for display only
Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner

Archived Thread

Simms vs. Hostetler...

SFGFNCGiantsFan : 5/11/2021 6:58 pm
Summer '91...who did you want starting Week 1 vs. SF? Curious to see the responses. I was in the pro Simms camp.
Pages: 1 2 <<Prev | Show All |
I was Hoss by a slim margin.  
barens : 5/12/2021 10:07 am : link
Looking back, I think it was really 1/2 dozen or the other.
1990  
mdthedream : 5/12/2021 10:56 am : link
The Giants in my opinion was the best team in football that year until Simms got injured.
Hoss  
mdthedream : 5/12/2021 10:57 am : link
got the nod over Simms only because of age.
Seeing Phil leaning on his crutches at the SB with  
jsuds : 5/12/2021 11:08 am : link
that look on his face you could tell he knew he'd never be
back there as a player again. One of the most poignant moments in Giants history. That injury probably also kept him out of the Hall.
What gets lost in the sauce a bit...  
bw in dc : 5/12/2021 11:13 am : link
is that Simms not being the QB of that '90 team - and assuming we still would have won - very, very likely cost him his place in Canton.

He should still be in, but that would have sealed it.
RE: What gets lost in the sauce a bit...  
SFGFNCGiantsFan : 5/12/2021 11:19 am : link
In comment 15261969 bw in dc said:
Quote:
is that Simms not being the QB of that '90 team - and assuming we still would have won - very, very likely cost him his place in Canton.

He should still be in, but that would have sealed it.


My old man says the same.
RE: 1990  
barens : 5/12/2021 11:34 am : link
In comment 15261927 mdthedream said:
Quote:
The Giants in my opinion was the best team in football that year until Simms got injured.


Clearly, they weren't, because Simms couldn't take them over the top against defensive teams that got to the QB more consistently. Simms was great, but at his age, he was the epitome of a statue.
RE: RE: What gets lost in the sauce a bit...  
bw in dc : 5/12/2021 11:34 am : link
In comment 15261981 SFGFNCGiantsFan said:
Quote:
In comment 15261969 bw in dc said:


Quote:


is that Simms not being the QB of that '90 team - and assuming we still would have won - very, very likely cost him his place in Canton.

He should still be in, but that would have sealed it.



My old man says the same.


It kills me that Simms isn't in the HoF right now. He did for the Giants what overrated Namath did for the Jets.

But Simms actually played great in his SB while Namath was the beneficiary of a Colts team who imploded. But NFL SB lore would have you believe that Namath played great after making his guarantee.

RE: RE: I disagree that the offense was sputtering in 1990  
an_idol_mind : 5/12/2021 11:46 am : link
In comment 15261761 Jimmy Googs said:
Quote:
In comment 15261462 an_idol_mind said:


Quote:


They got wrecked by the Eagles and had trouble scoring on the 9ers and Bills (as would happen in the playoffs, but with better results). But they were otherwise largely consistent with production around those games...23 on the Vikings, 31 on the Rams, for example.

Hostetler deserves credit for what he did, but benching Simms was a bad idea, and I disagree with the school of thought that says the Giants wouldn't have beat the 49ers or Bills with Simms in. They played both teams tight during the season, and Simms was the most efficient quarterback in the league in 1990.



Yeah the offense had slowed putting up points a good bit.

Up until that second Eagles game they had at least put up 20 points in every game in going 10-0. Then over the last 6 games they scored under 20 points four times, averaging only 15 points per game and went 3-3.


Yeah, but consider the circumstances around that. They got trounced by the Eagles, period. They only put up three against a very good Niners team, but had a shot at winning if Parcells hadn't gambled on some fourth downs. And Simms went down midway through the Bills game. The other time they scored under 20 was in a meaningless game against the 1-15 Patriots.

I argue that the slowing down of the offense had the most to do with playing tough defenses in the 49ers and Bills, plus the fact that the Eagles were always a problem. It's not like the team was on a nosedive and then the offense suddenly came to life under Hostetler.
Simms  
djstat : 5/12/2021 11:57 am : link
Hoss was an above average backup to me. I also felt it was Simms job.
RE: I thought Simms was the better QB...  
Jim in Fairfax : 5/12/2021 12:49 pm : link
In comment 15261702 BamaBlue said:
Quote:
but I wanted Hoss, because Simms was ALWAYS injured.

Simms started 101 of 103 games before the 1990 injury. And in an era before the rules for protecting QBs were enacted.
Agreed they played some tougher teams in there  
Jimmy Googs : 5/12/2021 12:53 pm : link
which absolutely had an effect but you could see the offense was puttering trying to score as the season matured. Hoss wasn't some instant jolt turning them into a force as he had to still find some confidence as well with a few starts.

But he offered just enough threat running, scrambling, rolling out of pocket that it allowed for them to get thru playoffs in my view. They played much better on offense vs SF the second time with Hoss (and even without Hampton this time who got hurt) although had to settle too many times with FGs.
Hoss  
JinCO : 5/13/2021 10:35 pm : link
Had a big argument with my future brother-in-law... He thought I was nuts... he was right.
I was always on team Simms  
PatersonPlank : 5/14/2021 8:53 am : link
Hoss to me was a good backup, and a change of pace guy, not a starter. They won the SB by dumbing down the offense with him, not because of anything spectacular he did, just like anyone does when the backup QB comes in (like us in Seattle last season).
Pages: 1 2 <<Prev | Show All |
Back to the Corner