It's amazing how quickly things change in the NFL (NFL=Not For Long). Two weeks ago Tiki was explaining that Coughlin had lost the locker room, that the team had no leadership and that Coughlin's job was on the line. Of course, he qualified his remarks by saying that he doesn't spend as much time as he used to in the locker room talking to players. (I guess no time at all qualifies as "not as much".) A little more in a later post on Tiki and what a self serving, self aggrandizing dope he is, but for now let's stick to the topic. All of a sudden, the Giants players are crowing about the team feeling and chemistry in the locker room. How everyone understands that despite the strict rules, Coughlin is trying to instill a professional attitude, accountability, structure and discipline and they understand that it's good for the team. (After watching the Cowboys gain 500 yards on offense and lose the game largely because of a celebration penalty in the end zone, who's questioning the requirements for some discipline?). Like I said: Not For Long. To be fair, it's not an unreasonable question to ask whether a 60 year old coach can relate to players half his age, but it is undeniable that Coughlin has won at every level, is honest with great integrity and has no ego that gets in the way of his team first approach. Winning cures a lot of things, I guess.
It's also interesting how the NFL experts, prognosticators and forecasters change their tunes from week to week to make themselves look smart. Going into the Giants-Texans game, everyone was promoting the Texans as the new darlings of the NFL. They were an up and coming team with a diversified offense, an excellent young QB, the best WR in football in Andre Johnson and the next Chris Johnson/Adrian Peterson to burst onto the scene in rookie RB Foster. The word was that the Giants defense may have been able to stop the Bears who had a crippled OL, but the Texans would move the ball up and down the field all day against them and put up 28+ points. Then after the Giants defense completely took them apart, held them to an embarrassingly low yardage total, gave up no TDs save for the one the Texans got after starting inside the Giants 20 because of an INT, the same analysts are changing their tune. The Texans are not that good, they have a bad OL, their offense is very simple. Yada, yada, yada. Anything but saying that the Giants defense is really good. That can't be the case, because they didn't say that at the beginning of the season. What a bunch of dopes.
The truth about the Giants defense, their true strength probably lies somewhere in between how good they looked the last two week and how awfully they got stomped by the Colts in week 2. I am a big believer in examining matchups in sports and these last two matchups happened to be very good for the Giants. The Texans are a team with a lot of good skill position players a very good passing QB, an OL that blocks well for the run, but somehow seems vulnerable to a good pass rush. The Giants, even without Kiwanuka, one of their best players have an excellent DL and they beat the daylights out of the Texans OL. To be fair, the Texans were missing their starting LT which gave the Giants another advantage, but still - they completely dominated the line of scrimmage. The Texans OL is not as bad as the Bears was the week before; after all the Texans had the top rushing RB in the league coming into the game and you need a good OL for that. The Giants DL shut down the run entirely and when the Texans had to go to the pass, the Giants got really great pressure, mostly from the DL, with very few blitzes mixed in, and had 3 sacks as well. They also knocked down 4 passes at the line of scrimmage with Chris (6'8") Canty getting 2. You have to be very pleased with the performance of the defense through the first 5 games of the season, giving them a little pass with their debacle against the Colts. Everyone knew that the Giants had talent and pass rushing ability in the DL, but the following points that we didn't know coming into the season makes them a potentially very strong defense all year:
1. Safety play: Phillips coming back from his knee surgery was a big unknown and, while he is still regaining his form, he has already shown how good he is. Rolle is playing very well as was expected, but he is a much better run stopper than we had reason to expect. He is a great tackler and an excellent "in the box" safety, with enough speed and ball hawking skills to get back in coverage as well. But the big surprise at the safety position for me has been the play of Deon Grant - he has been playing exceptionally well and was a great FA addition.
2. DT: Canty was a strong player with the Cowboys, but in the 3-4 defense that they play in Dallas, even though he was nominally a DE there, his role was more of a space eater and run stuffer, blocking up the middle freeing the Cowboys dynamic edge rushers, Ware and Spears to freelance and run wild. He was a question mark - especially after his injury filled first year with the Giants as to whether he could fit as a 4-3 DT and move around just a bit more. Canty came into camp this year trimmer than he had last year and has been playing absolutely spectacular football. Despite the fact that he is trimmer, he is still a mountain of a man, nearly impossible to move and he has incredible quickness and timing for such a large man. When Canty gets a push up the middle, the Giants pass rush is absolutely deadly. Cofield, who has also been playing very well, apparently fully recovered from his knee surgery two off-seasons ago, only adds to the strength of the middle of the defense. The reason a push up the middle is so important is that it matches very well with the speed edge rushers the Giants have. When a DE beats the T around the edge, the QB is taught to step forward away from his rush and the T is taught to reach out and push the DE just a little bit, making his path to the QB a little wider, giving the QB even more room to step forward into the pocket. When there is a big push up the middle, there is nowhere for the QB to go. It is one reason why Osi has suddenly awoken and looks like a better player again. Giants get a rush up the middle, either from the DTs, from a LB blitz, from a looping DE on the other side or one who takes an inside pass rush and Osi's wide path around the LT takes him right to the QB. Canty also has great timing and has knocked down several passes at the line of scrimmage already this year. (He used to do that to Eli twice a game when the Giants played the 'Boys, now I'm glad he's doing it for the men in blue.)
3. Jonathan Goff has been playing great and is getting better each game; he seems to be in the right position, around the ball, nearly all the time. He was always really quick and now has bulked up a little, definitely built up his upper body strength, without losing his quickness. His understanding of the defense and his reading of the offensive sets is growing weekly. This past week against the Texans, he made two outstanding plays on almost consecutive plays in the first half. The first play was a running play to the left side of the offense. There was a hole between the LT and LG which he filled beautifully, beat the RB Foster to the spot, hit him cleanly and made a punishing tackle behind the line for a 3 yard loss. About 2 or 3 plays later, the Texans sent one of their talented, pass catching TEs down the middle on a seam route. Goff stayed with him step for step, turned his head around like a CB to locate the ball, timed his jump perfectly and knocked the ball away beautifully with his right hand. It was an athletic play in his 5th game starting that Antonino Pierce could not make in his entire 5 years with the Giants. The LBs were thought to be a big weakness coming into the season, but I have hopes that Goff will be a pro bowl LB someday. He has strength, speed, athleticism and a very high IQ, which seems to be translating into a high football IQ.
4. Fewell seems to be a doing a really good job and this was a real unknown coming into the season as well. It is true that his game plan against the Colts was flawed, but since then he has been terrific. He has been creative with his personnel packages, keeping everyone happy and getting all the talented players enough PT. A few examples of his creativity: because the Giants S are so good (see point 1 above), and especially because they are so good in run support, Fewell is often playing 3 S and only 2 LBs. This keeps the best players on the field more of the time and minimizes the loss of Bulluck to injuy. The read-and-react technique that Fewell installed suits the huge, talented DTs very well and the Giants have been the stingiest team to run against. Fewell sees also that the Giants have great depth at DL, so he often plays 5 DL-men and uses one of them as a kind of rover who will slide to different spots on the line and rush the passer from different angles or drop into pass coverage like a LB. (JPP got an interception with this alignment against the Bears, which was called back because of Goff roughing the passer penalty). With athletic DEs like Tuck, Osi and rookie JPP, this is a well suited scheme for the Giants. I love that he is using JPP and he is starting to contribute. By the second half of the year he will be a major contributor to the defense; he already is on ST.
Showing posts with label week 6 analysis. Show all posts
Showing posts with label week 6 analysis. Show all posts
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Giants: Saints game post mortem (sic)
Post mortem: adj [Latin after death] 1. happening, done or made after death 2. having to do with a post mortem examination -noun 1. same as post-mortem examination 2. a detailed examination or evaluation of an event just ended.
Okay, so maybe I am being a little dramatic with all the "death" references, but I think you get my point: Giants got absolutely toasted by the Saints last Sunday. First of all, let me apologize for not putting up my usual analysis of previous week's game earlier in the week. I don't want you to think that I'm avoiding because of the bad loss. I was just really, really busy this week. On to the post mortem:
There were a lot of disturbing things that came out of this game if you are a Giants fan. I am not even that upset about the final score, because in any sport, sometimes a game can just get away from you. Even though they are professionals, the emotion takes over and the team on top is just flying all over the field and the team on the bottom can't generate the juice to keep up. The facts are that despite Saints first half dominance, this was a 10 point game with 1 minute to go in the half. Giants had the ball out at their own 30 with 40 or 50 seconds left. They tried to get a bit closer by half time, but the blind side hit on Eli, the fumble recovery and the ensuing easy TD by the Saints made it a 17 point game and the Saints were uncatchable.
I am not trying to minimize the size of the beating; Giants gave up 7 TDs and 500 yards of offense. I am just saying that the final score is not as worrying as some of the things that transpired in the game. The biggest worries have to be:
Let's take these things one at a time:
Giants DB-field and pass defense:
Saints HC Payton came in with a game plan to throw deep and often and attack the Giants secondary, especially the weak S C.C. Brown and the poor-in-coverage LBs. This worked like a charm for Payton. Without Boley in the game, Blackburn and Clark were exposed whenever they were matched up in pass coverage. Brown was out of position way too often, but more worrying is that when he was in position, the more physical WRs got good position and made way-too-easy catches. Brown was specifically targeted and gave up 3 or 4 long balls. Some of the things that went wrong on Sunday can, theoretically at least, be fixed by good coaching. But a player that is too slow, not big enough and doesn't have good ball skills, can not be fixed no matter how good the coach is. I advised in my pregame that the Giants should not be afraid to use Wilkerson or Kehl at LB with their superior speed, athleticism and ability to play in space against the Saints passing attack. Giants stuck with Blackburn and Clark because they anticipated that the Saints would run the ball, and the Giants pass defense was pitiful. If I anticipated that the Saints would pass, how come the Giants coaches didn't?
Poor game plan by the coaches
On defense, the Giants anticipated that the Saints would try to punish the Giants with their much improved running attack. Therefore, they kept 3 LBs on the field except in obvious passing situations, they attacked with the S whenever they thought a run was coming and they stayed away from blitzing, no doubt because they feared a Saints RB would pop through a crease and gain big yardage. I don't understand the idea of devising a game plan that protects you against the weaker part of the opponent's offense; you would naturally want to stop what they do best and what can really hurt you. I understand that the Saints running attack is improved and they have more balance on offense, but Brees is one of the elite QBs in the league, they have a good OL, and speedy skill position players on offense - it seems natural to have a game plan to stop the pass. When you have a game coming up against Michael Jordan's Bulls, you don't devise a game plan to try and stop Bill Wennington, because he has really improved as a C since last year. But most upsetting about the game plan and game management by the DC, is that even given that the Saints surprised the Giants by passing instead of running, there was no in-game adjustment by the coaches when the Saints started throwing, early, deep and often. Giants defensive team said that they weren't physically beaten, they got sucked in by the Saints play action fakes and were surprised that they didn't run. That is all coaching. Bad game plan; lack of awareness of the different plan that Saints were using and inability to adjust and change.
The second part of the poor game plan was the pass defense and pass rush strategy. When DC Spagnuolo was running this defense, he was very creative and aggressive. He devised a number of exotic blitzes and attacked from every different angle. Occasionally, he would tone the blitzing down, if for example, the Giants were playing a QB that was not a great pure passer but was an excellent runner. For example, if you were playing a QB like Michael Vick (pre-dog fighting) you would be more worried about him scrambling out of the pocket and making a play with his feet or giving the WRs time to make a play down field. Spagnuolo would rush conservatively, not too many odd-angle blitzes and the DL would be conservative by staying in their rush lanes. Keep the QB pinned in the pocket and make him beat you by passing the ball. You would also keep extra DBs back, keep the DBs deep, play more zone, have the DBs keep everything in front of them and make the QB have to beat you with pass after pass down the field. That's a Michael Vick or Donovan McNabb game plan. That's NOT a Drew Brees game plan. Yet, that's what Sheridan came up with. Virtually no blitzes, and when the Giants did blitz, most of the time it was a conventional bring-the-extra-LB. Furthermore, the Giants DL, whom I had been praising as coming with many loops, stunts, twists and DL games did nothing of that in this game. It was 90% straight ahead bull rushes. It completely diminishes the pass rush skills and style of this Giants DL that has a speedy Osi, an incredibly athletic Tuck at the other DE and an almost equally athletic Kiwanuka as the 3rd DE. Even the 4th DE Tollefson is a pure speed guy. Once again, even if you came into the game with that game plan, and you don't want to second guess that it was obviously the wrong strategy, the coaches have to make some adjustments after the first half when you see that your defensive plan has given up 34 points, 350 yards of offense and Brees was completely unbothered in the pocket.
Predictability of the defensive scheme
Payton was able to get the matchups that he wanted simply by lining up his players. He didn't need sophisticated motion. He didn't need to go to completely different formations or personnel groupings. He didn't need to overload one side with complex formations. He knew exactly what kind of zone defense the Giants would be in, line up his WRs and TE is specific locations and got exactly the matchups that he wanted. I am particularly thinking of the time that Antonio Pierce had to cover a WR running right down the middle of the field and the matchup of big WR Colston on tiny Dockery and Brown all game long.
The Giants may have been exposed on defense with the weak play of Brown and Dockery. The return of Ross, Boley and Canty may improve the physical parts of what's wrong. What concerns me more is the poor coaching job that the Giants seem to have done, especially on the defensive side of the ball. Sheridan in an unproven commodity. Let's see if he can recover from this. The book is still out on him.
Offense and other things
Eli just missed two or three deep balls which could have really changed the tempo and feel of the game. He overthrew Steve Smith by about 1 foot on an easy TD and underthrew Manningham and Nicks on two other throws. I am going to give him a break because he has been throwing so well this year and he was very good on other throws. Jacobs seemed to be running more decisively. I don't want to hammer the offensive game plan, which was to try to throw deep on the Saints, because the Giants did have a lot of opportunities and just missed making some of these plays. But the Giants did not run as much as they usually do, and you wonder if they might have been more effective running a little more.
Refereeing
The refereeing on Sunday was about as good as the umpiring has been in the MLB playoffs. (Digression: in game 4 of Yankees v. Angels, Swisher was out by a foot on the pickoff; he did not leave 3rd base early when he tagged up but was called out on the appeal play; and Cano and Posada were both tagged out by the catcher on the rundown play.) Specific ridiculous calls in the Giants-Saints game: the 40 yard PI called against Corey Webster when he was looking back for the ball and his feet got tangled with the WR. It was the text book definition of a non-PI. The phantom holding call against Shaun O'Hara on the TD pass to Jacobs that was called back. Even Troy Aikman said that there was not a single OL-man that was anywhere near holding on that play. And because it was a scramble, the OL-men were out in the open there was no excuse of poor visibility by the ref of the play. Finally, the offensive PI call against Domenik Hixon was also a textbook definition of what a legal pass route is, and Hixon was interfered with on the other end of that play. I am not saying that the Giants would have won with good refereeing: bottom line is still that they yielded 7 TD's and 500 yards of offense. I'm just saying that the Giants had some opportunities to make some plays and the game could have been a lot closer.
Giants WRs
The big Giants worry coming into the season was the quality of the WR corps. The emergence of excellent leaders in Manningham and Smith has been a revelation. Hixon is playing well and because of a reduced load can be a real weapon in the return game. Rookie Nicks looks outstanding and may end up being the best of the bunch.
Okay, so maybe I am being a little dramatic with all the "death" references, but I think you get my point: Giants got absolutely toasted by the Saints last Sunday. First of all, let me apologize for not putting up my usual analysis of previous week's game earlier in the week. I don't want you to think that I'm avoiding because of the bad loss. I was just really, really busy this week. On to the post mortem:
There were a lot of disturbing things that came out of this game if you are a Giants fan. I am not even that upset about the final score, because in any sport, sometimes a game can just get away from you. Even though they are professionals, the emotion takes over and the team on top is just flying all over the field and the team on the bottom can't generate the juice to keep up. The facts are that despite Saints first half dominance, this was a 10 point game with 1 minute to go in the half. Giants had the ball out at their own 30 with 40 or 50 seconds left. They tried to get a bit closer by half time, but the blind side hit on Eli, the fumble recovery and the ensuing easy TD by the Saints made it a 17 point game and the Saints were uncatchable.
I am not trying to minimize the size of the beating; Giants gave up 7 TDs and 500 yards of offense. I am just saying that the final score is not as worrying as some of the things that transpired in the game. The biggest worries have to be:
- weak play of the Giants secondary, particularly C.C. Brown at S
- poor game plan by the coaches, especially on defense
- failure to adjust the game plan to what was happening on the field, especially on defense
- predictability of the Giants defense
Let's take these things one at a time:
Giants DB-field and pass defense:
Saints HC Payton came in with a game plan to throw deep and often and attack the Giants secondary, especially the weak S C.C. Brown and the poor-in-coverage LBs. This worked like a charm for Payton. Without Boley in the game, Blackburn and Clark were exposed whenever they were matched up in pass coverage. Brown was out of position way too often, but more worrying is that when he was in position, the more physical WRs got good position and made way-too-easy catches. Brown was specifically targeted and gave up 3 or 4 long balls. Some of the things that went wrong on Sunday can, theoretically at least, be fixed by good coaching. But a player that is too slow, not big enough and doesn't have good ball skills, can not be fixed no matter how good the coach is. I advised in my pregame that the Giants should not be afraid to use Wilkerson or Kehl at LB with their superior speed, athleticism and ability to play in space against the Saints passing attack. Giants stuck with Blackburn and Clark because they anticipated that the Saints would run the ball, and the Giants pass defense was pitiful. If I anticipated that the Saints would pass, how come the Giants coaches didn't?
Poor game plan by the coaches
On defense, the Giants anticipated that the Saints would try to punish the Giants with their much improved running attack. Therefore, they kept 3 LBs on the field except in obvious passing situations, they attacked with the S whenever they thought a run was coming and they stayed away from blitzing, no doubt because they feared a Saints RB would pop through a crease and gain big yardage. I don't understand the idea of devising a game plan that protects you against the weaker part of the opponent's offense; you would naturally want to stop what they do best and what can really hurt you. I understand that the Saints running attack is improved and they have more balance on offense, but Brees is one of the elite QBs in the league, they have a good OL, and speedy skill position players on offense - it seems natural to have a game plan to stop the pass. When you have a game coming up against Michael Jordan's Bulls, you don't devise a game plan to try and stop Bill Wennington, because he has really improved as a C since last year. But most upsetting about the game plan and game management by the DC, is that even given that the Saints surprised the Giants by passing instead of running, there was no in-game adjustment by the coaches when the Saints started throwing, early, deep and often. Giants defensive team said that they weren't physically beaten, they got sucked in by the Saints play action fakes and were surprised that they didn't run. That is all coaching. Bad game plan; lack of awareness of the different plan that Saints were using and inability to adjust and change.
The second part of the poor game plan was the pass defense and pass rush strategy. When DC Spagnuolo was running this defense, he was very creative and aggressive. He devised a number of exotic blitzes and attacked from every different angle. Occasionally, he would tone the blitzing down, if for example, the Giants were playing a QB that was not a great pure passer but was an excellent runner. For example, if you were playing a QB like Michael Vick (pre-dog fighting) you would be more worried about him scrambling out of the pocket and making a play with his feet or giving the WRs time to make a play down field. Spagnuolo would rush conservatively, not too many odd-angle blitzes and the DL would be conservative by staying in their rush lanes. Keep the QB pinned in the pocket and make him beat you by passing the ball. You would also keep extra DBs back, keep the DBs deep, play more zone, have the DBs keep everything in front of them and make the QB have to beat you with pass after pass down the field. That's a Michael Vick or Donovan McNabb game plan. That's NOT a Drew Brees game plan. Yet, that's what Sheridan came up with. Virtually no blitzes, and when the Giants did blitz, most of the time it was a conventional bring-the-extra-LB. Furthermore, the Giants DL, whom I had been praising as coming with many loops, stunts, twists and DL games did nothing of that in this game. It was 90% straight ahead bull rushes. It completely diminishes the pass rush skills and style of this Giants DL that has a speedy Osi, an incredibly athletic Tuck at the other DE and an almost equally athletic Kiwanuka as the 3rd DE. Even the 4th DE Tollefson is a pure speed guy. Once again, even if you came into the game with that game plan, and you don't want to second guess that it was obviously the wrong strategy, the coaches have to make some adjustments after the first half when you see that your defensive plan has given up 34 points, 350 yards of offense and Brees was completely unbothered in the pocket.
Predictability of the defensive scheme
Payton was able to get the matchups that he wanted simply by lining up his players. He didn't need sophisticated motion. He didn't need to go to completely different formations or personnel groupings. He didn't need to overload one side with complex formations. He knew exactly what kind of zone defense the Giants would be in, line up his WRs and TE is specific locations and got exactly the matchups that he wanted. I am particularly thinking of the time that Antonio Pierce had to cover a WR running right down the middle of the field and the matchup of big WR Colston on tiny Dockery and Brown all game long.
The Giants may have been exposed on defense with the weak play of Brown and Dockery. The return of Ross, Boley and Canty may improve the physical parts of what's wrong. What concerns me more is the poor coaching job that the Giants seem to have done, especially on the defensive side of the ball. Sheridan in an unproven commodity. Let's see if he can recover from this. The book is still out on him.
Offense and other things
Eli just missed two or three deep balls which could have really changed the tempo and feel of the game. He overthrew Steve Smith by about 1 foot on an easy TD and underthrew Manningham and Nicks on two other throws. I am going to give him a break because he has been throwing so well this year and he was very good on other throws. Jacobs seemed to be running more decisively. I don't want to hammer the offensive game plan, which was to try to throw deep on the Saints, because the Giants did have a lot of opportunities and just missed making some of these plays. But the Giants did not run as much as they usually do, and you wonder if they might have been more effective running a little more.
Refereeing
The refereeing on Sunday was about as good as the umpiring has been in the MLB playoffs. (Digression: in game 4 of Yankees v. Angels, Swisher was out by a foot on the pickoff; he did not leave 3rd base early when he tagged up but was called out on the appeal play; and Cano and Posada were both tagged out by the catcher on the rundown play.) Specific ridiculous calls in the Giants-Saints game: the 40 yard PI called against Corey Webster when he was looking back for the ball and his feet got tangled with the WR. It was the text book definition of a non-PI. The phantom holding call against Shaun O'Hara on the TD pass to Jacobs that was called back. Even Troy Aikman said that there was not a single OL-man that was anywhere near holding on that play. And because it was a scramble, the OL-men were out in the open there was no excuse of poor visibility by the ref of the play. Finally, the offensive PI call against Domenik Hixon was also a textbook definition of what a legal pass route is, and Hixon was interfered with on the other end of that play. I am not saying that the Giants would have won with good refereeing: bottom line is still that they yielded 7 TD's and 500 yards of offense. I'm just saying that the Giants had some opportunities to make some plays and the game could have been a lot closer.
Giants WRs
The big Giants worry coming into the season was the quality of the WR corps. The emergence of excellent leaders in Manningham and Smith has been a revelation. Hixon is playing well and because of a reduced load can be a real weapon in the return game. Rookie Nicks looks outstanding and may end up being the best of the bunch.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)