I was listening to Humpty and Canty yesterday and they brought up a discussion I haven't heard with regards to the playcalling Sunday.
The discussion Rick Dipietro and Chris Canty had was on playcalling. They said they felt like Pat Shurmur was deliberately underusing Saquon Barkley and deliberately putting Eli Manning into positions that he couldn't succeed. For two reasons.
1) They did not feel they'd win this game anyway so they were limiting Barkley's snaps... IE: 3rd and short, 4th and short situations.
2) Pat Shurmur's offense is best suited with a mobile qb that can move the pocket. Case Keenum had a great year under Shurmur being able to extend the play or run option and roll outs.. Eli Manning is just not a fit for Pat Shurmur's offense so he was calling rollouts, etc. to expose him to management as not being able to effectively run the Giants offense. This would give him more leeway to put DJ (his guy) in sooner rather than later. (Keep in mind, Mara's "dream scenario" where DJ doesn't see the field all season has already not come to fruition)..
TBH I felt like this was the case as well. It's kind of insane to think a coach would do this, but, I wouldn't be surprised if coaches have done it in the past.
Thoughts?
Now do I agree with it? Not sure. But this dark cloud needs to go. We've been stuck in the mud on how to move forward for 2-3 years now. Just end it.
The other thing fans don't know is how many plays did PS call as a run that Eli audibled out of due to the D alignment? Shurmur would get the blame for underutilizing SB, but it's ultimately Eli's decision (and possibly/likely the correct calls) on whether its run/pass. The inability to execute on those plays is another story.
Yes, Shurmer's system needs mobility in the QB, but the idea he's exposing Eli as a way of getting him out of the lineup is pure talk radio idiocy. The idea that he was holding back on using Saquon is talk radio idiocy. We've already seen last year Shurmer will get away from the run sometimes regardless of how successful it is.
Yes, Shurmer's system needs mobility in the QB, but the idea he's exposing Eli as a way of getting him out of the lineup is pure talk radio idiocy. The idea that he was holding back on using Saquon is talk radio idiocy. We've already seen last year Shurmer will get away from the run sometimes regardless of how successful it is.
I disagree. Shepard was open initially on the 4th and 1 rollout. Eli hesitated and the window closed. Maybe the hesitation is due to McAdoo/Shurmur emphasizing that he needs to keep INTs down, but young/prime Eli takes that risk.
I just think he out thought himself on the 3rd and 2 and 4th and 1 - he's done it before.
I also feel he had Barkley on a pitch count expecting them to have the ball more. Gallman ran pretty well too when in there. He was planning for something that did not happen because the defense could not get off the field. He is going to need to use Barkley more earlier in the game, and worry about spelling him at the end of the game, not the middle.
Don't buy it.
Anyone who saw Shurmur on the sideline can tell he wants to win. It's written all over his face. And it goes on his resume.
I think Canty is confusing this with Shurmur's approach to calling a game, which is leaving a lot to be desired IMO.
Jones is not the answer to playoffs or no playoffs this year but he IS the answer going forward. Eli is not the answer to even going .500 this year and is not even part of the question going forward.
If the Giants lose to the Bills, and to be honest this game will be much much harder for the Gmen to win than people think, then it is time to go to Jones. 0-2 and with basically nothing defensively standing out as being able to hold things together,would seem like the perfect time to make the switch.
TRULY- I hope a contender loses their QB and makes an offer for Manning (hopefully one where he would consider going).. If the Colts were to lose Brisset or Jax loses Minshew (longer shot as a contender but with Coughlin there) etc., then I could see them asking about Manning.
Sometimes it's okay to ask your guys to beat the man in front of them, save the scheming & cleverness for when they can't.
And if he's protecting players, it's curious they are all playing down 20+ late game. If that was the case Barkley should have seen even fewer touches sitting most of the 4th
With that said, his choices w/ playcall & personnel have been head-scratching at times...which is also hard to believe at the pro level. Yet yrs of watching sports, this is always happening whether it's fans & media complaining unfairly or actually shitty coaching, so maybe not that surprising
But it was a stupid play call with Eli under center.
I disagree. Shepard was open initially on the 4th and 1 rollout. Eli hesitated and the window closed. Maybe the hesitation is due to McAdoo/Shurmur emphasizing that he needs to keep INTs down, but young/prime Eli takes that risk.
On that particular play, I agree with you. They tried at least 2 other roll-out passes (1st & 3rd quarter) in which Barkley was the first option and was taken away immediately.
There's also too many people who would be able to spot the sabotage.
Quote:
I disagree. Shepard was open initially on the 4th and 1 rollout. Eli hesitated and the window closed. Maybe the hesitation is due to McAdoo/Shurmur emphasizing that he needs to keep INTs down, but young/prime Eli takes that risk.
On that particular play, I agree with you. They tried at least 2 other roll-out passes (1st & 3rd quarter) in which Barkley was the first option and was taken away immediately.
I'd argue any roll-out with Barkley as the 1st option is poorly designed. Roll-outs are about misdirection so having the focus of the defense as the primary target on a roll-out is just idiotic.
Maybe if they set it up with a fake end-around to Engram it would work, but IIRC the ones where SB was the target seemed like awful designs. I think on one they even did a play action to SB first so the D was already moving towards him...
Not a stretch to go with the second option. The first is just something radio guys come up with to have something to talk about.
And I do agree with point above about just ripping the bandaid off the QB situation already. This is a cloud that won’t blow away. Put Daniels in and just move forward. Eli played ok on Sunday, but I don’t think he is the better fit for what Shurmur wants to run.
But it was a stupid play call with Eli under center.
1. It should've worked with Eli since he should've fired it to SS right away as was designed. The fact it didn't is on Eli (IMO) and not Shurmur.
2. You're absolutely right that DJ likely picks it up with his feet if he hesitates on the throw like Eli. Though based on how decisive DJ was in preseason, I think he makes the throw to the primary target immediately.
I know, right?
I'd argue any roll-out with Barkley as the 1st option is poorly designed. Roll-outs are about misdirection so having the focus of the defense as the primary target on a roll-out is just idiotic.
Here they are.
2nd time
1st time
Quote:
go on radio which is broadcast to thousands of people and say something so stupid?
I know, right?
To clarify. This was not Canty's opinion but an opinion they've been hearing thrown around and were discussing.
Quote:
I'd argue any roll-out with Barkley as the 1st option is poorly designed. Roll-outs are about misdirection so having the focus of the defense as the primary target on a roll-out is just idiotic.
Here they are.
2nd time
1st time
Thanks, the 1st one is what I was thinking of, but on 2nd look I don't think SB was the primary target. I think they wanted to hit 83 (Tomlinson) in the middle of the field and he was wide open, but Vander Esch didn't bite at all on the play action and Eli didn't feel like he had an angle there and looked to SB.
2nd one was poor design IMO. If the WRs/TEs were on the other side of the field, maybe it has a chance, but even if Barkley gets some separation from Lee, with the entire D flowing that way he really had no chance of getting into the end zone.
Quote:
In comment 14570074 Gman11 said:
Quote:
go on radio which is broadcast to thousands of people and say something so stupid?
I know, right?
To clarify. This was not Canty's opinion but an opinion they've been hearing thrown around and were discussing.
To even give it a shred of credence is akin to discussing the validity of vaccines with anti-vaccers. It's absurd
A question on the roll outs: is the issue that Eli is slow getting outside the pocket, giving the secondary time to read and cover the receiver? Seems to me Eli rolled out a lot last year with success. Also, the announcers made it sound like defenders have more leeway in contact on receivers if the QB is outside the pocket. Granted, everyone agrees that Shep was mauled and it should have been flagged, but do the rules change when QB rolls out?
Not using Barkley was a bad idea. Maybe shy away from using him as a battering ram on short yardage, but you've got to use your weapons.
Quote:
One thing that gets lost is after the second rollout failure...SS drops a TD pass...It never looked like the defender touched the ball. Would have been 21-14
I'd argue any roll-out with Barkley as the 1st option is poorly designed. Roll-outs are about misdirection so having the focus of the defense as the primary target on a roll-out is just idiotic.
Here they are.
2nd time
1st time
A question on the roll outs: is the issue that Eli is slow getting outside the pocket, giving the secondary time to read and cover the receiver? Seems to me Eli rolled out a lot last year with success. Also, the announcers made it sound like defenders have more leeway in contact on receivers if the QB is outside the pocket. Granted, everyone agrees that Shep was mauled and it should have been flagged, but do the rules change when QB rolls out?
Not using Barkley was a bad idea. Maybe shy away from using him as a battering ram on short yardage, but you've got to use your weapons.
Yes, once the QB is outside the pocket, illegal contact no longer applies. Holding, PI and demolishing WRs should still be called though.
Quote:
In comment 14570047 giants#1 said:
Quote:
I disagree. Shepard was open initially on the 4th and 1 rollout. Eli hesitated and the window closed. Maybe the hesitation is due to McAdoo/Shurmur emphasizing that he needs to keep INTs down, but young/prime Eli takes that risk.
On that particular play, I agree with you. They tried at least 2 other roll-out passes (1st & 3rd quarter) in which Barkley was the first option and was taken away immediately.
I'd argue any roll-out with Barkley as the 1st option is poorly designed. Roll-outs are about misdirection so having the focus of the defense as the primary target on a roll-out is just idiotic.
Maybe if they set it up with a fake end-around to Engram it would work, but IIRC the ones where SB was the target seemed like awful designs. I think on one they even did a play action to SB first so the D was already moving towards him...
Even in Madden the HB stays to block in a PA rollout, he is the frigging decoy after all.
Quote:
go on radio which is broadcast to thousands of people and say something so stupid?
I know, right?
Pretty simple, because a well reasoned intelligent take on the situation doesn't make people go running off to social media and the Internet to discuss.
They do it for ratings - what I don't get is why people believe them?
Why on Earth does anyone think that for his own career benefit, in what will most likely be his last chance as a HC, would Shurmur deliberately undermine his own chances to win?
Just for shits and giggles, it would imply that he doesn't have buy in from ownership and can only control what he can control, play calling, to get what he wants.
But I don't truly believe that is the case.
I don't understand why the guy in charge of quality control does not get him set straight.
He has made comments for quite a long time that do not show unwavering support for Eli imo.
If the Giants lose Sunday, Eli will have to win the following week against Washington. If not, 0-3 and 0-2 in the division will create the need for change. Then the bulls-eye will be on him imo.
I don't understand why the guy in charge of quality control does not get him set straight.
winnable game? Is that sarcasm?
Self-sabotage worked out pretty well for AB... He's going to have an extra 5 million when all is said and done and 1-2 Superbowl rings lmfao
I'm playing devil's advocate.
In comment 14570135 jcn56 said:
Quote:
In comment 14570074 Gman11 said:
Quote:
go on radio which is broadcast to thousands of people and say something so stupid?
I know, right?
Pretty simple, because a well reasoned intelligent take on the situation doesn't make people go running off to social media and the Internet to discuss.
They do it for ratings - what I don't get is why people believe them?
Why on Earth does anyone think that for his own career benefit, in what will most likely be his last chance as a HC, would Shurmur deliberately undermine his own chances to win?
..did or did not do in Dallas on Sunday.
My gut tells me that Shurmur can just be "Shurmur" and lose his job because he is not Head Coaching material.
A lot of BBIers believe Shurmur will be given another year with Daniel Jones in the saddle.
I have an entirely different POV. If this team regresses from its lousy 2018 season, then Shurmur will be dropped along with the rest of his coaching staff.
..did or did not do in Dallas on Sunday.
My gut tells me that Shurmur can just be "Shurmur" and lose his job because he is not Head Coaching material.
A lot of BBIers believe Shurmur will be given another year with Daniel Jones in the saddle.
I have an entirely different POV. If this team regresses from its lousy 2018 season, then Shurmur will be dropped along with the rest of his coaching staff.
..did or did not do in Dallas on Sunday.
My gut tells me that Shurmur can just be "Shurmur" and lose his job because he is not Head Coaching material.
A lot of BBIers believe Shurmur will be given another year with Daniel Jones in the saddle.
You seem strong in your belief so I will concur with you!
I have an entirely different POV. If this team regresses from its lousy 2018 season, then Shurmur will be dropped along with the rest of his coaching staff.
Their WR's were open all day!
The Giants are young and I am excited about that....but to say we are in the class of the Cowboys (and Eagles while we're at it) at this point in time is crazy!
He might just be incompetent.
I am still going with the fact that we replaced a Giants Legend (TC) with 2 bozos. We need a BigTime coach to come in here, but who is out there??
I am still going with the fact that we replaced a Giants Legend (TC) with 2 bozos. We need a BigTime coach to come in here, but who is out there??
Just let the Chin take over everything.
This has gone on forever. Go back to the 1984 Wild Card game between the Giants and Rams. The Rams were driving late in the game trying to tie the score. They had Eric Dickerson, who just broke the all time single season rushing record in 1984 and started to get rolling vs. the Giants. They were near the goal line and everyone thought they would give the ball to Dickerson. John Robinson called an inside handoff to FB Dwayne Crutchfield who was stuffed by Leonard Marshall. Drive dies. Rams kick a field goal and lose the game.
A big reason why the Broncos blew their unbeaten season vs. the Giants in 1998? Yes, it was Kent Graham throwing a bomb to Toomer. But it was also Shanahan, with Terrell Davis putting up a 2000 yard season as well. The Broncos needed 2 yards. They had Davis in the game. They gave the ball to FB Howard Griffith. Giants stop him short which set up the bomb by Toomer.
The Giants probably have Saquon on a pitch count, but in a game situation like that, Shurmur got too cute. Give the ball to your best player. Period.
they are solid tacklers . Attacking the edges does not
work they are to quick to the ball .
On defense Zak was changing plays took the time to make the
correct read before snapping the football we were
out manned and out coached .
But he's really not up to the task of being a HC and OC wrapped into one. Over time the game overwhelms him and his ability to playcall effectively goes out the window.
We really need an OC who knows what the hell he's doing.
Watch, after being criticized for underusing Barkley against the Cowboys, he gives him 25 carries and 10 passes this week.
Stop and think about what they are saying...
Quote:
Shurmur out thinks himself from what I see ... simply play to your strengths and keep doing what is working ... it is almost like ok he sees something is working and is scared to keep it up and tries to fool the opponent and only ends up helping them.
I don't understand why the guy in charge of quality control does not get him set straight.
winnable game? Is that sarcasm?
No! You help the D by utilizing your BEST player. You place your best CB on their best WR ... and have your rookie CB play to his strengths more times than not PRESS. I believe the game differently with SB getting 20-22 carries and 5 to 6 passes.
2) Eli's accuracy is OK rolling out to his right
3) Shurmur is v capable game planning what his guys can dowell
Yet that O usage, the bad calls being less 1-sided, still wouldn't have stopped the 5 TD drives by DAL's O. They won at literally every position. Maybe a TO changes things but w/ no pressure it's tough to get one. Even if you want to say better usage on O makes a closer score, I wouldn't say winnable. Dal is legit much better atm
Meanwhile the team is still clearly not in a position to win (especially being in the same division as Philly and Dallas who are both top 10 NFL teams), so I see no reason why the move can't come ASAP.
Nothing in preseason nor Sunday showed me that Eli Manning still gives the Giants a significantly better chance at winning than Daniel Jones. In fact, even if Eli is still technically a better overall QB than Jones at the moment, his lack of mobility limits Shurmur in his play calling and that is a huge negative unto itself. Everything in the NFL comes down to system and system-fit players, talent is very important but I don't see such a vast discrepancy in talent at this point between Eli and DJ to warrant giving Eli such a long leash.