PHL 19 NYG 17
The Giants beat themselves. Lack of pocket contain on defense. Gilbride lack of small ball for ~ the first half of the game on offense. ONE RUNNING BACK SCREEN. THE ENTIRE GAME. Underachievement. There were plenty of mistakes all around. The mere fact that the game was within reach down to the very end makes it very clear- considering how sloppy the Giants were, if they simply played more small ball and contained the pocket on defense, they win the game easily. Reread the preview from yesterday. Where was Bennett in this offense? Where was the copious amount of screens, draws and flares? Of course it was play action on the 4Q TD drive that set up those two big plays. The ONE Running Back Screen? It was only successful for 20 yards. But since it is illegal for Gilbride to use more than ~1-2 in a single game, we couldn't dial them up again the rest of the way.
Giants Offense First 28 minutes of the Game: 86 yards. 0 points.
Giants Offense Last 32 minutes of the Game: 280 yards. 17 points.
WHEN YOU LOSE YOUR STUD X (Burress in 2008, Nicks here in 2012) Wide Receiver, small ball goes from being important to being critical. The Giants and Gilbride responded to the loss of Nicks vs Carolina appropriately and we gave him the props. It was not an accident that the Giants offense percolated all game, running up 36 points. Here, they had 0 points for the first 28 minutes of the game because they did not use small ball. No urgency from Gilbride in H1. No margin of error for the Giants in H2. It isn't Gilbride's fault that the Defense could not contain the pocket, that Eli throws a pick in Q4, that Baas flubs the snap, that we get Barden for PI... but you have to play 60 minutes and the Giants offense did not.
86 yards of offense in the first 28 minutes of the game. And 20 of them came on the small ball RB screen. THE GAME WAS LOST IN THE FIRST HALF. The mistakes of the second half only expose them more.
@capt george You have Manning but Barden & Randle .... A 44y FG is what, a 90% success rate, more ?
A 16y pass in the redzone ? Not so much.
Having come of age as a fan in the '70s, I have been bred to look at the bright side. We haven't had a decent return team in ages! That was fun to watch. From my view, I though Barden's mugging of the Eagles defender was unwarranted. I think the ball ended up sailing over Barden's head. He may have thought he was saving an interception, but that would have been bad judgement on his part. He had my buy-in from the week before, but now I have second thoughts.....
Update of my "package" stats.
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B5bCg8zUyIf_YktsSExEV1lESHM
I was so excited about the game (and it was 6am over here ...) that I didn't fully realize how awful the play calling on the last drive was ...
2&9 on their 26, 25 seconds left ... That's a 44 yarder right there. Tynes scored from 47 and 49 last week.
Run it, spike it, kick it, win. Jeez.
Very close game, obviously. The Giants hurt themselves badly with failure to contain Vick and McCoy around end, bad play calling at the end of the game, and Eli's end zone pick. You can blame Barden for the OPI but it probably saved a game ending interception. Credit for the game being close as close as it was goes to Wilson's returns and a couple of defensive stops inside the 15. As bad as it is to lose a winnable game to Philly, this is one of those games which could lead to the coaches adjusting. Hopefully it won't take a 3 game losing streak and elimination games in November. But the article in todays Daily News shows that the message hasn't quite sunk in yet.
BTW it was fun for a fleeting moment to see the faces of Philly fans after Reed called the timeout on the last kick. Too bad it didn't last . . .
Mixed message but overall it looks like they're going to keep on doing what they're doing. Pass the Rolaids
NY Giants' Tom Coughlin not ready to change offensive philosophy after letting Eli Manning throw deep at end of Eagles loss
Coach stands by Big Blue style of always going for it, but admits he might do that last sequence against Philadelphia over if he had the chance to replay it.
By Ralph Vacchiano / NEW YORK DAILY NEWS
In hindsight, even Tom Coughlin admitted he was probably wrong. Maybe he should have run the ball to try to set up the potential game-winning field goal against the Eagles rather than let Eli Manning throw his ill-fated deep pass.
. . . . Just don’t mistake his confession for an apology or as a sign that his philosophy is going to change. Because as he accepted the blame for the bitter defeat and welcomed the inevitable second-guessing, Coughlin also strongly defended his aggressive nature. He wants his offense to always be on the attack, which is why he green-lighted a pass play on Sunday night with 25 seconds left and the Giants already in range for a field goal.
. . . . Yes, Coughlin said, in hindsight it wasn’t the right decision, but “that’s the way we usually play.” “What we’ve been able to do - with success - has been to continue on the attack,” Coughlin said. “We feel quite frankly with our quarterback that’s the way we should play.”
“We always say ‘Try to get as close as possible,’” added Eli Manning. “If you can score a touchdown, you try to score a touchdown. That’s the mentality that we have. You see a lot of teams get to the 30-yard line, then all of a sudden get conservative and then you’ve got to kick a 48 yarder. Those aren’t guaranteed. So you want to get as close as possible to try to ensure the win.”
That’s been the Giants’ philosophy for most of the Coughlin era and definitely since Kevin Gilbride was promoted to offensive coordinator for the start of the 2007 season. The Giants are a pass-first team that’s not afraid to take shots at the end zone.
. . . . “That’s the way we play,” Coughlin said. “We’ve been able to do that by virtue of putting the ball in the hands of the quarterback and having him make good decisions. This one didn’t work out. Would we change? Yeah, sure. Today we would. Today it’s easy.”
www.nydailynews.com/sports/football/giants/coughlin-defends-deep-thoughts-article-1.1172420#ixzz28AV8jeT1
@jfoster Yep, and especially when down by 2 and inside the opponent's 30 with less than a minute to play.
@Paddlepedal - That is an area of the offense that drives me nuts. I understand going deep down field every so often and it pays off sometimes, but the Giants seem to do it too much and end up in 3rd and long more than they should. I know I am not saying anything new to this group.
For the past three seasons, NY just doesn't match up well with Philly. In other words, Philly is too fast and shifty at the skill positions for NY: Vick, McCoy, and Jackson. Nor does it help that defensive line doesn't get it through its head that it needs to maintain lane discipline and contain Vick, instead of letting him run around the end. That's unacceptable even at the high school level. As always, Giants need more speed on defense.
Another one of those games ...
Gillbride was back to his old self, no need to beat that drum again.
Barden was awful, getting pushed around by Asomugha who's 3 feet smaller and 10 pounds lighter .... come on.
Weatherford had another bad day. He was very average as a J-E-T and last season was kinda unexpected. Hopefully he gets back on top.
Great to see we can return punts and kicks for more than 7y, athought it's a shame the offense can't convert good field position into points.
Great article. I couldn't agree more on Gilbride. I know this is 'preaching to the choir' but I think they win in spite of Gilbride. It should never have come down to that last kick.
I think it is very strange how, as good as the Giants have been the last several years, the Eagles have won the last 8 of 9 games against the Giants. It seems like the Eagles are in the Giants' heads now. This game won't help any.
1 Like
@jfoster The Giants have not been good over the last several years. They have 2 great 4 game streaks that ended in a SB and it makes us forget how very average they've been overall.
I think yesterday's game is actually a pretty good example of what we've seen from this team during the last few seasons (except for the return game).
@Arthuro I guess I am thinking of big picture - the Giants have been better the last several years than many of the years I can remember cheering for them when they managed 4-12 seasons. But you are probably right - they have been average or a little above average during the last several years.
Even at records of 8-8, 9-7, or even 7-9, they should have a better record against the Eagles than losing the last 8 out of 9. The Eagles haven't been THAT much better than the Giants during those years to come up with a record of 8-1 against the Giants. I think some teams just match up with other teams better than other teams.
@Arthuro The Giants have not been good over the last several years. They have 2 great 4 game streaks that ended in a SB and it makes us forget how very average they've been overall.
That is a brilliant statement.
