey balls!!!! - ( New Window )
Boomer?
Boomer?
Kurt Warner.
All I could muster was a "LOL. Holy Shit" as we are clearly getting played by a troll who thinks he can put game facts past fans who follow the team closely.
The comments about Pugh are just classic. Pugh silenced Mack in a game he didn't play in! The Force is strong with that one.
He needs to be more deliberate and not count on others playing along. He wanted Coughlin to play the part of graceful exit, wanted Manning to play the part of obedient predecessor, Macadoo as peaceful transition of the empire.
But these things don't usually end well. There are few fairy tell endings. Usually you've either gotten old or not succeeded in such a long time past success is a distant memory.
This off-season is hopeful. Gettleman and Shurmur seem to have the latitude to make decisions and don't have the ghost of the last regime's success looking.
I'm solidly on the record saying I don't believe Manning has enough left in the tank to carry a bad team into contention. I'll be shocked and thrilled if the stars align the next few years.
But the best thing for this team and future in the immediate term is figuring out right now what Manning has left and making a direct decision to end it or build on it.
Seems finally there's a coach and GM with the wisdom and mandate to make a decision.
The comments about Pugh are just classic. Pugh silenced Mack in a game he didn't play in! The Force is strong with that one.
Well Arizona signed him to that big contract because if he could shut down Mack from the sidelines - imagine what he could do when he played!
He needs to be more deliberate and not count on others playing along. He wanted Coughlin to play the part of graceful exit, wanted Manning to play the part of obedient predecessor, Macadoo as peaceful transition of the empire.
But these things don't usually end well. There are few fairy tell endings. Usually you've either gotten old or not succeeded in such a long time past success is a distant memory.
This off-season is hopeful. Gettleman and Shurmur seem to have the latitude to make decisions and don't have the ghost of the last regime's success looking.
I'm solidly on the record saying I don't believe Manning has enough left in the tank to carry a bad team into contention. I'll be shocked and thrilled if the stars align the next few years.
But the best thing for this team and future in the immediate term is figuring out right now what Manning has left and making a direct decision to end it or build on it.
Seems finally there's a coach and GM with the wisdom and mandate to make a decision.
I'm pretty much with you here (perhaps a little more bullish on Eli's abilities though)
He actually did. More proof of how PFF is spotty at best. The best is he uses QB rating for his argument even though they do not account lost fumbles.
And they would have gotten away with it, too, if it hadn't been for those meddling kids!
Questions afterwards (if he did bench him) would be answered with "it was a coaching decision"
End of story
Quote:
Indeed, Mara is the guy who agreed to pull this trigger. He knew every detail of the plan he hatched with Reese and McAdoo. Anything he says otherwise is a lie.
No he didnt. You have been shown a zillion times that Mara was under the impression that Eli would be pulled once the game was out of hand.
Maybe you should stop worrying about criticizing ownership and learn what is actually transpiring.
I generally think bw has a jaded view toward Giants' ownership/management, but I tend to agree with him here. Everything Mara has said since it all went down has felt like spin. He didn't expect Eli to refuse, and didn't expect the fan/media backlash to be as severe as it was. He fired everyone involved except for the one guy he couldn't: himself. That's how spin campaigns work.
If it was just as simple as pulling the starting QB when a game got out of hand in a season that had already gotten out of hand, why would anyone need the owner's blessing? That's just SOP for any football team. Mara definitely knew in advance that there was an intention for a schedule of playing time associated with McAdoo's plan, IMO.
He mentioned to Reese that the season was out of hand and it was time to see what the younger guys could do. Reese said that he and McAdoo had already been discussing it. That was the extent of Mara's involvement according to him. And this was the day after when the questions were the harshest and the answers probably the rawest.
Then, McAdoo took that and turned it into "we're pulling you at halftime regardless".
It really depends on how you view Mara. I view him as a non meddling owner who is only peripherally involved in the football operations and let's the professionals do their job, as opposed to say... a Jerry Jones type who is roaming the sidelines.
I think this was a poorly thought out plan from the get go, and I think Mara gave them an inch and they took a mile. That's my view.
IMO, if the plan as executed was told to Mara beforehand, he would have made sure to be there when something like that was presented to Eli. He wasn't even in the building. I think the whole thing truly took him by surprise, and being the professional that he is, he tried to absorb some of the blame from Reese and McAdoo.
Quote:
In comment 13990017 bw in dc said:
Quote:
Indeed, Mara is the guy who agreed to pull this trigger. He knew every detail of the plan he hatched with Reese and McAdoo. Anything he says otherwise is a lie.
No he didnt. You have been shown a zillion times that Mara was under the impression that Eli would be pulled once the game was out of hand.
Maybe you should stop worrying about criticizing ownership and learn what is actually transpiring.
I generally think bw has a jaded view toward Giants' ownership/management, but I tend to agree with him here. Everything Mara has said since it all went down has felt like spin. He didn't expect Eli to refuse, and didn't expect the fan/media backlash to be as severe as it was. He fired everyone involved except for the one guy he couldn't: himself. That's how spin campaigns work.
If it was just as simple as pulling the starting QB when a game got out of hand in a season that had already gotten out of hand, why would anyone need the owner's blessing? That's just SOP for any football team. Mara definitely knew in advance that there was an intention for a schedule of playing time associated with McAdoo's plan, IMO.
Yes, Mara also talked about giving the guys meaningful reps, not just playing in mop up duty. Mara was not under the impression that the switch would ONLY happen when the game is out of hand. But I also believe him when he says that there should be some flexibility with regards to game situation.
I believe his plan (and yes I believe that this was his directive) lays somewhere in between an automatic switch at halftime and only getting reps in mop up duty. But he didn't articulate it well.
Mara handing down a directive does not fit his MO.
1) He suggests it to JR, not the other way around
2) The initial conversations happened weeks before, that leads me to believe that Ben resisted until they were mathematically eliminated. I know this goes against the Ben hated Eli and tried to scapegoat him narrative that is popular here.
"I had mentioned to (GM Jerry Reese) a week or two ago, don't you think it's time to start to get a look at these other quarterbacks at some point during these games," Mara said to start his press conference. "And he agreed, said he'd already had a conversation with Ben about that. Jerry called me on Monday afternoon, I was at a family function in Virginia, to tell me that Ben was going to be speaking to Eli to let him know that he was going to continue to start the game(s) — he was going to start the game on Sunday — but that at some point Geno would come into the game.
"Tuesday morning, Jerry called me and said that Eli had informed Ben that if you're gonna play Geno in the second half, you may as well just start him. It's not fair to him, it's not fair to me," Mara recounted. "I think that would be the best decision going forward. And he also wanted us to put out a statement announcing that. So that's what we did."
What he actually said:
I'm not seeing a disconnect between the two.
Secondly _ from what I saw on TV he refused to start game knowing he'd be benched.
McMagoo screwed up a lot, but Eli deserved to be benched .
Quite honestly, if ,in relative terms his contract wasn't so cheap, he should have been traded if Giants could have gotten a 1st or 2nd rd pick.
Eli will play out the 2 years on his contract and retire (from Giants) gracefully.
Quote:
Context matters. Rodger's game was unusually full of screen passes, what kind of grade does he deserve for that? In the end, Rodgers' game was top of the league, so it evened out. You can't use an exception game to say invalidate all PFF grades.
Geno led 2 TD drives, one where he threw the TD himself and another drive where he marched the team down the field to punch it in. On the fumble, Geno led us into the red zone. You can't blame the fumble on him entirely because he was under heavy pressure all game and fumbles are bound to happen in that hostile environment. The line wasn't blocking until Pugh came into the game and silenced Mack. Later, Geno was leading a good drive until a fumble, and he had a good late drive after that.
As far as pass depth is concerned, let me explain NFL QB'ing to you. Geno's short pass depth comes from his getting the ball out quickly in response to a bad line. We saw Geno throw farther to Shepperd when his line solidified.
Eli last year had terrible pass depth for the same reason as Geno - and I've never heard you criticize Eli for it. This kind of bias and myopia is why talking football with some of you is like discussing religion with heretics.
NFL GMs and coaches make bad QB decisions all the time. There are a couple next season who will get fired for choosing the wrong QB. So your argument that "why wasn't Geno signed as starter???" is bunk on that basis alone. I bet you said the same about Pugh, who signed a humungous contract. Not bad for a terrible guard, right?
There is so much wrong with this post, its damn right hysterical.
1. Context matters with Rodgers game? He threw nothing but screen passes in a 5 TD game? Got proof on that? The fact is Geno did not throw ONE pass down the field against the Raiders. Not one.
2. Geno led us into the red zone right before he fumbled? Um, wrong. The punter for Oakland fumbled the snap and was tackled leading us to get the ball inside the 5. Geno fumbled the ball away 2 plays later. Your excuses for him as why its ok to fumble is really cute as well.
3. Geno's short passes came as a result of him being a terrible QB and not being able to read defenses - one of the reasons why the Jets cut bait with him. He was terrible with them.
4. Pugh did not solidfy the line against Oakland. In fact, he didnt even play!!!!!
http://www.nfl.com/inactives?team=NYG
5. My argument is bunk on why Smith hasnt been signed to start? Well its been 2 years now, and no one wants him to start, and there is a good chance the chargers wont even want him on the team. You know why? Because he sucks donkey balls.
6. I wasnt around here last year to talk about Eli and his throws. And by your register date - November of 2017 - it doesnt seem like you were either. Well, at least under this name.
7.
Quote:
You can't use an exception game to say invalidate all PFF grades
I cant use it, but you can? Well done!!!!
8. You know why you find it hard to talk football with people here? Because you dont know what you are talking about and just make up shit as you go. But then again, you knew Pugh solidified the line once he played against Oakland, right? I never laughed so hard when you said Pugh silenced Mack.
1. To be specific, the Rodgers game was screen passes and easy wide open passes for TDs. He had a bad fumble and a dropped INT. So he didn't get a fantastic grade for that 1 game. His overall grade for the season however was top 5, so that game was an exception. Your trying to use 1 game to invalidate everything PFF does so you can attack Geno.
2. PFF gave Geno a 80+ rating because, no matter how many times you say it, the fumbles weren't Geno's fault. I'll prove it here with tape. This means you can't nitpick at semantics or misrepresent happenings. We can directly see who is to blame for the red zone fumble:
https://streamable.com/n0bmw
It's 2nd and goal. The offense is in Shotgun (3 WRs, 1 HB and 1 TE). Raiders are in Cover 2. The RT Chad Wheeler's job is to block Mack. Engram has two hands on the ground, which implies his job is to chip Mack. Geno drops back, pump fakes to get his WR open and succeeds. Vereen is open. Then, before Geno can get the ball out, he is stripped by Mack. What happened?
TE Engram doesn't chip anyone and RT Chad Wheeler whiffs Mack, giving him a free release on Geno. In other words, the tape proves the red zone fumble wasn't Geno's fault.
3. Good QB play with a bad poor line and bad receivers is throwing short. Throwing long all the time only leads to turnovers. That aside, Eli threw short all season and you deny he's a bad QB. So Geno is a bad QB for doing the same thing Eli does? That's absurd. You're not intellectually honest.
4. My mistake, it was Hart that spelled in for Wheeler and solified the line. Wheeler and Flowers were terrible.
5. My argument remains the same. NFL GMs didn't sign Keenum or Foles as starter, despite in the fact both Keenum and Foles are good enough to start. Accordingly then, GMs not clamoring the sign Geno doesn't mean anything. The Giants tape says Geno is good. Anthony Lynn is the Chargers coach, and he likely pushed for Geno's signing, as he was coached for the Jets while Geno was there. This logically implies you're wrong and the Chargers want Geno on the team (hence the coach vouching for him).
Semantics aside, the tape proves you don't know football, you don't know how to evaluate QBs, and PFF had every reason to give Geno his 80+. Just go watch tape and stop making stuff up. Geno was not even at fault for the 1st fumble; Flowers whiffed on his block.
Quote:
He mentioned to Reese that the season was out of hand and it was time to see what the younger guys could do. Reese said that he and McAdoo had already been discussing it. That was the extent of Mara's involvement according to him.
What he actually said:
Quote:
"I had mentioned to (GM Jerry Reese) a week or two ago, don't you think it's time to start to get a look at these other quarterbacks at some point during these games," Mara said to start his press conference. "And he agreed, said he'd already had a conversation with Ben about that. Jerry called me on Monday afternoon, I was at a family function in Virginia, to tell me that Ben was going to be speaking to Eli to let him know that he was going to continue to start the game(s) — he was going to start the game on Sunday — but that at some point Geno would come into the game.
I'm not seeing a disconnect between the two.
I'm not disagree with you on that point. I just don't buy that this was some diabolical plan by Mac to save face. If so why wait for mathematical elimination when it was clear by week 8 the team was going nowhere. (really at 0-5 we were done)
Mac was trying to win games to save his job. That why he kept playing Eli and didn't bother to give Webb any reps as he saw the writing on the wall that unless he started winning we wouldn't get a chance to coach webb
Did you happen to watch, two weeks later, when Eli put up 3 TD's and over 400 yards on the eventual Superbowl champions with the same handicapped team?
Yeah it is. You're just looking at box stats, which as anyone knows can be misleading. We evaluate QBs by their tap. Geno displayed great footwork, accuracy, arm strength and mobility. Eli didn't display any of the above all year.
Not only was there the mistake on Pugh, but Geno "driving" the team to the red zone once where he actually didn't move the ball after the special teams recovered the bad punt snap.
And then has the gall to say other posters don't know how to understand the game.
Fuck me up the ass with a diseased stick.
I ignore your previous post because honestly, it was not good.
And those "traits" Geno showed - no he didnt.
The biggest play of the day was a Geno horrific throw over the middle.
Quote:
Quote:
He mentioned to Reese that the season was out of hand and it was time to see what the younger guys could do. Reese said that he and McAdoo had already been discussing it. That was the extent of Mara's involvement according to him.
What he actually said:
Quote:
"I had mentioned to (GM Jerry Reese) a week or two ago, don't you think it's time to start to get a look at these other quarterbacks at some point during these games," Mara said to start his press conference. "And he agreed, said he'd already had a conversation with Ben about that. Jerry called me on Monday afternoon, I was at a family function in Virginia, to tell me that Ben was going to be speaking to Eli to let him know that he was going to continue to start the game(s) — he was going to start the game on Sunday — but that at some point Geno would come into the game.
I'm not seeing a disconnect between the two.
I'm not disagree with you on that point. I just don't buy that this was some diabolical plan by Mac to save face. If so why wait for mathematical elimination when it was clear by week 8 the team was going nowhere. (really at 0-5 we were done)
Mac was trying to win games to save his job. That why he kept playing Eli and didn't bother to give Webb any reps as he saw the writing on the wall that unless he started winning we wouldn't get a chance to coach webb
If McAdoo hadn't been heaping the blame at Manning for weeks prior I would agree with you. But McAdoo was throwing blame at Eli's feet going all the way back to 2016 as a reason for the offense's ineptitude. "QB has to play in 'dirty pockets'".It was discussed weekly here.
Reese's deflections go all the way back to 2012 when he was calling Manning "skittish", as if he shouldn't be playing behind those "lines" that Reese assembled.
Quote:
You're going to try and sit there and sell us that Geno Smith and his 1 TD, 200 yard performance against a sh-tty Raiders team is better than Eli put up all year? And you're telling us to WATCH THE GAME?
Did you happen to watch, two weeks later, when Eli put up 3 TD's and over 400 yards on the eventual Superbowl champions with the same handicapped team?
Yeah it is. You're just looking at box stats, which as anyone knows can be misleading. We evaluate QBs by their tap. Geno displayed great footwork, accuracy, arm strength and mobility. Eli didn't display any of the above all year.
So Geno's 200 yard, 1 TD game against the 6-10 Raiders was better than Eli's 400 yard, 3 TD game against the Superbowl Champion Eagles.
Got it.
Quote:
In comment 13990245 Britt in VA said:
Quote:
Quote:
He mentioned to Reese that the season was out of hand and it was time to see what the younger guys could do. Reese said that he and McAdoo had already been discussing it. That was the extent of Mara's involvement according to him.
What he actually said:
Quote:
"I had mentioned to (GM Jerry Reese) a week or two ago, don't you think it's time to start to get a look at these other quarterbacks at some point during these games," Mara said to start his press conference. "And he agreed, said he'd already had a conversation with Ben about that. Jerry called me on Monday afternoon, I was at a family function in Virginia, to tell me that Ben was going to be speaking to Eli to let him know that he was going to continue to start the game(s) — he was going to start the game on Sunday — but that at some point Geno would come into the game.
I'm not seeing a disconnect between the two.
I'm not disagree with you on that point. I just don't buy that this was some diabolical plan by Mac to save face. If so why wait for mathematical elimination when it was clear by week 8 the team was going nowhere. (really at 0-5 we were done)
Mac was trying to win games to save his job. That why he kept playing Eli and didn't bother to give Webb any reps as he saw the writing on the wall that unless he started winning we wouldn't get a chance to coach webb
If McAdoo hadn't been heaping the blame at Manning for weeks prior I would agree with you. But McAdoo was throwing blame at Eli's feet going all the way back to 2016 as a reason for the offense's ineptitude. "QB has to play in 'dirty pockets'".It was discussed weekly here.
Reese's deflections go all the way back to 2012 when he was calling Manning "skittish", as if he shouldn't be playing behind those "lines" that Reese assembled.
Mac made like two or three comments. Reese made one. Stop with the conspiracy against Eli theories