If you take a look at 2020 stats for the four conference finalists in comparison to the Giants, you get an informative look into why the Giants are failing and what they need to improve to compete in 2021.
Team - PPG - League Rank
Points Scored
GB - 31.8 - 1ST
BUF - 31.3 - 2ND
TB - 30.8 - 3RD
KC - 29.6 - 6TH
NYG - 17.5 - 31ST
This one is pretty obvious. You've got to score points. But it's more interesting when taken in conjunction with points allowed:
Points Allowed
TB - 22.2 - 8TH
NYG - 22.3 - 9TH
KC - 22.6 - 10TH
GB - 23.1 - 13TH
BUF - 23.4 - 16TH
Defensively the Giants were right there with the best teams in the league. But while those other teams won anywhere from 11 to 14 games, the Giants only won 6.
It was obvious to anyone watching but it is so stark it deserves to be restated: the offense must be drastically better in 2021. I'll also note that only one team in the NFL (LA Rams) finished in the bottom 16 in points scored and still finished over .500. The #16 ranked team in points scored was Atlanta, with 24.8.
That sets a good target for the Giants in 2021: Score 25 points per game.
Now let's look at run vs. pass...
Rushing Y/A
GB - 4.8 - 5TH
KC - 4.5 - 11TH
NYG - 4.4 - 13TH
BUF - 4.2 - 23RD
TB - 4.1 - 25TH
Passing AY/A
GB - 9.6 - 1ST
KC - 8.7 - 3RD
BUF - 8.5 - 5TH
TB - 8.1 - 8TH
NYG - 6.0 - 28TH
You can see the correlation with winning and passing the ball well, whereas there doesn't appear to be any correlation in rushing the ball well. Three teams in the bottom half of the league in AY/A finished over .500 - LA Rams, Pittsburgh, and Chicago. The 16th best team in AY/A (Baltimore) had a mark of 7.3 AY/A.
There's a good target for the Giants in 2021 - achieve an AY/A of 7.5.
If you dive deeper into the passing statistics, you find more correlation.
Passing TDs
GB - 48 - 1ST
TB - 42 - 2ND
KC - 40 - 3RD
BUF - 40 - 4TH
NYG - 12 - 32ND
The four best teams in the league were the four top teams in TD passes. Speaks for itself. Only four teams in the bottom half of the league in passing TDs finished above .500: Chicago, Indianapolis, Miami, and LA Rams. The 16th ranked team in TD passes (Baltimore) had 27.
Target for the Giants in 2021 - throw 30 TD passes.
Sacks Allowed
GB - 21 - 3RD
TB - 22 - 4TH
KC - 24 - 5TH
BUF - 27 - 9TH
NYG - 50 - 30TH
Only two teams in the bottom half of the league in sacks allowed finished above .500: Chicago and Seattle. The 16th ranked team (LA Chargers) allowed 34.
Target for Giants in 2021 - Allow fewer than 30 sacks.
---------------------------------------------------------
The Giants were right there with the four best teams in the league in defense and running the football, yet they finished 5 to 8 games behind them in the standings. Clearly, winning in the NFL in 2020 was about throwing the football to create points. The four best teams did that at the top level, the Giants were a bottom level passing team.
The targets laid out above are not elite level targets - they are slightly above league average. They do not represent unreasonable expectations for 2021.
2021 Targets
- Score 25 points per game.
- Achieve an AY/A of 7.5.
- Throw 30 TD passes.
- Allow fewer than 30 sacks.
If the Giants hit those four targets they should end up with a good record and a playoff spot. But they've got to improve drastically over their last two seasons:
2019
- 21.3 points per game
- AY/A of 6.4
- 30 TD passes
- 43 sacks allowed
2020
- 17.5 points per game
- AY/A of 6.0
- 12 TD passes
- 50 sacks allowed
Why am I including 2019? Because it's been pretty common to point to it as a strong year for the Giants' passing offense. While it was clearly better than 2020, you can see that it still falls well short of average by 2020 standards. Significant improvement is needed.
I'll admit that this is only looking at one year (2020). I'll bookmark this and see how 2021 shapes up in comparison to these targets.
:)
The philosophy to building a winner in 2021 does seem to contradict Dave’s 1990 vision.
On defense, we need rushers. Our pass rush still lacks in a big way, despite what Graham was able to pull off. That’s what we need more than anything.
Teams did not have to get into shootouts for scoring, their defenses were effective at keeping scoring to a trickle. Because the Giants offense was so anemic, teams could focus more on possession. Less big plays and more ball control offenses ate the Giants lunch.
The Giants cannot be complacent on defense though, they must assume that the unit will fallback a bit and bring in some more help.
As for the offense, I think ultimately an upgrade will be needed at QB. I’d give Jones half of 2021 to see marked improvement in production in combination with decreased turnovers. The Bucs are a good example to show what an improvement at the position can do.
I just hope the Giants don’t repeat the mistakes of 2016. The Giants are building a team, not a unit. We’ve seen what happens when too much of the focus is on one side of the ball.
Nah, that'll never work.
Let's just stick to the "run the ball, stop the run and rush the passer" thing...
Without a big time Edge player, we still finished tied for 12th in sacks and were top half in the league in pressure.
And this is largely, IMV, derivative of Patrick's schemes he learned from the Belichick U. Point being we shouldn't over-spend for a big name pass rusher in free agency. Try to draft someone and/or look for a player with upside, ala a Fackrell-type, part two.
I don't know what the magic number is for TD passes, but we need significantly more AND a low INT total to boot. That TD/INT ratio needs to also improve significantly.
This threaded will inevitably lead to a collision of Jones and Garrett. Is Jones the right guy? Is the Garrett offensive the right O?
I do know Garrett's offenses have succeeded in the past scoring points. The other day I think my research showed top half in the league 5/9 X out of 9 years in Dallas; and 3X in the top 6.
The way Mara and Gettleman spoke at the State of the Union, these horrible poker players definitely tipped their hands - expect a spending spree in free agency on offense, and maybe a offensive heavy draft.
So what I'm saying is you improve one stat, the others will improve. Obviously YPA and TDs are important. The offensive line improved during the year, but there's still room for improvement. We cut down on turnovers, but we didn't get enough.
You just have to watch the game to see room for improvement. The team was 5-3 in the last 8 games, and that's because the offensive line improved. Jones cut down on his turnovers, but everybody knows there was nobody that scared defenses. A top receiver opens things up for other receivers. An edge rusher draws double teams and lets other people get pressure.
So we just have to look like the team from the second half of the season rather than the first half. But that's easier said than done. We'll fill holes through free agency and the draft. I think Jones is "the answer" but I get why other people don't think so. Fun to speculate for 9 months, but it would have been a lot better to only have 8 months to speculate. Oh, well.
-Offensive Tackle for the right side
-Wide Receiver on the outside, and a more
-reliable Tight End who can be a red zone target
Only difference was we took Daniel Jones and they took devin white.
Never expected buccs to be super bowl champs till they signed brady
Teams did not have to get into shootouts for scoring, their defenses were effective at keeping scoring to a trickle. Because the Giants offense was so anemic, teams could focus more on possession. Less big plays and more ball control offenses ate the Giants lunch.
Agree with this. Example: Giants gave up only 20 points to the Browns but gave up two 95 yard drives. Good defenses don't do that.
Week 16, the Ravens scored on five of their first six drives and would have scored on the sixth but for a delay of game penalty that took them out of FG range. They "only" scored 27 points but could have scored a lot more if they had to.
Also should be kept in mind that because the NFL plays so many fewer games than the other major sports, seasonal team stats are not an apples-to-apples comparison. It matters whom you play and when you play them.
PPG: 23.1 (16th)
AY/A: 7.4 (14th)
TD Passes: 23 (21st)
Sacks allowed: 47 (23rd)
That's with Eli, Barkley at his best, and Beckham in Shurmur's offense.
We have not seen good offensive football around here in some time.
I do believe there are premium positions, but you grab talent when talent is available and don't reach for position.
Spend big on playmakers, just don't be fooled into thinking a player is a playmaker just because they happen to be the best available at the time.
For comparison sake, when you run something like a smash route you threaten the corner in cover two. You read the corner. If the corner bites up you hit the corner route behind him. If the corner drops deep then you hit the underneath defender.
You you run a play what we used to call Texas, that is a post route, a dig route, and a drag route. You work 3 levels of the defense over the middle of the field. There are progressions. If one isn't open then you work to your next target and so on.
Long story short, the scheme this year was not something that helped out our players and put them in situations to succeed. This offense works if you have the horses. If you don't have the horses then coaching is that much more important. Graham had much more to work with but you can see how he adapted and utilized his players. Garrett seems too rigid in his approach.
Final point, while I agree this is a passing league and that needs to improve, I would still focus on the run game. It helps open everything up. Look at your boy Lamar Jackson's progression. He evolved a lot as a passer but a big reason for that is that teams loaded up the box. Also, OL love to run the ball. It gets them in a better groove so to speak. Also, DJ will be more effective with play action where defenses have to honor the run. I think this would be a good compliment to the defense that we play. If we start relying on being to pass heavy then that will have a direct effect on our defense not being as productive.
In spite of Shurmur's failings as a head coach, he has a history of elevating the play of his quarterbacks at least statistically. He made Case Keenum look like a good starter. We're rightfully concerned about Garrett, but I'm also concerned that Shurmur's absence and associated QB stat inflation might be a bigger factor.
For comparison sake, when you run something like a smash route you threaten the corner in cover two. You read the corner. If the corner bites up you hit the corner route behind him. If the corner drops deep then you hit the underneath defender.
You you run a play what we used to call Texas, that is a post route, a dig route, and a drag route. You work 3 levels of the defense over the middle of the field. There are progressions. If one isn't open then you work to your next target and so on.
Long story short, the scheme this year was not something that helped out our players and put them in situations to succeed. This offense works if you have the horses. If you don't have the horses then coaching is that much more important. Graham had much more to work with but you can see how he adapted and utilized his players. Garrett seems too rigid in his approach.
Garrett is such a red herring...still. It's the players, and mostly Jones.
Look at New England. Would you agree that McDaniel is a great OC? He's been a chameleon at changing offensive game-plans from week to week, opponent to opponent. But this year the Patriots finished 27th in the league in PPG. Did McDaniels forget how to coach offense? Of course not. He didn't have a good QB and the parts around him were subpar. Sound familiar?
Quote:
A lot of us see Garrett as part of the problem. He needs to have better route concepts. I hope Judge gets more involved with this offense. When we run shit like all hook routes you put your QB in a shitty situation. That throw has to be predetermined. He has to look at matchups prior to snapping the ball and hope that his guy wins that battle. If not he has to hold the ball but by the time he looks at another receiver the defender has the advantage.
For comparison sake, when you run something like a smash route you threaten the corner in cover two. You read the corner. If the corner bites up you hit the corner route behind him. If the corner drops deep then you hit the underneath defender.
You you run a play what we used to call Texas, that is a post route, a dig route, and a drag route. You work 3 levels of the defense over the middle of the field. There are progressions. If one isn't open then you work to your next target and so on.
Long story short, the scheme this year was not something that helped out our players and put them in situations to succeed. This offense works if you have the horses. If you don't have the horses then coaching is that much more important. Graham had much more to work with but you can see how he adapted and utilized his players. Garrett seems too rigid in his approach.
Garrett is such a red herring...still. It's the players, and mostly Jones.
Look at New England. Would you agree that McDaniel is a great OC? He's been a chameleon at changing offensive game-plans from week to week, opponent to opponent. But this year the Patriots finished 27th in the league in PPG. Did McDaniels forget how to coach offense? Of course not. He didn't have a good QB and the parts around him were subpar. Sound familiar?
Not sure what your point is. I'm not focusing on results. I'm focusing on scheme. You just said McDaniels is a chameleon. Is that the same word you'd use to describe Garrett? Garrett has had plenty of success in the NFL but I don't think he's doing a good enough job.
Quote:
A lot of us see Garrett as part of the problem. He needs to have better route concepts. I hope Judge gets more involved with this offense. When we run shit like all hook routes you put your QB in a shitty situation. That throw has to be predetermined. He has to look at matchups prior to snapping the ball and hope that his guy wins that battle. If not he has to hold the ball but by the time he looks at another receiver the defender has the advantage.
For comparison sake, when you run something like a smash route you threaten the corner in cover two. You read the corner. If the corner bites up you hit the corner route behind him. If the corner drops deep then you hit the underneath defender.
You you run a play what we used to call Texas, that is a post route, a dig route, and a drag route. You work 3 levels of the defense over the middle of the field. There are progressions. If one isn't open then you work to your next target and so on.
Long story short, the scheme this year was not something that helped out our players and put them in situations to succeed. This offense works if you have the horses. If you don't have the horses then coaching is that much more important. Graham had much more to work with but you can see how he adapted and utilized his players. Garrett seems too rigid in his approach.
Garrett is such a red herring...still. It's the players, and mostly Jones.
Look at New England. Would you agree that McDaniel is a great OC? He's been a chameleon at changing offensive game-plans from week to week, opponent to opponent. But this year the Patriots finished 27th in the league in PPG. Did McDaniels forget how to coach offense? Of course not. He didn't have a good QB and the parts around him were subpar. Sound familiar?
There have been plenty of articles explaining exactly why Garrett’s offense is antiquated. Do you subscribe to The Athletic? They’ve had some very good articles this season on the issues of this offense in today’s NFL. GoTerps has mentioned these same articles as well several times.
It’s not just the players. Garrett does an awful job of putting the players in a position to succeed. This isn’t 2010 anymore. Offenses have progressed. Garrett needs to catch up.
Garrett is such a red herring...still. It's the players, and mostly Jones.
Look at New England. Would you agree that McDaniel is a great OC? He's been a chameleon at changing offensive game-plans from week to week, opponent to opponent. But this year the Patriots finished 27th in the league in PPG. Did McDaniels forget how to coach offense? Of course not. He didn't have a good QB and the parts around him were subpar. Sound familiar?
Not sure what your point is. I'm not focusing on results. I'm focusing on scheme. You just said McDaniels is a chameleon. Is that the same word you'd use to describe Garrett? Garrett has had plenty of success in the NFL but I don't think he's doing a good enough job.
My point is I don't think the problems with the offense are really Garrett. He's just a convenient target. His scheme can work - it worked in Dallas. In nine of his years as HC, his offense was top half of the league in PPG in 7 of his 10 years, and 3 times his offense was in the top six. In 2019, his final year, his offense finished 6th.
I bring McDaniels into the discussion because even an OC renown for variety and creativity, he couldn't get his team to produce points without better QB play and players. So without the right parts any offense stalls.
Look, I'm agnostic on Garrett. But his success in the NFL as play-caller is well chronicled. And he did really good work with Dak when Dak was thrust into the starter's role when Romo went down. So I wish the spotlight would be cast on the real problem.
Garrett called a brilliant game against Tampa, but Jones failed to execute. It was all there. Garrett has done more as a head coach than most ever will in their careers. Add in the fact he had a meddling owner watching over every single move and then talking weekly to the media.
Jones is the bigger issue imo.
My intent was not to twist what you wrote. I read your initial post, which I found interesting (in fact, I find many of your posts interesting), and it felt like you were placing at least half the blame on Garrett.
I've read a fair amount about his offense, and players who have run it, and it sounds more flexible than the way it's portrayed around here.
Quote:
Garrett is such a red herring...still. It's the players, and mostly Jones.
Look at New England. Would you agree that McDaniel is a great OC? He's been a chameleon at changing offensive game-plans from week to week, opponent to opponent. But this year the Patriots finished 27th in the league in PPG. Did McDaniels forget how to coach offense? Of course not. He didn't have a good QB and the parts around him were subpar. Sound familiar?
Not sure what your point is. I'm not focusing on results. I'm focusing on scheme. You just said McDaniels is a chameleon. Is that the same word you'd use to describe Garrett? Garrett has had plenty of success in the NFL but I don't think he's doing a good enough job.
My point is I don't think the problems with the offense are really Garrett. He's just a convenient target. His scheme can work - it worked in Dallas. In nine of his years as HC, his offense was top half of the league in PPG in 7 of his 10 years, and 3 times his offense was in the top six. In 2019, his final year, his offense finished 6th.
I bring McDaniels into the discussion because even an OC renown for variety and creativity, he couldn't get his team to produce points without better QB play and players. So without the right parts any offense stalls.
Look, I'm agnostic on Garrett. But his success in the NFL as play-caller is well chronicled. And he did really good work with Dak when Dak was thrust into the starter's role when Romo went down. So I wish the spotlight would be cast on the real problem.
Garrett hasnt’t called plays in Dallas since 2012. Bill Callahan took over play calling duties. I’m sure Garrett still had some say over the years in the offense but he was solely the HC so I’m not sure why everyone gives him all the credit for those offenses. He lost play calling duties for a reason. And a lot has changed around the NFL since 2012.
If you have read the articles breaking down the issues with Garrett’s offense and you STILL don’t think he’s a big part of the problem then that’s because you don’t want to believe it.
I'm not saying offense doesn;t need to improve -- but you have to have a strong running game, and a strong defense to win too
Offense on it's own doesn't get you there -- in fact KC is a very good example of that -- their defense didn't get the job done yesterday
Riddle me this: Do offenses have good offense because they have a high power offense -- or is it because the defenses they play don't get the job done?
Here's another riddle -- can you have a good offense if the offense isn't balanced (as in able to run and pass)?
Here's another riddle -- can you have a good offense if you don't have a good defense that supports it?
I reject the stats above - they don't tell the full story. You need complementary football - being strong in each facet of the game
Overall their defense was good vs many teams whose offense wasn't very good.
Roughly where would you rank the Giants among the 32 teams in the 4 aspects below.
Quarterback Play:
Offensive Weapons:
Offensive Line/Pass Pro:
Offensive Concepts/Coaching:
Garrett hasnt’t called plays in Dallas since 2012. Bill Callahan took over play calling duties. I’m sure Garrett still had some say over the years in the offense but he was solely the HC so I’m not sure why everyone gives him all the credit for those offenses. He lost play calling duties for a reason. And a lot has changed around the NFL since 2012.
If you have read the articles breaking down the issues with Garrett’s offense and you STILL don’t think he’s a big part of the problem then that’s because you don’t want to believe it.
Bruce Arians has had the same vertical offense for decades. And that offense just won the Super Bowl. So I'm not buying that Garrett's offense is this relic and can't work. Garrett put on a clinic calling plays against the Bucs. Unfortunately, our QB couldn't execute. Big surprise.
Again, and I can't underscore this enough, I am completely neutral on Garrett. But I've watched enough football to conclude the problem with this offense isn't Garrett. It's the entire offensive personnel, especially Jones.
Roughly where would you rank the Giants among the 32 teams in the 4 aspects below.
Quarterback Play: Bottom 5
Offensive Weapons: Bottom half
Offensive Line/Pass Pro: Bottom 10
Offensive Concepts/Coaching: Bottom half
See answers above. The problems on offense are multifold, but the severest as I see it at quarterback.
I may have a healthier respect for Pat Shurmur's schematic abilities than others but I find it real hard to believe he was the reason Jones threw 24 passing tds in 13 games, including 13 in the RZ without an INT, with basically all the same WRs as this past season. It's hard to not read the quote below, think about Evan Engram running all those 3 yard curl routes, and not give Garrett a pretty lousy overall grade for his first year - even factoring in the Barkley injury.
Big test for Judge to walk the walk w/r/t accountability for the offensive scheme next year.
Lol -- gfy
And as a moderator, I really think you need to avoid verbally abusing posters.
We all know the offense sucks. We all know they need to build a competent Offensive Line. And we all know they need a couple of WRs that can actually catch the ball and scare the hell out of the DBs. Add a ER(and maybe a CB) and there you go playoffs!
I guess Joe Judge should read this thread to learn how to win.
+1
Kyler Murray hasn't had 30TD's yet. Josh Allen did it this season for the first time. Baker Mayfield hasn't gotten there. Derek Carr, a BBI favorite, hit 30 TD's once. In 2015. Tannehill did it once - this season.
But Tannehill led a deep run last season without throwing 30 TD's. Jimmy G did the same.
I guess it is OK to set a standard to shoot for - but that standard seems pretty subjective, almost as if pulled from an ass or something.
For some reason, the perception among the serially negative is that Jones is an 11TD a year guy. And they start crafting narratives around the idea that's what he is.
Having no offense is without question the worse of those two scenarios. At least if you can score effectively and reliably, you'll always have a chance to just be the last one with the ball and win a shootout. If you have no offense, you might be done the first time you lose the lead. And if your offense is really bad, you're going to wear your defense out eventually anyway, with 3-and-outs and short fields.
There's a reason why many successful teams are built around their offense nowadays, and it's not just a cyclical trend or a response to the rule changes, IMO. It's because a more informed analysis by the smarter teams suggested that offense carries greater weight in the outcome of a game. Certainly a linear regression would show exactly that.
And the basic underlying truth of it is obvious: no matter how well you play defense, the winner is still the team who scores the most points. If you can't score points, you can't win.