I was somewhat skeptical of the hype surrounding his signing last year because he didn't seem like a guy who was among the upper echelon of CBs. However, he had a legitimately terrific season last year and I believe everyone was counting on him to be a rock on which the defense would be built.
And yet, so far this season, he has looked average at best. Did he look better than he is because he was rarely tested last year, given the Giants' weakness at CB overall? What's going on there?
Maybe he wasn't as good as we thought because the matchups were just so good all over the field elsewhere that opposing offenses didn't bother.
But coach feel a soft zone is best?????
Maybe someone who's done a detailed review of the game would disagree but I saw him getting lit up in the 1st half.
Our outside backers are very weak so far (AO will get better but he has a horrible habit of stopping in his tracks when he has to redirect or gets stymied on the first move) and Carter is average period. Glad he came back, good for him but he still doesn't make plays.
Not getting a Pass Rusher was a bad misatke.
+1. Absolutely ... he has better tools this year, but they have not generated any pass rush and the soft cushions are a joke, note also that he is playing McKinney more, often at the expense of both Love and Peppers. Mr Picasso is indeed the guy you question now, not JB ... who been made an outstanding clutch interception that should have given the team the win.
McLaurin is also a top-notch WR. I don't think he gets the credit he deserves because he has had such mediocrity throwing him the ball.
It's also a matchup thing, he's not going to perform as well against the smaller fluid route runners of the league. Ridley will probably have a decent game. When he was with the Panthers, it was Evans, Thomas, and Julio 6 times a year. Guy is a very good corner, but not elite. He had a great year last year, but I think we can expect some regression.
Dear lord..
He literally gave McLauren a wide open route in front of him to the end zone. Mind boggling.
Not getting a Pass Rusher was a bad misatke.
We got one: Ojulari. It's just that our front office seemingly doesn't believe in contingencies in case one player acquisition doesn't solve everything.
Quote:
pretty sure thats it.
He literally gave McLauren a wide open route in front of him to the end zone. Mind boggling.
That’s scheme, not player. It is mind boggling. Two direct TDs because the scheme was laughable. Hell, the pick was amazing considering we were playing such soft man.
Peppers has also regressed. He was terrific in 2020 and now he’s downright bad. When two talented players show parallel declines, it suggests the issue isn’t confined to them.
Quote:
In comment 15378468 Platos said:
Quote:
pretty sure thats it.
He literally gave McLauren a wide open route in front of him to the end zone. Mind boggling.
That’s scheme, not player. It is mind boggling. Two direct TDs because the scheme was laughable. Hell, the pick was amazing considering we were playing such soft man.
Agreed. But it still explains him not being able to cover. Can't do it when the game plan is to let them catch the ball every play.
Quote:
Because Peppers simply isn't good at much of anything other than the occasional blitz.
Peppers has also regressed. He was terrific in 2020 and now he’s downright bad. When two talented players show parallel declines, it suggests the issue isn’t confined to them.
Or maybe the players had career years in 2020 and this year they reverted to the norm.
He wasn’t good Thursday, but he’s going to have his worst games against him probably. Ridley will probably have a decent game too. The really silky smooth athletic route runners are his weakness. McLaurins the toughest matchup he’ll see all year for him. Guy is arguable a top 5 WR and at least top 10.
What PFF watches and what I watch all too often are the polar opposite. It's clear why, per my old Fat friend in Charlotte, teams in the NFL don't take them seriously at all...
Junk science for football.
Quote:
where he posts one stellar season and then never gets terribly close to that level of play again.
I'm not convinced of this. When he was given the opportunity to play tight, he actually made an outstanding play to not only read the throw, but make the INT where he had to reach back and also around the WR. I think Graham has not consistently put anyone on this D in a position to make plays.
It was man and he was lined ten yards off the ball. It was a great play, made much harder, by the scheme.
Maybe he wasn't as good as we thought because the matchups were just so good all over the field elsewhere that opposing offenses didn't bother.
OT, sort of, I'm not nearly as high on McKinney as most seem to be, a lot of holes in his game, never mind he's not an especially good tackler. Another DG mistake in selecting DBs in the draft, should have gone after TB rookie S, on the board.
Yeah, this is my opinion as well. I just don't understand the Perry Fewell defensive scheme. We have man/press corners and we are neutering them. It's not like our safeties are poor, either.
I just don't understand what Graham is trying to do.
Quote:
First, we are playing a lot of zone. Second, it is a lot of soft zone. The CBs were routinely 10+ yards off the ball, even when in man. You can't consistently shut down NFL WRs like that.
Yeah, this is my opinion as well. I just don't understand the Perry Fewell defensive scheme. We have man/press corners and we are neutering them. It's not like our safeties are poor, either.
I just don't understand what Graham is trying to do.
Quote:
In comment 15378710 Matt M. said:
Quote:
First, we are playing a lot of zone. Second, it is a lot of soft zone. The CBs were routinely 10+ yards off the ball, even when in man. You can't consistently shut down NFL WRs like that.
Yeah, this is my opinion as well. I just don't understand the Perry Fewell defensive scheme. We have man/press corners and we are neutering them. It's not like our safeties are poor, either.
I just don't understand what Graham is trying to do.
It's almost like he's coaching for the D that was here 2 years ago, before he was here. We went out and got players who can cover and make plays and then basically tell them not to.
Graham is a man to man guy. He ran man to man near the top of the league, percentage wise while in Miami. That’s his bread and butter. Now suddenly since he’s been with the Giants he runs zone more than almost every other team in the league. I can’t help but think that’s coming from the HC, who obviously prefers a more conservative game plan. I don’t know that as a fact, but connect the dots. And that HAS to change. Playing to keep the game close in the 4th quarter is a losers mentality. He has the players now. So go out and dictate games on YOUR terms. Conservative is apparently not working…
Or did they just forget that closer man coverage is an option?
Quote:
Not getting a Pass Rusher was a bad misatke.
We got one: Ojulari. It's just that our front office seemingly doesn't believe in contingencies in case one player acquisition doesn't solve everything.
I call total bullshit when they had 2 fucking dozxen guys at edge during camp and preseason. Say what you want, but the "more than one" thing doesn't hold up. whether they worked ouyt is a different story, but it wasn't for lack of numbers at the position. The just all wound up sucking.
Or did they just forget that closer man coverage is an option?
It's not that they are idiots, but they are coaching scared. The coverages are SOFTER than last year and I think it's because they really want to minimize the big play early. Hopefully it tightens up. I hate the term "coaching not to lose" but thats exactly what we are looking at. We have a functional offense now, giving up the occasional big play isn't going to sink our chances of winning. I'd have no problems playing super low variance gameplans, but not when we aren't clearly better than the opponent, especially on the road.
Or did they just forget that closer man coverage is an option?
Who called them idiots? I spelled it out clearly for you. Judge is an extremely conservative coach that wants to shorten the game and make sure they have a chance to win in the 4th quarter. He said as much last season, although everyone assumed he was playing it close to the vest because of the lack of talent in the secondary. They have signed two CB’s to hefty contracts that also happen to excel in press man coverage. And are still playing zone and when they play man they are 10 yards off the ball.
They aren’t idiots. And nobody said they were. Not even sure why the hell you made that up. But they are coaching scared. The objective is to not give up the big play and let teams methodologically go down the field. The problem is, that’s not the type of personnel they signed to huge contracts. You’re asking them to do something that isn’t their strength. Why the hell did they sign two CBs that excell in man coverage and not utilize them to their strength?
Or did they just forget that closer man coverage is an option?
If we don't want to think they're idiots, what's your theory for why they're playing soft zone with 2 high-priced man corners?
Quote:
overnight, don’t you think they have reasons for not having their Secondary in more aggressive man coverages? They even said it themselves that was going to be of focus after going hard for Jackson in free agency and Robinson in draft.
Or did they just forget that closer man coverage is an option?
Who called them idiots? I spelled it out clearly for you. Judge is an extremely conservative coach that wants to shorten the game and make sure they have a chance to win in the 4th quarter. He said as much last season, although everyone assumed he was playing it close to the vest because of the lack of talent in the secondary. They have signed two CB’s to hefty contracts that also happen to excel in press man coverage. And are still playing zone and when they play man they are 10 yards off the ball.
They aren’t idiots. And nobody said they were. Not even sure why the hell you made that up. But they are coaching scared. The objective is to not give up the big play and let teams methodologically go down the field. The problem is, that’s not the type of personnel they signed to huge contracts. You’re asking them to do something that isn’t their strength. Why the hell did they sign two CBs that excell in man coverage and not utilize them to their strength?
So you plainly call them out as coaching scared, describe them as not understanding the type of players they have, not understanding their strengths and not utilizing them correctly. And doing it while they are under huge contracts.
Are you sure you aren’t calling them idiots? Or are those compliments of the head coach and his DC?
Quote:
overnight, don’t you think they have reasons for not having their Secondary in more aggressive man coverages? They even said it themselves that was going to be of focus after going hard for Jackson in free agency and Robinson in draft.
Or did they just forget that closer man coverage is an option?
If we don't want to think they're idiots, what's your theory for why they're playing soft zone with 2 high-priced man corners?
They’ve made two career journeyman QBs in a row look like Hall of Famers so it’s obvious they have their hands on the pulse of the situation. No need to question them.
Quote:
In comment 15379018 chick310 said:
Quote:
overnight, don’t you think they have reasons for not having their Secondary in more aggressive man coverages? They even said it themselves that was going to be of focus after going hard for Jackson in free agency and Robinson in draft.
Or did they just forget that closer man coverage is an option?
Who called them idiots? I spelled it out clearly for you. Judge is an extremely conservative coach that wants to shorten the game and make sure they have a chance to win in the 4th quarter. He said as much last season, although everyone assumed he was playing it close to the vest because of the lack of talent in the secondary. They have signed two CB’s to hefty contracts that also happen to excel in press man coverage. And are still playing zone and when they play man they are 10 yards off the ball.
They aren’t idiots. And nobody said they were. Not even sure why the hell you made that up. But they are coaching scared. The objective is to not give up the big play and let teams methodologically go down the field. The problem is, that’s not the type of personnel they signed to huge contracts. You’re asking them to do something that isn’t their strength. Why the hell did they sign two CBs that excell in man coverage and not utilize them to their strength?
So you plainly call them out as coaching scared, describe them as not understanding the type of players they have, not understanding their strengths and not utilizing them correctly. And doing it while they are under huge contracts.
Are you sure you aren’t calling them idiots? Or are those compliments of the head coach and his DC?
You’re not very fucking bright. Although I’ve already known that. And your reading comprehension absolutely sucks.
Quote:
In comment 15379018 chick310 said:
Quote:
overnight, don’t you think they have reasons for not having their Secondary in more aggressive man coverages? They even said it themselves that was going to be of focus after going hard for Jackson in free agency and Robinson in draft.
Or did they just forget that closer man coverage is an option?
If we don't want to think they're idiots, what's your theory for why they're playing soft zone with 2 high-priced man corners?
They’ve made two career journeyman QBs in a row look like Hall of Famers so it’s obvious they have their hands on the pulse of the situation. No need to question them.
Another remark clearly questioning their football intelligence.
Not winning with their strategy is one thing, but suggesting that they have seen it fail once, ignored it and implemented again suggests you must think they are not very smart. Especially against QBs lacking any special talent.
Not winning with their strategy is one thing, but suggesting that they have seen it fail once, ignored it and implemented again suggests you must think they are not very smart.
Maybe something is escaping me, but isn't that exactly what they've done? If they haven't ignored the results, they've certainly disregarded them. The result is the same. Not questioning their intelligence, just wondering about their judgment. Again, what is your explanation for what they've done?
Quote:
Not winning with their strategy is one thing, but suggesting that they have seen it fail once, ignored it and implemented again suggests you must think they are not very smart.
Maybe something is escaping me, but isn't that exactly what they've done? If they haven't ignored the results, they've certainly disregarded them. The result is the same. Not questioning their intelligence, just wondering about their judgment. Again, what is your explanation for what they've done?
Let’s not mince words here. If you are saying they are disregarding obvious failures and questioning their judgment then that sounds a lot like their football intelligence is in doubt. Isn’t that what is being suggested here?
Those coaches “coaching scared” will look a lot more brave when the players play better.
Quote:
In comment 15379060 chick310 said:
Quote:
Not winning with their strategy is one thing, but suggesting that they have seen it fail once, ignored it and implemented again suggests you must think they are not very smart.
Let’s not mince words here. If you are saying they are disregarding obvious failures and questioning their judgment then that sounds a lot like their football intelligence is in doubt. Isn’t that what is being suggested here?
I know lots of intelligent people with poor judgment. They are entirely different issues. (I also know very intelligent people who are failures at their jobs). So, no, I am not questioning their football intelligence. So you can put that to rest.
If you aren’t questioning their football intelligence, what are you suggesting?