Do you think today's NFL is more imperative to have a QB who can work with subpar OLs?
Said it's always been a great antidote, mentioned Brunnell's scrambling ability. But said it always comes down to can you throw the ball well enough.
One thing he learned about in the last couple of years - if you don' have a good OL, you play action because the DL has to play the run first and that gives you an extra second or two that you couldn't do with a traditional drop back passing game.
Said the best QBs in the league, Brady and Brees don't move any better than Eli
Talked up Darnold - hasn't seen much of him, but a big strong guy with a strong arm, good mobility. Said you can't judge him in his first year, wait until his second year. Question of whether he has the poise under fire should be answered next year. Said there are a lot of QBs that don't have the intelligence/vision to make the judgements necessary to throw the ball well, that you won't know until next year whether Darnold has it.
but that he's also not an anticipator, he needs to wait and see the plays develop in front of him, not good at reading the defense and being one step ahead of them.
around and bring up Darnold. Loved Gilbride's answer, haven't really seen much of him!
It's like he wouldn't let Gilbride even finish his answer on Eli before turning it to a Jets conversation.
Actually, I think it was Gilbride who turned it a bit - they asked about whether a mobile QB was necessary in today's NFL, and Gilbride sidestepped it, went back to Brunell.
If in their mind this guy has a legit chance based on what they've seen (arm strength, assimilation of the playbook, etc.), then you definitely want to take a look at him this season. If you're looking at him and think he's lost, then it's a waste of time. Coaches are more concerned with winning than the long term view of the QB position. Said by this point they have a pretty good handle on Lauletta, said that they knew all they needed to know about the guy everyone was clamoring for last year (Webb).
and no surprise, no love lost there ('I wasn't the only one who didn't like the guy').
And that's it. Not much there, but not sure what people would expect from KG. He's obviously going to be a bit biased, he's got two rings and had a good run here in large part due to Eli.
The only part that I think I'd disagree with is Eli moving as well as Brady or Brees. I don't know who'd win in a foot race, but it sure seems like Brees at least is better at anticipating and moving with the pressure in the pocket, and getting rolling when he needs to.
He seems to imply a QB change is not done. He's also talking up Webb in comparison to Lauletta in terms of work ethic, saying that Webb was a harder worker than even Eli, and that Lauletta could learn from that example.
not done. Said that if they do, it'll be in the best interests of the organization and not a reflection on Manning, that he's still the best QB on the roster.
Anyone would choose to purposefully not value what a coach like Kevin Gilbride has to say is a bit silly to me. Especially since he worked so close with Manning.
Love Gilbride but definetly have to disagree with him on Brady Â
and Brees not having more mobility than Eli. I've watched a ton of Brady. Brady is more willing and definetly runs better than Eli. What little I have seen of Brees he runs better than both Eli and Brady.Eli runs like my sister and he's not very willing to do it.
Anyone would choose to purposefully not value what a coach like Kevin Gilbride has to say is a bit silly to me. Especially since he worked so close with Manning.
If you're going to answer your own questions...
That closeness with Eli is why some people don't think KG's objective enough.
And Joe and Evan are now on the 'Davis Webb on Sunday' campaign. So it's not just Giants fans. They want to see Webb instead of McCown.
Anyone would choose to purposefully not value what a coach like Kevin Gilbride has to say is a bit silly to me. Especially since he worked so close with Manning.
If you're going to answer your own questions...
That closeness with Eli is why some people don't think KG's objective enough.
And Joe and Evan are now on the 'Davis Webb on Sunday' campaign. So it's not just Giants fans. They want to see Webb instead of McCown.
They often don't think he's objective enough because what he says fails to fit their agenda, or "narrative" possibly.
That, or his comments tend to be very much of the Â
Gilbride: The same guy I've always seen in physical ability. He's never been able to solve problems with his feet, always his brain and his arm. Needs enough time to go through his progressions. I understand the QB gets the brunt of the fan anger, they're just not scoring enough. Bottom line: You have to win, but when you're the QB and you aren't winning, the ire's going to be on him.
Evan: A lot of teams have bad OLs, do you think it's more imperative in today's NFL to have QBs that can make plays with their legs?
Gilbride: It's a great answer to have that as an attribute with poor OL play. It will always come down to, "can you throw the ball well enough and be accurate?" In football, quick/short passes are nice, but you have to also be able to make big plays down the field. Brady and Brees aren't any more mobile than Eli but they're able to buy an extra second with play action.
Joe: Thoughts on Sam Darnold?
Gilbride: Haven't seen enough of him actually, I've seen and heard enough that he can be the answer. Don't judge a QB in his first year, but in his second year you'll be able to see if he'll be able to grow into the franchise QB you've been looking for. The most important attributes in a QB are: Does he have poise under fire? Does he have ability to process information? I see a lot of QBs now with a lot of natural talent that have no idea what's going on in front of them. Intelligence, vision, accuracy, and poise are four attributes more important than arm strength.
Evan: Dak Prescott?
Gilbride: Everyone wanted to put him in Tom Brady's class after year 1. He was been afforded some things other guys don't have - he had 3-4 seconds on every throw. Defenders had to stop Zeke before him. Now that their line is breaking down, you have a more accurate barometer of the type of QB he is. But he's also better than what people say. Not accurate deep, not an "anticipator," sees things when they happen rather than before they happen. But he's unflappable and he's tough, and he has a great running back, they should run more play action on 1st and 2nd down.
Joe: What's the deal with Jameis Winston?
Gilbride: Big, strong arm guy, athletic enough to play the position. But I questioned his judgment from day 1. Not sure of his ability to quickly ascertain what's going on and deliver the ball where it needs to be. Fine line between athletic arrogance that lets you perform at a high level and crossing that threshold to now where you're trying too hard to make things happen that are impossible.
Evan: Can you learn a lot from a handful of games with a young QB who's inexperienced (this is in referenced to Lauletta)
Gilbride: In a word, no, but you do it anyway. At least find out. I understand the temptation from the fans. In the mind of the coaching staff, if they feel that he has a legitimate chance based on what they've seen (how he conducts himself in practice), then it makes all the sense in the world to look at him. But if you make the determination that it would be a waste of time, don't do it to do it. The coach also has a responsibility to his players to not lose the locker room and try to win games.
Not a lot there, but Eli/Lauletta were addressed and I know people have asked about Jameis.
'I told them to do this and they didn't' variety, which don't usually fly well when it's coming from someone trying to defend their own firing.
Today he said Brees and Brady were no more mobile than Eli, and that's really not true. It's not a stretch to think that maybe he's a tad biased.
It's been five years. He has since said he was retiring after 2013 unless he got a head coaching gig. That is confirmed by a poster here that was a friend of his family supposedly.
He's a two time champion, and he could have worked elsewhere if he was truly fired, and wanted to continue coaching.
Why would he still need to defend himself after all these years?
And his point about playaction is extremely valid. Â
Where he basically put the blame on Reese and Ross for not restocking the offensive line. Which looks pretty accurate now unless you believe that Gilbride and Coughlin had the final say on picks over Reese and Co.
RE: And his point about playaction is extremely valid. Â
We can't run it because Eli would get tackled before he even got turned around from the fake.
It is why I was upset they let Fluker go. Our running game looked better last year with Darkwa once Fluker was inserted than it does this year with someone touched by the hand of god.
Wow, even KG's praise of certain aspects/players Â
It's been five years. He has since said he was retiring after 2013 unless he got a head coaching gig. That is confirmed by a poster here that was a friend of his family supposedly.
He's a two time champion, and he could have worked elsewhere if he was truly fired, and wanted to continue coaching.
Why would he still need to defend himself after all these years?
Can't really take anyone on BBI seriously as a source for anything.
He officially retired - but right after, people assumed he retired rather than be fired, and the hiring of McAdoo came with a statement from Reese that said it was time for a change, which started the back and forth over whether it was the offensive scheme or the talent that was causing the failure.
I don't blame the guy for being defensive, the perception was that his scheme was no longer getting the job done, and he took it personally. I would too if I were him. That doesn't mean he's wrong, but it does make him a biased observer.
RE: RE: That, or his comments tend to be very much of the Â
'I told them to do this and they didn't' variety, which don't usually fly well when it's coming from someone trying to defend their own firing.
Today he said Brees and Brady were no more mobile than Eli, and that's really not true. It's not a stretch to think that maybe he's a tad biased.
It's been five years. He has since said he was retiring after 2013 unless he got a head coaching gig. That is confirmed by a poster here that was a friend of his family supposedly.
He's a two time champion, and he could have worked elsewhere if he was truly fired, and wanted to continue coaching.
Why would he still need to defend himself after all these years?
Ego perhaps? You referenced it briefly. It's not a secret he badly wanted another head coaching job. He went on a number of interviews while working here, and it just never worked out. What coach doesn't have an ego.
RE: And his point about playaction is extremely valid. Â
We can't run it because Eli would get tackled before he even got turned around from the fake.
I think this has happened the last few seasons. The Giants lose yards on many runs. A run for no gain or a one one and a half yard gain is a bad run for other teams. For the Giants it is an improvement.
If Eli was on NO he would be a one win Qb? I doubt it. Brees is the man, on this squad he is likely injured by now.
Eli and the fact that he is indestructable on a football field actually leads to a worse perception of him as a player.
Darnold in half a season is in a boot.
If Eli were mortal on the field, he would have been out long ago due to injury and the backup would have failed and Eli would be looked at in a better light.
Anyone would choose to purposefully not value what a coach like Kevin Gilbride has to say is a bit silly to me. Especially since he worked so close with Manning.
If you're going to answer your own questions...
That closeness with Eli is why some people don't think KG's objective enough.
And Joe and Evan are now on the 'Davis Webb on Sunday' campaign. So it's not just Giants fans. They want to see Webb instead of McCown.
They often don't think he's objective enough because what he says fails to fit their agenda, or "narrative" possibly.
Occam's Razor would be more consistent with Gilbride simply being biased in his assessment.
Anyone would choose to purposefully not value what a coach like Kevin Gilbride has to say is a bit silly to me. Especially since he worked so close with Manning.
If you're going to answer your own questions...
That closeness with Eli is why some people don't think KG's objective enough.
And Joe and Evan are now on the 'Davis Webb on Sunday' campaign. So it's not just Giants fans. They want to see Webb instead of McCown.
They often don't think he's objective enough because what he says fails to fit their agenda, or "narrative" possibly.
Occam's Razor would be more consistent with Gilbride simply being biased in his assessment.
Wouldn't Occam's Razor in this case be to take Gilbride at his word with regards to Eli?
I mean the root of the principle is the explanation that requires the least speculation or in basic terms the explanation that is the simplest is the accurate one, no?
Where he basically put the blame on Reese and Ross for not restocking the offensive line. Which looks pretty accurate now unless you believe that Gilbride and Coughlin had the final say on picks over Reese and Co.
I would say extremely accurate and it's looking more and more like they pushed the wrong two guys out!
The only part that I think I'd disagree with is Eli moving as well as Brady or Brees. I don't know who'd win in a foot race, but it sure seems like Brees at least is better at anticipating and moving with the pressure in the pocket, and getting rolling when he needs to.
Glad you qualified that with your assessment. Saying Brees moves as poorly as Eli is flat out ludicrous, undermines a lot of credibility to a bias. Brees is very nimble afoot, very quick in his decision-making (another unfavorable comparison to Eli), and very quick to step up (something Eli can't do because of OL), evade, roll, etc.
How did DB survive and thrive in this league as a certain HOFer, I think, with his lack of height if he could not duck and dodge and find passing lanes. It would be interesting to compare number of balls batted down at LOS between the two.
RE: Love KG, but comparing Eli’s mobility to Brees Â
There’s a contingent that just don’t want to love coughlin and or gillbride. I’ll never understand this. Bring up the glory days and some can’t wait to point out the negatives. 2005-2012 was glorious. Excellence. Consistency might look different but make no mistake those giants teams personified all those great team attributes. Love KG. He and Eli and coughlin were perfect for each other.
Always with his arm and his brains.
Said it's always been a great antidote, mentioned Brunnell's scrambling ability. But said it always comes down to can you throw the ball well enough.
One thing he learned about in the last couple of years - if you don' have a good OL, you play action because the DL has to play the run first and that gives you an extra second or two that you couldn't do with a traditional drop back passing game.
Said the best QBs in the league, Brady and Brees don't move any better than Eli
Talked up Darnold - hasn't seen much of him, but a big strong guy with a strong arm, good mobility. Said you can't judge him in his first year, wait until his second year. Question of whether he has the poise under fire should be answered next year. Said there are a lot of QBs that don't have the intelligence/vision to make the judgements necessary to throw the ball well, that you won't know until next year whether Darnold has it.
It's like he wouldn't let Gilbride even finish his answer on Eli before turning it to a Jets conversation.
It's like he wouldn't let Gilbride even finish his answer on Eli before turning it to a Jets conversation.
Actually, I think it was Gilbride who turned it a bit - they asked about whether a mobile QB was necessary in today's NFL, and Gilbride sidestepped it, went back to Brunell.
No, you heard it right - my point was KG was starting to duck the Eli questions a bit.
Makes sense now...I am also listening on the radio.com app, so there is a bit of a delay.
And that's it. Not much there, but not sure what people would expect from KG. He's obviously going to be a bit biased, he's got two rings and had a good run here in large part due to Eli.
The only part that I think I'd disagree with is Eli moving as well as Brady or Brees. I don't know who'd win in a foot race, but it sure seems like Brees at least is better at anticipating and moving with the pressure in the pocket, and getting rolling when he needs to.
If you're going to answer your own questions...
That closeness with Eli is why some people don't think KG's objective enough.
And Joe and Evan are now on the 'Davis Webb on Sunday' campaign. So it's not just Giants fans. They want to see Webb instead of McCown.
Quote:
Anyone would choose to purposefully not value what a coach like Kevin Gilbride has to say is a bit silly to me. Especially since he worked so close with Manning.
If you're going to answer your own questions...
That closeness with Eli is why some people don't think KG's objective enough.
And Joe and Evan are now on the 'Davis Webb on Sunday' campaign. So it's not just Giants fans. They want to see Webb instead of McCown.
They often don't think he's objective enough because what he says fails to fit their agenda, or "narrative" possibly.
Today he said Brees and Brady were no more mobile than Eli, and that's really not true. It's not a stretch to think that maybe he's a tad biased.
Gilbride: The same guy I've always seen in physical ability. He's never been able to solve problems with his feet, always his brain and his arm. Needs enough time to go through his progressions. I understand the QB gets the brunt of the fan anger, they're just not scoring enough. Bottom line: You have to win, but when you're the QB and you aren't winning, the ire's going to be on him.
Evan: A lot of teams have bad OLs, do you think it's more imperative in today's NFL to have QBs that can make plays with their legs?
Gilbride: It's a great answer to have that as an attribute with poor OL play. It will always come down to, "can you throw the ball well enough and be accurate?" In football, quick/short passes are nice, but you have to also be able to make big plays down the field. Brady and Brees aren't any more mobile than Eli but they're able to buy an extra second with play action.
Joe: Thoughts on Sam Darnold?
Gilbride: Haven't seen enough of him actually, I've seen and heard enough that he can be the answer. Don't judge a QB in his first year, but in his second year you'll be able to see if he'll be able to grow into the franchise QB you've been looking for. The most important attributes in a QB are: Does he have poise under fire? Does he have ability to process information? I see a lot of QBs now with a lot of natural talent that have no idea what's going on in front of them. Intelligence, vision, accuracy, and poise are four attributes more important than arm strength.
Evan: Dak Prescott?
Gilbride: Everyone wanted to put him in Tom Brady's class after year 1. He was been afforded some things other guys don't have - he had 3-4 seconds on every throw. Defenders had to stop Zeke before him. Now that their line is breaking down, you have a more accurate barometer of the type of QB he is. But he's also better than what people say. Not accurate deep, not an "anticipator," sees things when they happen rather than before they happen. But he's unflappable and he's tough, and he has a great running back, they should run more play action on 1st and 2nd down.
Joe: What's the deal with Jameis Winston?
Gilbride: Big, strong arm guy, athletic enough to play the position. But I questioned his judgment from day 1. Not sure of his ability to quickly ascertain what's going on and deliver the ball where it needs to be. Fine line between athletic arrogance that lets you perform at a high level and crossing that threshold to now where you're trying too hard to make things happen that are impossible.
Evan: Can you learn a lot from a handful of games with a young QB who's inexperienced (this is in referenced to Lauletta)
Gilbride: In a word, no, but you do it anyway. At least find out. I understand the temptation from the fans. In the mind of the coaching staff, if they feel that he has a legitimate chance based on what they've seen (how he conducts himself in practice), then it makes all the sense in the world to look at him. But if you make the determination that it would be a waste of time, don't do it to do it. The coach also has a responsibility to his players to not lose the locker room and try to win games.
Not a lot there, but Eli/Lauletta were addressed and I know people have asked about Jameis.
Today he said Brees and Brady were no more mobile than Eli, and that's really not true. It's not a stretch to think that maybe he's a tad biased.
It's been five years. He has since said he was retiring after 2013 unless he got a head coaching gig. That is confirmed by a poster here that was a friend of his family supposedly.
He's a two time champion, and he could have worked elsewhere if he was truly fired, and wanted to continue coaching.
Why would he still need to defend himself after all these years?
It's been five years. He has since said he was retiring after 2013 unless he got a head coaching gig. That is confirmed by a poster here that was a friend of his family supposedly.
He's a two time champion, and he could have worked elsewhere if he was truly fired, and wanted to continue coaching.
Why would he still need to defend himself after all these years?
Can't really take anyone on BBI seriously as a source for anything.
He officially retired - but right after, people assumed he retired rather than be fired, and the hiring of McAdoo came with a statement from Reese that said it was time for a change, which started the back and forth over whether it was the offensive scheme or the talent that was causing the failure.
I don't blame the guy for being defensive, the perception was that his scheme was no longer getting the job done, and he took it personally. I would too if I were him. That doesn't mean he's wrong, but it does make him a biased observer.
Quote:
'I told them to do this and they didn't' variety, which don't usually fly well when it's coming from someone trying to defend their own firing.
Today he said Brees and Brady were no more mobile than Eli, and that's really not true. It's not a stretch to think that maybe he's a tad biased.
It's been five years. He has since said he was retiring after 2013 unless he got a head coaching gig. That is confirmed by a poster here that was a friend of his family supposedly.
He's a two time champion, and he could have worked elsewhere if he was truly fired, and wanted to continue coaching.
Why would he still need to defend himself after all these years?
Ego perhaps? You referenced it briefly. It's not a secret he badly wanted another head coaching job. He went on a number of interviews while working here, and it just never worked out. What coach doesn't have an ego.
I think this has happened the last few seasons. The Giants lose yards on many runs. A run for no gain or a one one and a half yard gain is a bad run for other teams. For the Giants it is an improvement.
If Eli was on NO he would be a one win Qb? I doubt it. Brees is the man, on this squad he is likely injured by now.
Darnold in half a season is in a boot.
If Eli were mortal on the field, he would have been out long ago due to injury and the backup would have failed and Eli would be looked at in a better light.
Quote:
In comment 14169908 crick n NC said:
Quote:
Anyone would choose to purposefully not value what a coach like Kevin Gilbride has to say is a bit silly to me. Especially since he worked so close with Manning.
If you're going to answer your own questions...
That closeness with Eli is why some people don't think KG's objective enough.
And Joe and Evan are now on the 'Davis Webb on Sunday' campaign. So it's not just Giants fans. They want to see Webb instead of McCown.
They often don't think he's objective enough because what he says fails to fit their agenda, or "narrative" possibly.
Occam's Razor would be more consistent with Gilbride simply being biased in his assessment.
Quote:
In comment 14169912 jcn56 said:
Quote:
In comment 14169908 crick n NC said:
Quote:
Anyone would choose to purposefully not value what a coach like Kevin Gilbride has to say is a bit silly to me. Especially since he worked so close with Manning.
If you're going to answer your own questions...
That closeness with Eli is why some people don't think KG's objective enough.
And Joe and Evan are now on the 'Davis Webb on Sunday' campaign. So it's not just Giants fans. They want to see Webb instead of McCown.
They often don't think he's objective enough because what he says fails to fit their agenda, or "narrative" possibly.
Occam's Razor would be more consistent with Gilbride simply being biased in his assessment.
Wouldn't Occam's Razor in this case be to take Gilbride at his word with regards to Eli?
I mean the root of the principle is the explanation that requires the least speculation or in basic terms the explanation that is the simplest is the accurate one, no?
I would say extremely accurate and it's looking more and more like they pushed the wrong two guys out!
How did DB survive and thrive in this league as a certain HOFer, I think, with his lack of height if he could not duck and dodge and find passing lanes. It would be interesting to compare number of balls batted down at LOS between the two.
WHAT pocket?????
It really doesn’t. If people want to pick that apart go right ahead but he could have simply meant that there are other QBs who aren’t mobile.
But you are right, let’s just discount his entire opinion and analysis of everything else he said.