but Parcells also said those things almost 40 years ago (gulp).
The game is different now. Rosters are different now. Practice is different now. The season is different now.
Selfishly, I'm excited to see our starters on the field, but more and more of what I consider to be the good/smart franchises are sitting their guys. For me, health remains the #1 preseason objective and seems to have proven to be one of, if not the most important factor in terms of in-season success.
Except, another two-time SB winning HC (TC) said the same thing not too many years ago. Also echoed by people such as Brandt, Polian to name a few iirc..
Now more than EVER given the limited practices, games and two-a-days, would their op8nions ring true, imo
Daboll & Kafka have got to run some new offensive plays
2 or 3 “3 and outs” for the first unit (up against backups, it appears tonight), then when the starting OL comes out, the QB’s are running for their lives the rest of the time. On D, I’ve seen the unit struggle too often in the past. Hopefully this year, the play matches what’s been happening in practice: solid play.
Wouldn’t be shocked if this ends up being a 17-13 snooze fest.
...or at least players whose roster spots are fairly secure. I would rather not have indispensable assets like Thomas/Williams/Neal/Thibodeaux/etc. in pileups with desperate guys who have little to lose.
I can't prove that it would make any difference, but my ideal would be for the respective staffs to reach an understanding, for example: first half, we play the forty guys we know are going to make the team; second half, we let the bottom fifty players on each side engage in mayhem competing for the last 10-15 roster spots.
I just want to see a few runs where the OL opens a
but i'm genuinely excited to see what our new offense and defense looks like, even with a vanilla scheme
As for how the players play, if the OL looks solid, Jones and Taylor complete a few passes, and our defense looks like it has a clue, plus no major injuries, I'll go to bed happy
Let's go Giants
RE: My preference for preseason is always that starters face starters...
...or at least players whose roster spots are fairly secure. I would rather not have indispensable assets like Thomas/Williams/Neal/Thibodeaux/etc. in pileups with desperate guys who have little to lose.
I can't prove that it would make any difference, but my ideal would be for the respective staffs to reach an understanding, for example: first half, we play the forty guys we know are going to make the team; second half, we let the bottom fifty players on each side engage in mayhem competing for the last 10-15 roster spots.
I definitely agree with that Blogger. But at the same time, I want this offense getting reps no matter what. Not ideal against scrubs but they need reps against another group of defensive players to my mind. At this point I'll take what we can get.
RE: I just want to see a few runs where the OL opens a
legitimate hole, and Barkley blast through for 20 yards. I don't care if its against Brockton High in Mass, I just want to see it (its been so long).
Starters need to play 1 or 2 series. New offense, new OL, new coaches, existing defeatest mentality. We need to start fresh. A good drive with the #1's in there would go a long way
Playing Barkley makes no sense.
If he’s going to get hurt, let it be in games that count.
If he gets off to a good start, but our record is poor, we need the opportunity to trade Barkley at the deadline.
There's a choice to be made between focusing on pre-season games
or joint practices. The reason some teams/coaches prefer making joint practice the focus is that it provides a setting more suited for rules agreed upon by the coaching staffs.
The Patriots aren't going to play their starters tonight because they have joint practices with the Panthers coming up this week, and then more joint practice sessions with the Raiders the following week.
Judge gets a lot of grief for not playing the starters in the preseason games last year but one reason for that was that the Giants had two joint practice arrangements: with the Browns and with the Patriots.
If you try to use your starters heavily in both games and joint practices, you are asking for trouble/injury.
but Parcells also said those things almost 40 years ago (gulp).
The game is different now. Rosters are different now. Practice is different now. The season is different now.
Selfishly, I'm excited to see our starters on the field, but more and more of what I consider to be the good/smart franchises are sitting their guys. For me, health remains the #1 preseason objective and seems to have proven to be one of, if not the most important factor in terms of in-season success.
Except, another two-time SB winning HC (TC) said the same thing not too many years ago. Also echoed by people such as Brandt, Polian to name a few iirc..
Now more than EVER given the limited practices, games and two-a-days, would their op8nions ring true, imo
So to buttress the point made by a dinosaur, you quote other dinosaurs? Not too many years ago from TC is still 10+ and even he was a (beloved) relic of the prior era (as are the others you name). Logically, I understand the idea that limited practice makes the preseason games all that much more important. I think that's true for evaluating your roster. I don't think it bears out that playing your starters in the preseason correlates with success in-season (whereas I've seen studies in the past which show a strong correlation between health and wins).
Look to the other side of the field tonight. Belichick is installing an entirely new offensive staff with a second year Qb. His starters are sitting. The superbowl champ Rams are sitting their starters (and I heard they'll even be sitting their 2nd string QB given some of the concerns with Staffords elbow). I don't mind it with a new coach and young roster like we have. But to me, it's sort of like cramming for a test. It's not a good thing. It's a necessary evil. The good franchises aren't doing it.
RE: RE: I just want to see a few runs where the OL opens a
legitimate hole, and Barkley blast through for 20 yards. I don't care if its against Brockton High in Mass, I just want to see it (its been so long).
Playing Barkley makes no sense.
If he’s going to get hurt, let it be in games that count.
If he gets off to a good start, but our record is poor, we need the opportunity to trade Barkley at the deadline.
I don’t agree. He needs to play, almost more than the others. He’s just getting his confidence back. Let him get his timing down with this new line. Again, what is there to lose? He gets hurt? Ok. That’s football. He’s most likely not going to be here next year and we aren’t winning the Super Bowl this year. Let him play. Let the team score and let’s win a game!
Toney has been practicing all camp. Sure they’ve been managing it - but IMO if he doesn’t suit up that means he’s still nursing an injury and that would be a bit worrisome.
He’s been out there basically every day with the first string unit. Not sure why he wouldn’t play a series or two.
Theres a thread below this one about Toney not being able to finish practice due to some undisclosed leg injury. If there is any sign of a problem I think they sit him
Remember when Ron Dayne emerged from that pile at the LOS and ran to the endzone and everyone thought he was turning a corner? Might've been against the Chiefs?
Ahhh, good times. Good, good times.
I remember that game in 1999 when Sean Bennett was making the ESPN crew salivate, Kent Graham was "making a statement," and Joe Jurevicius looked like Keyshawn Johnson.
Daboll knows he's got the "surprise factor" working in his favor early in the year. They aren't going to show their hand tonight.
I think that the surprise factor will be for fans if the fans recognize the different tempo and route concepts. But, I would expect that opposing teams will expect pages from the Bills playbook not last season's Giants playbook.
Daboll knows he's got the "surprise factor" working in his favor early in the year. They aren't going to show their hand tonight.
Um...what surprise factor is that?
Daboll has his system but they [seem] to be involving different concepts notably from Kafka who came from the Andy Reid style of offense.
Giants using shovel plays for the first time, ever? Chiefs have done that for a decade now and does really well especially in the redzone.
I don't think they shine much light tonight on the tempo of the offense and its aggressive nature but after the last two years of Garrett's offense, I'm anxious to see their designs.
I have seen the Giant offense shovel a lot of stuff
but Parcells also said those things almost 40 years ago (gulp).
The game is different now. Rosters are different now. Practice is different now. The season is different now.
Selfishly, I'm excited to see our starters on the field, but more and more of what I consider to be the good/smart franchises are sitting their guys. For me, health remains the #1 preseason objective and seems to have proven to be one of, if not the most important factor in terms of in-season success.
Except, another two-time SB winning HC (TC) said the same thing not too many years ago. Also echoed by people such as Brandt, Polian to name a few iirc..
Now more than EVER given the limited practices, games and two-a-days, would their op8nions ring true, imo
So to buttress the point made by a dinosaur, you quote other dinosaurs? Not too many years ago from TC is still 10+ and even he was a (beloved) relic of the prior era (as are the others you name). Logically, I understand the idea that limited practice makes the preseason games all that much more important. I think that's true for evaluating your roster. I don't think it bears out that playing your starters in the preseason correlates with success in-season (whereas I've seen studies in the past which show a strong correlation between health and wins).
Look to the other side of the field tonight. Belichick is installing an entirely new offensive staff with a second year Qb. His starters are sitting. The superbowl champ Rams are sitting their starters (and I heard they'll even be sitting their 2nd string QB given some of the concerns with Staffords elbow). I don't mind it with a new coach and young roster like we have. But to me, it's sort of like cramming for a test. It's not a good thing. It's a necessary evil. The good franchises aren't doing it.
What does that have to do with what I said? Just because you state that Parcells, TC, et al are dinosaurs, doesn’t make it remotely true. Why on earth would I take the word of any poster that says what SB winning HCs and GMs is antiquated and no longer relevant. They believe that you don’t know what you TRULY HAVE until you’ve played 4-5 regular season games, roster-wise.
Nothing to do with who you play or who you sit dur8ng preseason. Daboll already said he’s playing all those who are healthy enough to play and with limited practices and now just 3 preseason games, I wholeheartedly agree with him as A FAN, not a purported expert
If we play well, it’s because the Pats sat their starters, if we don’t, it’s cause for dismay because the Pats sat their starters..
It’s a practice against someone else other than their own team. Get sharp, no meaningful injuries, move on to the next practice
I disagree. This Giants team has nothing to lose, and they have to play that way. We lose a starter to injury? Ok. Who’s up? We aren’t winning the super bowl. This is a journey to be mediocre right now. It starts by having a winning mentality. That starts tonight.
I agree. Just citing the inevitable reaction on here..😂
Exactly. Either way Jones and the Giants suck tonight.
TAYLOR and the Giants suck tonight..Get off Jones's rear end..If he sucks tonight you can blow your freaking horn Friday all Freakin day long..Right now,bug off..
RE: Shyster: Good point about the usefulness of joint practices.
Also, glad to see you posting actively. Hope you are doing well.
Thanks BBB; doing fine and looking forward to football. And I was picking up on your point about the ideal of coaches' agreeing on rules designed to protect the welfare of starters.
legitimate hole, and Barkley blast through for 20 yards. I don't care if its against Brockton High in Mass, I just want to see it (its been so long).
Playing Barkley makes no sense.
If he’s going to get hurt, let it be in games that count.
If he gets off to a good start, but our record is poor, we need the opportunity to trade Barkley at the deadline.
Hes played essentially no football in far too long. Also, he's not exactly jim brown in that he has nothing to prove. There are things he has to work on too, and if he gets hurt again while preparing for the season there's simply nothing to do about it.
You don't want the Giants using regular season games to get practice reps if the argument is that you care about "games that count". Your players should be prepared to play in games that count, not barely practiced in the new offense they're running.
Daboll knows he's got the "surprise factor" working in his favor early in the year. They aren't going to show their hand tonight.
Um...what surprise factor is that?
Daboll has his system but they [seem] to be involving different concepts notably from Kafka who came from the Andy Reid style of offense.
Giants using shovel plays for the first time, ever? Chiefs have done that for a decade now and does really well especially in the redzone.
I don't think they shine much light tonight on the tempo of the offense and its aggressive nature but after the last two years of Garrett's offense, I'm anxious to see their designs.
I still don't know what kind of system Daboll runs. It's "spready" I guess, but I'm afraid it was very much let Josh Allen do his thing offense.
but Parcells also said those things almost 40 years ago (gulp).
The game is different now. Rosters are different now. Practice is different now. The season is different now.
Selfishly, I'm excited to see our starters on the field, but more and more of what I consider to be the good/smart franchises are sitting their guys. For me, health remains the #1 preseason objective and seems to have proven to be one of, if not the most important factor in terms of in-season success.
Except, another two-time SB winning HC (TC) said the same thing not too many years ago. Also echoed by people such as Brandt, Polian to name a few iirc..
Now more than EVER given the limited practices, games and two-a-days, would their op8nions ring true, imo
So to buttress the point made by a dinosaur, you quote other dinosaurs? Not too many years ago from TC is still 10+ and even he was a (beloved) relic of the prior era (as are the others you name). Logically, I understand the idea that limited practice makes the preseason games all that much more important. I think that's true for evaluating your roster. I don't think it bears out that playing your starters in the preseason correlates with success in-season (whereas I've seen studies in the past which show a strong correlation between health and wins).
Look to the other side of the field tonight. Belichick is installing an entirely new offensive staff with a second year Qb. His starters are sitting. The superbowl champ Rams are sitting their starters (and I heard they'll even be sitting their 2nd string QB given some of the concerns with Staffords elbow). I don't mind it with a new coach and young roster like we have. But to me, it's sort of like cramming for a test. It's not a good thing. It's a necessary evil. The good franchises aren't doing it.
What does that have to do with what I said? Just because you state that Parcells, TC, et al are dinosaurs, doesn’t make it remotely true. Why on earth would I take the word of any poster that says what SB winning HCs and GMs is antiquated and no longer relevant. They believe that you don’t know what you TRULY HAVE until you’ve played 4-5 regular season games, roster-wise.
Nothing to do with who you play or who you sit dur8ng preseason. Daboll already said he’s playing all those who are healthy enough to play and with limited practices and now just 3 preseason games, I wholeheartedly agree with him as A FAN, not a purported expert
Not sure what to tell you. You're now changing the topic a bit with the "you don't know what you have" comment. I'm not debating whether preseason is important for managing your roster. As I noted above, in terms of evaluating the roster (especially depth and at the fringe), it is critically important. THOSE are the guys I think it's important to see as much of as you possibly can. I'm talking specifically about whether playing starters in the preseason is the right move. In support of not playing starters, I noted that it seems to that most of the good teams all seem to be moving away from doing so and are actually playing starters very little to not at all in an effort to keep them as healthy as possible heading into the season.
In response, I've gotten quotes from Parcells, Coughlin, Polian, and Brandt. You can bristle at the idea that their thoughts are outdated, but not a single one of them has been involved in running an NFL team in at least 10 years. But you shouldn't accept that their views are antiquated because I said so. You should accept that their views are antiquated because none of them is part of the modern NFL and because, most importantly, those statements are out of step with the way the modern NFL operates, including the most successful coaches/franchises (like Belichick).
The Pats aren’t playing their starters. By almost every report their offense has been nothing short of horrific so far in camp, particularly the OL and they are nowhere near game ready, even a pre season game. If it’s that bad, putting them out there right now against a Wink defense is a recipe for disaster. And it’s tough to tell the defense that they’re playing but the shit ass offense doesn’t have to, so, nobody plays.
RE: RE: RE: I just want to see a few runs where the OL opens a
Hes played essentially no football in far too long. Also, he's not exactly jim brown in that he has nothing to prove. There are things he has to work on too, and if he gets hurt again while preparing for the season there's simply nothing to do about it.
You don't want the Giants using regular season games to get practice reps if the argument is that you care about "games that count". Your players should be prepared to play in games that count, not barely practiced in the new offense they're running.
Barkley has 660 rushes and 190 receptions in his four-year career. That's 850 touches. He knows what he's doing. RBs can work off any rust in practice, controlled scrimmages and ultimately in live games.
Further, I'm taking the view we are likely going to be a bad team again. So as one of the few assets we have that could be used as trade bait by the trade deadline (assuming we have an upside-down record by the end of October), that's another reason to protect Barkley.
They aren't the same player, and the circumstances are different, but I don't think the Titans are playing Henry this preseason. Which makes a ton of sense to me, too...
I really hope Daniel Jones lights up the Patriots 2nd team defense. Would help alleviate some of the concerns Ive had for him watching him perform poorly in camp practices.
Glad football is back!
RE: RE: RE: RE: I just want to see a few runs where the OL opens a
Hes played essentially no football in far too long. Also, he's not exactly jim brown in that he has nothing to prove. There are things he has to work on too, and if he gets hurt again while preparing for the season there's simply nothing to do about it.
You don't want the Giants using regular season games to get practice reps if the argument is that you care about "games that count". Your players should be prepared to play in games that count, not barely practiced in the new offense they're running.
Barkley has 660 rushes and 190 receptions in his four-year career. That's 850 touches. He knows what he's doing. RBs can work off any rust in practice, controlled scrimmages and ultimately in live games.
Further, I'm taking the view we are likely going to be a bad team again. So as one of the few assets we have that could be used as trade bait by the trade deadline (assuming we have an upside-down record by the end of October), that's another reason to protect Barkley.
They aren't the same player, and the circumstances are different, but I don't think the Titans are playing Henry this preseason. Which makes a ton of sense to me, too...
None of those career touches are behind this offensive line, with this playbook. That matters. Functional running games rely on practice reps and OL understanding both the blocking scheme on paper and the RBs tendencies and instincts. That is developed by playing together in live action.
This doesn't address that you can't convince me that Barkley knows what he's doing in pass protection. The results aren't convincing.
I dont think they're ready to win either, but starting the season without taking advantage of time to prepare sure didn't work last year either. Why expect different now?
will check out banter after
reading people lose their minds over a DJ errant pass or evan neal getting beat on pass pro during 1st q of game 1 of preseason is mind numbing
RE: How are those out-of-market like me planning to watch live?
I expect basic concepts for the most part but it still will be a very different O than the Giants have run. Id like to see DJ make some good throws. He isnt going to play much but Id like to see some good things to get some positive things going.
Id like to see Barkley do something special. I think he is a major piece for the O tis year and will be very active.
Id like to see Neal hold his own.
On D it would be nice if Thibs got a sack just to get the fan base excited.
Selfishly, I'm excited to see our starters on the field, but more and more of what I consider to be the good/smart franchises are sitting their guys. For me, health remains the #1 preseason objective and seems to have proven to be one of, if not the most important factor in terms of in-season success.
Most other teams don't have a new coaching staff, with new play calling and a bunch of new young players. Most other teams don't have 4 new starters on their OL and aren't trying to evaluate a QB in his last yr under contract.
I don't mind if some of the defensive starters sit for the most part, but our O absolutely needs work. Judge not playing them last year was a big mistake.
There's plenty to gauge from pre season games, if you know what you're watching.
The young guys need acclimate to the speed and size of NFL competition. If the rookies are winning their one-on-one battles physically that is great. If they are not, it's not great. Same for guys like Holmes and Robinson.
The QB needs to be accurate, make quick reads, and hang on to the football. If he does great, if not, not great.
There aren't many tragedies in the pre-season aside from injuries. But there are signals on basic readiness.
I don't think we will see much creativity. Most teams are vanilla pre-season
Quote:
Daboll, Kafka and Wink have in mind for us.
I don't think we will see much creativity. Most teams are vanilla pre-season
I'm sure you're right but I'd expect a few new concepts to be apparent. There is less time than ever to get prepped for the season.
The game is different now. Rosters are different now. Practice is different now. The season is different now.
Selfishly, I'm excited to see our starters on the field, but more and more of what I consider to be the good/smart franchises are sitting their guys. For me, health remains the #1 preseason objective and seems to have proven to be one of, if not the most important factor in terms of in-season success.
Except, another two-time SB winning HC (TC) said the same thing not too many years ago. Also echoed by people such as Brandt, Polian to name a few iirc..
Now more than EVER given the limited practices, games and two-a-days, would their op8nions ring true, imo
Otherwise, how the heck do they give their team any practice in real-game situations?
Wouldn’t be shocked if this ends up being a 17-13 snooze fest.
Quote:
In comment 15777313 Producer said:
Quote:
Daboll, Kafka and Wink have in mind for us.
I don't think we will see much creativity. Most teams are vanilla pre-season
I'm sure you're right but I'd expect a few new concepts to be apparent. There is less time than ever to get prepped for the season.
In any event, the 1-one-1 matchups will be fun to watch. I am going to focus on Neil and KThib
Looking forward to seeing the defense and Thibodeaux.
As someone that's watched a lot of football and knows what reasonable expectations are for a preseason game, the list is short:
- Everyone comes out healthy
- Communication between players/coaches in the huddle is smooth
- No one slated as a starter is glaringly over matched
For preseason game 1, there isn't really much more. I mulled putting in "everyone knows their assignments" but it may even be too early for that.
I can't prove that it would make any difference, but my ideal would be for the respective staffs to reach an understanding, for example: first half, we play the forty guys we know are going to make the team; second half, we let the bottom fifty players on each side engage in mayhem competing for the last 10-15 roster spots.
As for how the players play, if the OL looks solid, Jones and Taylor complete a few passes, and our defense looks like it has a clue, plus no major injuries, I'll go to bed happy
Let's go Giants
I can't prove that it would make any difference, but my ideal would be for the respective staffs to reach an understanding, for example: first half, we play the forty guys we know are going to make the team; second half, we let the bottom fifty players on each side engage in mayhem competing for the last 10-15 roster spots.
I definitely agree with that Blogger. But at the same time, I want this offense getting reps no matter what. Not ideal against scrubs but they need reps against another group of defensive players to my mind. At this point I'll take what we can get.
Playing Barkley makes no sense.
If he’s going to get hurt, let it be in games that count.
If he gets off to a good start, but our record is poor, we need the opportunity to trade Barkley at the deadline.
Quote:
legitimate hole, and Barkley blast through for 20 yards. I don't care if its against Brockton High in Mass, I just want to see it (its been so long).
Playing Barkley makes no sense.
If he’s going to get hurt, let it be in games that count.
If he gets off to a good start, but our record is poor, we need the opportunity to trade Barkley at the deadline.
I'd like to see one series with SB. Actually, if the Giants get a 1st down in that 1st series, I'd replace SB then.
And then when the game is over let the coaches tell you that there is a ton you still have to work on...
I'm feeling they keep three backs and two seem to be locks.
Daboll knows he's got the "surprise factor" working in his favor early in the year. They aren't going to show their hand tonight.
Quote:
legitimate hole, and Barkley blast through for 20 yards. I don't care if its against Brockton High in Mass, I just want to see it (its been so long).
Starters need to play 1 or 2 series. New offense, new OL, new coaches, existing defeatest mentality. We need to start fresh. A good drive with the #1's in there would go a long way
Playing Barkley makes no sense.
If he’s going to get hurt, let it be in games that count.
If he gets off to a good start, but our record is poor, we need the opportunity to trade Barkley at the deadline.
The Patriots aren't going to play their starters tonight because they have joint practices with the Panthers coming up this week, and then more joint practice sessions with the Raiders the following week.
Judge gets a lot of grief for not playing the starters in the preseason games last year but one reason for that was that the Giants had two joint practice arrangements: with the Browns and with the Patriots.
If you try to use your starters heavily in both games and joint practices, you are asking for trouble/injury.
Daboll knows he's got the "surprise factor" working in his favor early in the year. They aren't going to show their hand tonight.
Um...what surprise factor is that?
Quote:
but Parcells also said those things almost 40 years ago (gulp).
The game is different now. Rosters are different now. Practice is different now. The season is different now.
Selfishly, I'm excited to see our starters on the field, but more and more of what I consider to be the good/smart franchises are sitting their guys. For me, health remains the #1 preseason objective and seems to have proven to be one of, if not the most important factor in terms of in-season success.
Except, another two-time SB winning HC (TC) said the same thing not too many years ago. Also echoed by people such as Brandt, Polian to name a few iirc..
Now more than EVER given the limited practices, games and two-a-days, would their op8nions ring true, imo
So to buttress the point made by a dinosaur, you quote other dinosaurs? Not too many years ago from TC is still 10+ and even he was a (beloved) relic of the prior era (as are the others you name). Logically, I understand the idea that limited practice makes the preseason games all that much more important. I think that's true for evaluating your roster. I don't think it bears out that playing your starters in the preseason correlates with success in-season (whereas I've seen studies in the past which show a strong correlation between health and wins).
Look to the other side of the field tonight. Belichick is installing an entirely new offensive staff with a second year Qb. His starters are sitting. The superbowl champ Rams are sitting their starters (and I heard they'll even be sitting their 2nd string QB given some of the concerns with Staffords elbow). I don't mind it with a new coach and young roster like we have. But to me, it's sort of like cramming for a test. It's not a good thing. It's a necessary evil. The good franchises aren't doing it.
Quote:
legitimate hole, and Barkley blast through for 20 yards. I don't care if its against Brockton High in Mass, I just want to see it (its been so long).
Playing Barkley makes no sense.
If he’s going to get hurt, let it be in games that count.
If he gets off to a good start, but our record is poor, we need the opportunity to trade Barkley at the deadline.
I don’t agree. He needs to play, almost more than the others. He’s just getting his confidence back. Let him get his timing down with this new line. Again, what is there to lose? He gets hurt? Ok. That’s football. He’s most likely not going to be here next year and we aren’t winning the Super Bowl this year. Let him play. Let the team score and let’s win a game!
He’s been out there basically every day with the first string unit. Not sure why he wouldn’t play a series or two.
Theres a thread below this one about Toney not being able to finish practice due to some undisclosed leg injury. If there is any sign of a problem I think they sit him
Ahhh, good times. Good, good times.
I remember that game in 1999 when Sean Bennett was making the ESPN crew salivate, Kent Graham was "making a statement," and Joe Jurevicius looked like Keyshawn Johnson.
Daboll knows he's got the "surprise factor" working in his favor early in the year. They aren't going to show their hand tonight.
Quote:
about the scheme tonight, too.
Daboll knows he's got the "surprise factor" working in his favor early in the year. They aren't going to show their hand tonight.
Um...what surprise factor is that?
Daboll has his system but they [seem] to be involving different concepts notably from Kafka who came from the Andy Reid style of offense.
Giants using shovel plays for the first time, ever? Chiefs have done that for a decade now and does really well especially in the redzone.
I don't think they shine much light tonight on the tempo of the offense and its aggressive nature but after the last two years of Garrett's offense, I'm anxious to see their designs.
Quote:
In comment 15777301 Giantfan in skinland said:
Quote:
but Parcells also said those things almost 40 years ago (gulp).
The game is different now. Rosters are different now. Practice is different now. The season is different now.
Selfishly, I'm excited to see our starters on the field, but more and more of what I consider to be the good/smart franchises are sitting their guys. For me, health remains the #1 preseason objective and seems to have proven to be one of, if not the most important factor in terms of in-season success.
Except, another two-time SB winning HC (TC) said the same thing not too many years ago. Also echoed by people such as Brandt, Polian to name a few iirc..
Now more than EVER given the limited practices, games and two-a-days, would their op8nions ring true, imo
So to buttress the point made by a dinosaur, you quote other dinosaurs? Not too many years ago from TC is still 10+ and even he was a (beloved) relic of the prior era (as are the others you name). Logically, I understand the idea that limited practice makes the preseason games all that much more important. I think that's true for evaluating your roster. I don't think it bears out that playing your starters in the preseason correlates with success in-season (whereas I've seen studies in the past which show a strong correlation between health and wins).
Look to the other side of the field tonight. Belichick is installing an entirely new offensive staff with a second year Qb. His starters are sitting. The superbowl champ Rams are sitting their starters (and I heard they'll even be sitting their 2nd string QB given some of the concerns with Staffords elbow). I don't mind it with a new coach and young roster like we have. But to me, it's sort of like cramming for a test. It's not a good thing. It's a necessary evil. The good franchises aren't doing it.
What does that have to do with what I said? Just because you state that Parcells, TC, et al are dinosaurs, doesn’t make it remotely true. Why on earth would I take the word of any poster that says what SB winning HCs and GMs is antiquated and no longer relevant. They believe that you don’t know what you TRULY HAVE until you’ve played 4-5 regular season games, roster-wise.
Nothing to do with who you play or who you sit dur8ng preseason. Daboll already said he’s playing all those who are healthy enough to play and with limited practices and now just 3 preseason games, I wholeheartedly agree with him as A FAN, not a purported expert
Quote:
In comment 15777216 Jolly Blue Giant said:
Quote:
In comment 15777209 Big Blue '56 said:
Quote:
If we play well, it’s because the Pats sat their starters, if we don’t, it’s cause for dismay because the Pats sat their starters..
It’s a practice against someone else other than their own team. Get sharp, no meaningful injuries, move on to the next practice
I disagree. This Giants team has nothing to lose, and they have to play that way. We lose a starter to injury? Ok. Who’s up? We aren’t winning the super bowl. This is a journey to be mediocre right now. It starts by having a winning mentality. That starts tonight.
I agree. Just citing the inevitable reaction on here..😂
Exactly. Either way Jones and the Giants suck tonight.
TAYLOR and the Giants suck tonight..Get off Jones's rear end..If he sucks tonight you can blow your freaking horn Friday all Freakin day long..Right now,bug off..
Thanks BBB; doing fine and looking forward to football. And I was picking up on your point about the ideal of coaches' agreeing on rules designed to protect the welfare of starters.
A "lose-lose" sounds like a lot of losing, which incidentally is what Jones and the Giants have done so sounds fitting.
Quote:
If we play well, it’s because the Pats sat their starters, if we don’t, it’s cause for dismay because the Pats sat their starters..
A "lose-lose" sounds like a lot of losing, which incidentally is what Jones and the Giants have done so sounds fitting.
That must be it
Quote:
legitimate hole, and Barkley blast through for 20 yards. I don't care if its against Brockton High in Mass, I just want to see it (its been so long).
Playing Barkley makes no sense.
If he’s going to get hurt, let it be in games that count.
If he gets off to a good start, but our record is poor, we need the opportunity to trade Barkley at the deadline.
Hes played essentially no football in far too long. Also, he's not exactly jim brown in that he has nothing to prove. There are things he has to work on too, and if he gets hurt again while preparing for the season there's simply nothing to do about it.
You don't want the Giants using regular season games to get practice reps if the argument is that you care about "games that count". Your players should be prepared to play in games that count, not barely practiced in the new offense they're running.
Quote:
In comment 15777374 mittenedman said:
Quote:
about the scheme tonight, too.
Daboll knows he's got the "surprise factor" working in his favor early in the year. They aren't going to show their hand tonight.
Um...what surprise factor is that?
Daboll has his system but they [seem] to be involving different concepts notably from Kafka who came from the Andy Reid style of offense.
Giants using shovel plays for the first time, ever? Chiefs have done that for a decade now and does really well especially in the redzone.
I don't think they shine much light tonight on the tempo of the offense and its aggressive nature but after the last two years of Garrett's offense, I'm anxious to see their designs.
I still don't know what kind of system Daboll runs. It's "spready" I guess, but I'm afraid it was very much let Josh Allen do his thing offense.
Quote:
In comment 15777333 Big Blue '56 said:
Quote:
In comment 15777301 Giantfan in skinland said:
Quote:
but Parcells also said those things almost 40 years ago (gulp).
The game is different now. Rosters are different now. Practice is different now. The season is different now.
Selfishly, I'm excited to see our starters on the field, but more and more of what I consider to be the good/smart franchises are sitting their guys. For me, health remains the #1 preseason objective and seems to have proven to be one of, if not the most important factor in terms of in-season success.
Except, another two-time SB winning HC (TC) said the same thing not too many years ago. Also echoed by people such as Brandt, Polian to name a few iirc..
Now more than EVER given the limited practices, games and two-a-days, would their op8nions ring true, imo
So to buttress the point made by a dinosaur, you quote other dinosaurs? Not too many years ago from TC is still 10+ and even he was a (beloved) relic of the prior era (as are the others you name). Logically, I understand the idea that limited practice makes the preseason games all that much more important. I think that's true for evaluating your roster. I don't think it bears out that playing your starters in the preseason correlates with success in-season (whereas I've seen studies in the past which show a strong correlation between health and wins).
Look to the other side of the field tonight. Belichick is installing an entirely new offensive staff with a second year Qb. His starters are sitting. The superbowl champ Rams are sitting their starters (and I heard they'll even be sitting their 2nd string QB given some of the concerns with Staffords elbow). I don't mind it with a new coach and young roster like we have. But to me, it's sort of like cramming for a test. It's not a good thing. It's a necessary evil. The good franchises aren't doing it.
What does that have to do with what I said? Just because you state that Parcells, TC, et al are dinosaurs, doesn’t make it remotely true. Why on earth would I take the word of any poster that says what SB winning HCs and GMs is antiquated and no longer relevant. They believe that you don’t know what you TRULY HAVE until you’ve played 4-5 regular season games, roster-wise.
Nothing to do with who you play or who you sit dur8ng preseason. Daboll already said he’s playing all those who are healthy enough to play and with limited practices and now just 3 preseason games, I wholeheartedly agree with him as A FAN, not a purported expert
Not sure what to tell you. You're now changing the topic a bit with the "you don't know what you have" comment. I'm not debating whether preseason is important for managing your roster. As I noted above, in terms of evaluating the roster (especially depth and at the fringe), it is critically important. THOSE are the guys I think it's important to see as much of as you possibly can. I'm talking specifically about whether playing starters in the preseason is the right move. In support of not playing starters, I noted that it seems to that most of the good teams all seem to be moving away from doing so and are actually playing starters very little to not at all in an effort to keep them as healthy as possible heading into the season.
In response, I've gotten quotes from Parcells, Coughlin, Polian, and Brandt. You can bristle at the idea that their thoughts are outdated, but not a single one of them has been involved in running an NFL team in at least 10 years. But you shouldn't accept that their views are antiquated because I said so. You should accept that their views are antiquated because none of them is part of the modern NFL and because, most importantly, those statements are out of step with the way the modern NFL operates, including the most successful coaches/franchises (like Belichick).
Hes played essentially no football in far too long. Also, he's not exactly jim brown in that he has nothing to prove. There are things he has to work on too, and if he gets hurt again while preparing for the season there's simply nothing to do about it.
You don't want the Giants using regular season games to get practice reps if the argument is that you care about "games that count". Your players should be prepared to play in games that count, not barely practiced in the new offense they're running.
Barkley has 660 rushes and 190 receptions in his four-year career. That's 850 touches. He knows what he's doing. RBs can work off any rust in practice, controlled scrimmages and ultimately in live games.
Further, I'm taking the view we are likely going to be a bad team again. So as one of the few assets we have that could be used as trade bait by the trade deadline (assuming we have an upside-down record by the end of October), that's another reason to protect Barkley.
They aren't the same player, and the circumstances are different, but I don't think the Titans are playing Henry this preseason. Which makes a ton of sense to me, too...
Can we close this one and try again?
Barkley went several rounds later and should be on the field every chance he gets...
I really hope Daniel Jones lights up the Patriots 2nd team defense. Would help alleviate some of the concerns Ive had for him watching him perform poorly in camp practices.
Glad football is back!
Quote:
Hes played essentially no football in far too long. Also, he's not exactly jim brown in that he has nothing to prove. There are things he has to work on too, and if he gets hurt again while preparing for the season there's simply nothing to do about it.
You don't want the Giants using regular season games to get practice reps if the argument is that you care about "games that count". Your players should be prepared to play in games that count, not barely practiced in the new offense they're running.
Barkley has 660 rushes and 190 receptions in his four-year career. That's 850 touches. He knows what he's doing. RBs can work off any rust in practice, controlled scrimmages and ultimately in live games.
Further, I'm taking the view we are likely going to be a bad team again. So as one of the few assets we have that could be used as trade bait by the trade deadline (assuming we have an upside-down record by the end of October), that's another reason to protect Barkley.
They aren't the same player, and the circumstances are different, but I don't think the Titans are playing Henry this preseason. Which makes a ton of sense to me, too...
None of those career touches are behind this offensive line, with this playbook. That matters. Functional running games rely on practice reps and OL understanding both the blocking scheme on paper and the RBs tendencies and instincts. That is developed by playing together in live action.
This doesn't address that you can't convince me that Barkley knows what he's doing in pass protection. The results aren't convincing.
I dont think they're ready to win either, but starting the season without taking advantage of time to prepare sure didn't work last year either. Why expect different now?
reading people lose their minds over a DJ errant pass or evan neal getting beat on pass pro during 1st q of game 1 of preseason is mind numbing
The NFL Bite website is active and it lists tonight's game.
Check out the linked BBI thread below for options.
Viewing Options - ( New Window )
Id like to see Barkley do something special. I think he is a major piece for the O tis year and will be very active.
Id like to see Neal hold his own.
On D it would be nice if Thibs got a sack just to get the fan base excited.
Selfishly, I'm excited to see our starters on the field, but more and more of what I consider to be the good/smart franchises are sitting their guys. For me, health remains the #1 preseason objective and seems to have proven to be one of, if not the most important factor in terms of in-season success.
Most other teams don't have a new coaching staff, with new play calling and a bunch of new young players. Most other teams don't have 4 new starters on their OL and aren't trying to evaluate a QB in his last yr under contract.
I don't mind if some of the defensive starters sit for the most part, but our O absolutely needs work. Judge not playing them last year was a big mistake.
DVR Set.
:thumbsup:
The young guys need acclimate to the speed and size of NFL competition. If the rookies are winning their one-on-one battles physically that is great. If they are not, it's not great. Same for guys like Holmes and Robinson.
The QB needs to be accurate, make quick reads, and hang on to the football. If he does great, if not, not great.
There aren't many tragedies in the pre-season aside from injuries. But there are signals on basic readiness.