In case you thought I was incorrect in my analysis of the Giants offensive problems, laying the blame first on the WRs not winning their battles and getting separation from their defenders, second on the OL not holding up and finally on Eli playing a little soft, please read this article by Prisco of CBS Sports. He did the film analysis and came to the exact same conclusions I did. The timing between Eli and his WRs could be better and Eli did force some throws, but the main problem shows up on film: nobody's getting open.
Prisco even makes mention of the fact that the Bengals only rushed 4 and kept 7 in coverage, making it harder to throw; but that should have made it easier to run. Giants aren't doing that either.
Wednesday, November 21, 2012
What needs fixing
The OL needs to play better. The coaches say Diehl was hurt and is now getting healthier which explains his spottty performance. I don't buy it, since he was playing poorly before he got hurt and Beatty came in at LT. But it does show that the coaches have evaluated Diehl accurately and do not have blinders on. The first step in fixing a problem is recognizing that one exists in the first place. They see that he is not playing well. It will be interesting to see if they give him another chance and consider replacing him after this week or even midgame if he is doing poorly. Or if they pull the trigger now off of the bye week and put Locklear in to replace Diehl at RT. It is an absolute requirement to upgrade the OL in the off-season. Locklear is decent, but is older and is not the long term answer at RT. Boothe is solid, and Baas is OK, but why can't the Giants have a stud somewhere in the OL?
Parenthetically, the coaches said, when they gave Diehl his job back that a player can't lose his starting position through injury. What a load of garbage. First of all, it is up to the coaches to put the best team out there and not follow some theoretical set of unwritten rules to keep veterans happy. Second of all, how did that rule get applied when Tom Brady took Drew Bledsoe's job up in New England a few years back? You remember - Bledsoe got hammered with a serious chest injury that kept him out a long time (8 or 9 weeks maybe?) and Brady replaced him and excelled. Bledsoe never got his job back and Brady, well... is Brady. He won his first Super Bowl that year. Want another example - how did this 'can't lose your job because of injury' thing work out for Wally Pipp and Lou Gehrig ?
Stevie Brown has made some plays at S, but also got beat deep several times because he bit on underneath routes, gambling and hoping to make another big play, giving up his deep coverage responsibility. That is what happened on the blown coverage on AJ Green in the Bengals game. Webster passed him off to Brown expecting deep help, but Brown misread the play and was looking to come up on a shorter route. Even though Brown has made some plays, I would try to work Phillips back into the mix.
At WR, Giants hope Nicks will return to form, but if he doesn't, Giants just can't keep the status quo. They have to get some speed in the lineup, perhaps with Jernigan and David Wilson at RB. Barden and Randle should get some snaps - anything to open things up. Giants should also change subtly their route combinations and selections - they should add a few more posts and seams and use fewer short hooks and underneath routes, just as a change of pace. A double move off of a back shoulder fade would also be a big play, though it does require time to develop and good protection from the OL.
Andre Brown has been playing better than Bradshaw and I would not mind seeing Brown and Wilson in there with Bradshaw's role diminished. He took a big helmet-to-helmet hit in that Bengals game and looked dazed to me on the bench. I haven't heard anything about him getting a concussion or being out, but the Giants start practicing on Wednesday and we may hear then. He also has continuing problems with his ankles and feet and the early report is that he will not practice or will be limited in Wednesdays practice.
Back to the WRs: Hixon has an ankle problem and may not play.
Parenthetically, the coaches said, when they gave Diehl his job back that a player can't lose his starting position through injury. What a load of garbage. First of all, it is up to the coaches to put the best team out there and not follow some theoretical set of unwritten rules to keep veterans happy. Second of all, how did that rule get applied when Tom Brady took Drew Bledsoe's job up in New England a few years back? You remember - Bledsoe got hammered with a serious chest injury that kept him out a long time (8 or 9 weeks maybe?) and Brady replaced him and excelled. Bledsoe never got his job back and Brady, well... is Brady. He won his first Super Bowl that year. Want another example - how did this 'can't lose your job because of injury' thing work out for Wally Pipp and Lou Gehrig ?
Stevie Brown has made some plays at S, but also got beat deep several times because he bit on underneath routes, gambling and hoping to make another big play, giving up his deep coverage responsibility. That is what happened on the blown coverage on AJ Green in the Bengals game. Webster passed him off to Brown expecting deep help, but Brown misread the play and was looking to come up on a shorter route. Even though Brown has made some plays, I would try to work Phillips back into the mix.
At WR, Giants hope Nicks will return to form, but if he doesn't, Giants just can't keep the status quo. They have to get some speed in the lineup, perhaps with Jernigan and David Wilson at RB. Barden and Randle should get some snaps - anything to open things up. Giants should also change subtly their route combinations and selections - they should add a few more posts and seams and use fewer short hooks and underneath routes, just as a change of pace. A double move off of a back shoulder fade would also be a big play, though it does require time to develop and good protection from the OL.
Andre Brown has been playing better than Bradshaw and I would not mind seeing Brown and Wilson in there with Bradshaw's role diminished. He took a big helmet-to-helmet hit in that Bengals game and looked dazed to me on the bench. I haven't heard anything about him getting a concussion or being out, but the Giants start practicing on Wednesday and we may hear then. He also has continuing problems with his ankles and feet and the early report is that he will not practice or will be limited in Wednesdays practice.
Back to the WRs: Hixon has an ankle problem and may not play.
Tuesday, November 20, 2012
More Bengals game
Eli did not have a good game, there's no doubt about that. His two INTs were both bad mistakes. However, on both of these plays he was rushed and had his jersey grabbed, which is definitely on the OL to give him better protection. If it was just these two plays where the protection broke down, I could give the OL a pass. But the protection was poor all day with some sacks and lots of pressure. The mistake Eli made on these INTs was trying to make a play when there was nothing there. He should have taken the sack and tried on the next series to get some offense going. Eli plays aggressively, trying to make plays, sometimes when there's just a small chance of getting it done. This is what makes him good and I don't want to lose that mentality, but it also gets him in trouble at times.
The combination of poor OL protection and WRs not getting separation is deadly to the offense. The QB has to hold the ball a bit longer waiting for someone to get open, but with poor protection, there are few opportunities to do that. I don't want to sound like an Eli apologist, which I sometimes feel like I do in this blog, but let's have some perspective. Eli didn't go from someone who threw for nearly 5,000 yards last year and for 500 yards in a game this year into someone who is inaccurate and makes bad decisions in a 2 or 3 week span. The whole offense has to improve including Eli.
As far as WRs not getting separation, I think a big part of it is Nicks being hurt and not having the explosiveness from the line of scrimmage. With Nicks slowed down, they can play him aggressively and the easy pitch-and-catch underneath routes that allows the offense to move the chains are not there. Every route has to be perfectly run and perfectly thrown. With Nicks not at full strength, not getting as much attention from the DBs, the opposing defense can instead focus on Cruz and take away what he does well. Giants need to have some deep threats on the field to open up the running game and the underneath routes. Is it possible that Cruz is a great # 2 WR but needs a # 1 opposite him in order to excel? It may also be possible that the Giants miss Mannigham more than we thought they would. Manningham may have made occasional mistakes, but he did have speed, could make plays and opened the field because he was a threat. We thought that between Hixon, Randle, Barden and Jernigan there would be enough there to fill the void of Manningham's departure. Jernigan hasn't seen the field and while Hixon has had his moments, he is not the pure burner that they need. The hope is that with the bye week off, Nicks has some time to get healthy and will return to form. If not, Giants should try Jernigan and maybe even get Beckum in the game for some seam routes. The big addition has to be getting Wilson in the games more. Even though he is at RB instead of WR, using him creatively could open things up.
Defenses have figured the Giants offense out. The bye week may have come at just the right time, if the Giants coaches can change things up a bit and respond to what defense are doing to the offense.
The running game has been pretty inconsistent. When defense sits back in the 2-deep zone, it should mean that the Giants can run the ball against the soft box. But the OL has not done it. The weak spot has been Diehl and it will be interesting to see if he improves at RT or if the Giants coaches have to bite the bullet and move Locklear back in at his spot.
I really didn't love Coughlin calling Eli out over his two INTs and calling the plays stupid, silly or words to that effect. He should just shut up and realize that as much as he (Coughlin) has done for him (Eli), Eli has done way more for Coughlin's legacy. If Coughlin gets into the HOF as a 2-time SB winning coach, he will be doing so on Eli's broad shoulders. Take a lesson from Eli - never throw anyone under the bus, especially your franchise QB.
I heard Eli slip up in a post game press conference and say that they have to come up with a slightly different plan for responding to how defenses have been playing them lately. He quickly backtracked and passed over it, not wanting to cast aspersions on the Giants coaches, but I heard it clearly and it confirms what I've been saying on this blog.
The combination of poor OL protection and WRs not getting separation is deadly to the offense. The QB has to hold the ball a bit longer waiting for someone to get open, but with poor protection, there are few opportunities to do that. I don't want to sound like an Eli apologist, which I sometimes feel like I do in this blog, but let's have some perspective. Eli didn't go from someone who threw for nearly 5,000 yards last year and for 500 yards in a game this year into someone who is inaccurate and makes bad decisions in a 2 or 3 week span. The whole offense has to improve including Eli.
As far as WRs not getting separation, I think a big part of it is Nicks being hurt and not having the explosiveness from the line of scrimmage. With Nicks slowed down, they can play him aggressively and the easy pitch-and-catch underneath routes that allows the offense to move the chains are not there. Every route has to be perfectly run and perfectly thrown. With Nicks not at full strength, not getting as much attention from the DBs, the opposing defense can instead focus on Cruz and take away what he does well. Giants need to have some deep threats on the field to open up the running game and the underneath routes. Is it possible that Cruz is a great # 2 WR but needs a # 1 opposite him in order to excel? It may also be possible that the Giants miss Mannigham more than we thought they would. Manningham may have made occasional mistakes, but he did have speed, could make plays and opened the field because he was a threat. We thought that between Hixon, Randle, Barden and Jernigan there would be enough there to fill the void of Manningham's departure. Jernigan hasn't seen the field and while Hixon has had his moments, he is not the pure burner that they need. The hope is that with the bye week off, Nicks has some time to get healthy and will return to form. If not, Giants should try Jernigan and maybe even get Beckum in the game for some seam routes. The big addition has to be getting Wilson in the games more. Even though he is at RB instead of WR, using him creatively could open things up.
Defenses have figured the Giants offense out. The bye week may have come at just the right time, if the Giants coaches can change things up a bit and respond to what defense are doing to the offense.
The running game has been pretty inconsistent. When defense sits back in the 2-deep zone, it should mean that the Giants can run the ball against the soft box. But the OL has not done it. The weak spot has been Diehl and it will be interesting to see if he improves at RT or if the Giants coaches have to bite the bullet and move Locklear back in at his spot.
I really didn't love Coughlin calling Eli out over his two INTs and calling the plays stupid, silly or words to that effect. He should just shut up and realize that as much as he (Coughlin) has done for him (Eli), Eli has done way more for Coughlin's legacy. If Coughlin gets into the HOF as a 2-time SB winning coach, he will be doing so on Eli's broad shoulders. Take a lesson from Eli - never throw anyone under the bus, especially your franchise QB.
I heard Eli slip up in a post game press conference and say that they have to come up with a slightly different plan for responding to how defenses have been playing them lately. He quickly backtracked and passed over it, not wanting to cast aspersions on the Giants coaches, but I heard it clearly and it confirms what I've been saying on this blog.
Tuesday, November 13, 2012
Bengals Game review I
This is the bye week, so there's plenty of time to analyze what's going on with this team until the next game, which we will certainly do on this blog. Before I get to that in later posts, let's spend some time analyzing the specific game itself, without digressing too much to the reasons the Giants are slumping.
The recent woes of giving up big plays on defense (Giants are near the bottom of the league in giving up plays >20 yards) showed up on the first drive when AJ Green, who is an incredibly impressive WR, maybe better than Megatron, was left alone on a badly blown coverage by the Giants and scored in a walk. I don't know what's worse - DBs getting beat physically by superior players or DBs making mistake after mistake, miscommunication is what the players call it, and allowing painfully easy TDs. I guess if they are getting beat physically, there's little hope for improvement. If opponents are bigger, stronger, faster, you have little recipe to improve. But if you have blown coverages and miscommunication, there is at least hope that the players will stop making mistakes and clean things up. This seems to be what happened last year when, in addition to the benefit of some good players coming back from injury, the secondary definitely tightened things up and made fewer mistakes down the stretch. When players keep making these mistakes, you could question: is it because they are stupid, uncoachable players or is it because the coaching is not very good. That was a rhetorical question, I hope you're not thinking of giving an answer. It is theoretically possible that you could have a particular assembly of players on a team that are just not good team players. But since the Giants have won with this group before, that is obviously not the case. I am going to put this on the coach. Fewell is just not good at coming up with schemes or disguising the defense (Giants never fool anybody on defense), is not very good at calling a game (calls for risky blitzes and predictable defenses at the wrong times) and apparently is not very good at tutoring his players (players keep making all these mistakes.
The second more worrisome recent problem is not moving the ball on offense and not scoring TDs in the red zone, settling for FGs. This happened twice in the first half; once when the Giants recovered a fumbled punt and were set up inside the Bengals 30. Giants moved it down to the 5 but settled for a FG, because of a predictable call by Gilbride, throwing a swing pass to Bradshaw and asking him to making someone miss. This may work out near midfield when the S group is back defending the deep ball. But when all 11 defenders are up within 5 yards of the play, it has little chance for success. Then, trailing 17-3 before the half, Giants moved it about 70 yards inside the Bengals 10, Eli threw a perfect pass to Bennet who did not keep his feet in bounds and Giants were down 17-6 at the half when it could/should have easily been 17-14 or at least 17-10.
Then in the second half the wheels fell off because of all the turnovers. After an exchange of punts and some good defense, Giants started a drive near midfield. After a pass and a few effective runs, Giants moved the ball to around the 10 and Bradshaw fumbled. That absolutely took the steam out of the team. It just added to the feeling that nothing was going right - even when the team makes some positive plays and has a chance to get back in the game, something goes wrong to mess it up. A TD or even a FG there gets the Giants right back in the game. Consider: as much as it looked like the Giants were being dominated to that point in the game - some decent red zone production could have had the Giants ahead 21-17 instead of down 17-6. The next two possessions were two awful INTs by Eli, both when he was getting hit and pressured. He tried to throw the ball away on the first one and complete a desperation throw under pressure on the second. They were both bad decisions by Eli - he should have just taken the sacks - but that was just the conclusion of the play. The reason the play ended that way is because the OL was getting hammered all day long by the Bengals DL. It's not just the 4 sacks, it was the constant pressure which resulted in these turnovers and is a main contributor to the lack of offensive productivity.
I will do some more analysis of what's wrong with the offense in later posts, but for now, realize that the OL, especially the RT Diehl is a huge problem for this team. I said coming into the game that giving Diehl his starting RT job back was a mistake - Locklear was playing OK and he had replaced Diehl who was playing poorly when he was in there. Maybe the Giants don't feel Locklear has enough tread left on the tire to start all season long, but from a pure productivity standpoint, this sure looks like a situation where the Giants tried to fix something that wasn't broken. It may not have been broken before, but it sure looks like it's broken now.
After all that, as much as everything went wrong for the Giants, if a few things broke differently, Giants could have won this game.
The recent woes of giving up big plays on defense (Giants are near the bottom of the league in giving up plays >20 yards) showed up on the first drive when AJ Green, who is an incredibly impressive WR, maybe better than Megatron, was left alone on a badly blown coverage by the Giants and scored in a walk. I don't know what's worse - DBs getting beat physically by superior players or DBs making mistake after mistake, miscommunication is what the players call it, and allowing painfully easy TDs. I guess if they are getting beat physically, there's little hope for improvement. If opponents are bigger, stronger, faster, you have little recipe to improve. But if you have blown coverages and miscommunication, there is at least hope that the players will stop making mistakes and clean things up. This seems to be what happened last year when, in addition to the benefit of some good players coming back from injury, the secondary definitely tightened things up and made fewer mistakes down the stretch. When players keep making these mistakes, you could question: is it because they are stupid, uncoachable players or is it because the coaching is not very good. That was a rhetorical question, I hope you're not thinking of giving an answer. It is theoretically possible that you could have a particular assembly of players on a team that are just not good team players. But since the Giants have won with this group before, that is obviously not the case. I am going to put this on the coach. Fewell is just not good at coming up with schemes or disguising the defense (Giants never fool anybody on defense), is not very good at calling a game (calls for risky blitzes and predictable defenses at the wrong times) and apparently is not very good at tutoring his players (players keep making all these mistakes.
The second more worrisome recent problem is not moving the ball on offense and not scoring TDs in the red zone, settling for FGs. This happened twice in the first half; once when the Giants recovered a fumbled punt and were set up inside the Bengals 30. Giants moved it down to the 5 but settled for a FG, because of a predictable call by Gilbride, throwing a swing pass to Bradshaw and asking him to making someone miss. This may work out near midfield when the S group is back defending the deep ball. But when all 11 defenders are up within 5 yards of the play, it has little chance for success. Then, trailing 17-3 before the half, Giants moved it about 70 yards inside the Bengals 10, Eli threw a perfect pass to Bennet who did not keep his feet in bounds and Giants were down 17-6 at the half when it could/should have easily been 17-14 or at least 17-10.
Then in the second half the wheels fell off because of all the turnovers. After an exchange of punts and some good defense, Giants started a drive near midfield. After a pass and a few effective runs, Giants moved the ball to around the 10 and Bradshaw fumbled. That absolutely took the steam out of the team. It just added to the feeling that nothing was going right - even when the team makes some positive plays and has a chance to get back in the game, something goes wrong to mess it up. A TD or even a FG there gets the Giants right back in the game. Consider: as much as it looked like the Giants were being dominated to that point in the game - some decent red zone production could have had the Giants ahead 21-17 instead of down 17-6. The next two possessions were two awful INTs by Eli, both when he was getting hit and pressured. He tried to throw the ball away on the first one and complete a desperation throw under pressure on the second. They were both bad decisions by Eli - he should have just taken the sacks - but that was just the conclusion of the play. The reason the play ended that way is because the OL was getting hammered all day long by the Bengals DL. It's not just the 4 sacks, it was the constant pressure which resulted in these turnovers and is a main contributor to the lack of offensive productivity.
I will do some more analysis of what's wrong with the offense in later posts, but for now, realize that the OL, especially the RT Diehl is a huge problem for this team. I said coming into the game that giving Diehl his starting RT job back was a mistake - Locklear was playing OK and he had replaced Diehl who was playing poorly when he was in there. Maybe the Giants don't feel Locklear has enough tread left on the tire to start all season long, but from a pure productivity standpoint, this sure looks like a situation where the Giants tried to fix something that wasn't broken. It may not have been broken before, but it sure looks like it's broken now.
After all that, as much as everything went wrong for the Giants, if a few things broke differently, Giants could have won this game.
Friday, November 9, 2012
Steelers Game Review
This was a complete domination by the Steelers. It may be difficult to accept that, because after all, the Giants lost only by 4 points and in fact they were ahead by 10 going into the 4th quarter. But with every football game, you have to look beyond the scores and stats to see what actually happened. Giants were ahead 20-10 going into the 4th quarter, but many of the points were gifts. One was a fumble recovery for TD by Boley on a questionable fumble/forward pass call by the refs. Giants also got a FG after an INT by Webster of a terrible throw by Big Ben. In fact the other TD that the Giants got was somewhat tainted also, because Eli threw a ball behind Cruz at the goal line that was almost picked and would have left the Giants trying a FG. But Cruz got hit late, Giants got a first down on the personal foul and came away with a TD that should have been a FG. That kind of tells you that the offense was pretty poor. Steelers defense is pretty good, but not overwhelming and Giants should have been more productive.
On the defensive side of the ball, Giants did get some turnovers and some stops, but they gave up 150 yards rushing and could not stop the Steelers in 4th quarter when they won the game with two TD drives. ST were horrible also giving up field position on kickoff returns and one big punt return all night long. Giants were in the game on the scoreboard, but were spanked badly in every phase.
Everyone is blaming Eli for the offensive woes and I am not going to be blind and say he's playing great, but it is equally obtuse to say that the offensive problems in the last two games are all on Eli's shoulders. There are two components that are primarily breaking down: the WRs and the OL. I think the Cowboys found a few things out about Giants offense - when Nicks is hurting, they don't have the consistent deep play threat and if you play them physically at the line of scrimmage, they won't get separation and make themselves good targets even for the short balls that gets the offense going and keeps the chains moving. Furthermore, when you jam the WRs and play press coverage, that gives the WRs a chance to go deep if they get a good release off the line and beat the man coverage. But the Cowboys played a lot of 2 deep S coverage protecting against deep balls. So why doesn't every defense do this every game against every team? Because when you commit to having two S deep and match up man on the WRs, it means you can never drop a S down low to the line of scrimmage and have only 7 guys "in the box" to stop the run. If the TE is split out wide, you may only have 6. This is an invitation for the opposing offense to run the ball, but the OL has not been effective at blasting the soft box and opening up holes consistently for the running game. Steelers did a lot of the same thing, playing tight press man-to-man coverage and not giving any room to the WRs. There was simply no separation for the Giants WRs and Eli often had nowhere to go with the ball.
The way to fix it (aside from motivating the WRs and OL to play better) is to be creative with throws to other targets: Wilson/Brown/Bradshaw out of the backfield, and I'm not talking about the hitch/screen that the Giants run that hasn't worked in the last 3 years against any decent defense. I am talking about some wheel routes or even seam routes to take advantage of their speed. I would also make more use of the TE down the field - Bennet can run and now Beckum is back active again also.
As far as the OL is concerned, there is one obvious thing that needs to be fixed. Locklear has to get back at RT to replace Diehl. The OL was doing pretty well and Locklear was playing OK at RT after Diehl went down. Now that Diehl has reclaimed his spot, the OL has regressed and Diehl is playing poorly. he's giving up pressures in the passing game very week and not blocking well in the running game. Here too, defenses have read this and are loading up to stop the run to the left side of the offense, because it has been more effective than when they run behind Diehl. You know the expression: if it ain't broke don't fix it. Well, it wasn't broke before, but it seems to be now.
Maybe when Nicks gets healthy, regains his speed and elusiveness things will look better, but I want to see better play from the offense in the runa nd the passing game.
On defense, the DL had good pass rush last week but was poor against the run. Hosley has talent but is getting beaten for some big plays every week. Fewell doesn't know how to call a agame and is leaving him isolated too often. (Thing back to the Moss TD in the Redskins game three weeks ago - that was Hosley he beat and there was no S help behind him). He will be a good palyer for the Giants but is struggling now. There are still too many miscommunications, blown coverages and breakdowns for the Giants secondary. That is on the coach to coach 'em up as much as it is on the players to pay attention.
On the defensive side of the ball, Giants did get some turnovers and some stops, but they gave up 150 yards rushing and could not stop the Steelers in 4th quarter when they won the game with two TD drives. ST were horrible also giving up field position on kickoff returns and one big punt return all night long. Giants were in the game on the scoreboard, but were spanked badly in every phase.
Everyone is blaming Eli for the offensive woes and I am not going to be blind and say he's playing great, but it is equally obtuse to say that the offensive problems in the last two games are all on Eli's shoulders. There are two components that are primarily breaking down: the WRs and the OL. I think the Cowboys found a few things out about Giants offense - when Nicks is hurting, they don't have the consistent deep play threat and if you play them physically at the line of scrimmage, they won't get separation and make themselves good targets even for the short balls that gets the offense going and keeps the chains moving. Furthermore, when you jam the WRs and play press coverage, that gives the WRs a chance to go deep if they get a good release off the line and beat the man coverage. But the Cowboys played a lot of 2 deep S coverage protecting against deep balls. So why doesn't every defense do this every game against every team? Because when you commit to having two S deep and match up man on the WRs, it means you can never drop a S down low to the line of scrimmage and have only 7 guys "in the box" to stop the run. If the TE is split out wide, you may only have 6. This is an invitation for the opposing offense to run the ball, but the OL has not been effective at blasting the soft box and opening up holes consistently for the running game. Steelers did a lot of the same thing, playing tight press man-to-man coverage and not giving any room to the WRs. There was simply no separation for the Giants WRs and Eli often had nowhere to go with the ball.
The way to fix it (aside from motivating the WRs and OL to play better) is to be creative with throws to other targets: Wilson/Brown/Bradshaw out of the backfield, and I'm not talking about the hitch/screen that the Giants run that hasn't worked in the last 3 years against any decent defense. I am talking about some wheel routes or even seam routes to take advantage of their speed. I would also make more use of the TE down the field - Bennet can run and now Beckum is back active again also.
As far as the OL is concerned, there is one obvious thing that needs to be fixed. Locklear has to get back at RT to replace Diehl. The OL was doing pretty well and Locklear was playing OK at RT after Diehl went down. Now that Diehl has reclaimed his spot, the OL has regressed and Diehl is playing poorly. he's giving up pressures in the passing game very week and not blocking well in the running game. Here too, defenses have read this and are loading up to stop the run to the left side of the offense, because it has been more effective than when they run behind Diehl. You know the expression: if it ain't broke don't fix it. Well, it wasn't broke before, but it seems to be now.
Maybe when Nicks gets healthy, regains his speed and elusiveness things will look better, but I want to see better play from the offense in the runa nd the passing game.
On defense, the DL had good pass rush last week but was poor against the run. Hosley has talent but is getting beaten for some big plays every week. Fewell doesn't know how to call a agame and is leaving him isolated too often. (Thing back to the Moss TD in the Redskins game three weeks ago - that was Hosley he beat and there was no S help behind him). He will be a good palyer for the Giants but is struggling now. There are still too many miscommunications, blown coverages and breakdowns for the Giants secondary. That is on the coach to coach 'em up as much as it is on the players to pay attention.
Friday, November 2, 2012
Looking ahead to the Steelers
First a few interesting notes about Giants injuries:
Blackburn is out of practice with a hamstring and they can take a little while to heal. He may not be ready so it looks like Herzlich will get a start this week against the Steelers. It might be a good match up since the Steelers have a very good TE in Heath Miller who Big Ben will undoubtedly target after Witten's big game last week against Giants secondary. Herzlich is more athletic and might do a better job in pass coverage. Of course the MLB comes off the field when Giants go to nickel coverage and the Steelers play a lot of 3-WR looks, so Herzlich may not get as much ice time as we think.
In a slightly surprising move, Diehl has reclaimed his starting RT job and Locklear is moving to the bench. Locklear has been playing fairly well, though certainly not great. But Diehl was not playing well at all, IMO when he was healthy. The OL has been going pretty well, I don't know why the Giants coaches would try to fix what ain't broken.
Kenny Phillips has been practicing fully this week and may be ready to come back. Rolle is still not practicing with his concussion symptoms but also may be ready to play by Sunday. This means that Stevie Brown may make his way back to the bench. It makes perfect sense: why shouldn't the Giants bench the best secondary player they've had this year. (???) Will Hill might come back soon also, this is the last week of his suspension. I really think with the emergence of Brown that Tyler Sash's roster spot might be in jeopardy, although with the way Reese's draft picks get protected, it might be Tryon that goes instead.
Steelers can't get a hotel for their players because of lack of hotel space due to hurricane Katrina, er I mean Sandy, so they're flying in Sunday morning. (If NBA commish David Stern can do it, so can I.) I don't know what the big fuss is; business people do this all the time..... fly in to a city in the morning, have their meetings and fly back at night.
Giants need their WRs to play better than they have last two weeks. Cowboys DBs got away with a lot of holding last week, but still the Giants WRs have to win their one on one battles to give Eli some targets to throw to. It will be interesting to see if the league tries to copy the tactic that the Cowboys used against the Giants WRs. We'll see starting this Sunday. To defeat that tactic, Giants have to get a good release off the line and take some shots deep. This has been hard to do with Nicks somewhat limited;the hope is that he will get healthier week by week. Giants also need to use their TE in the middle of the field to attack the S position and open things up for the WRs. With Polamalu out this is particularly important. Pascoe appears injured so we may get a first real sighting of rookie TE Adrien Robinson, who has only been dressed for games two weeks this year and has seen the field for only a few snaps.
Steelers have a very good offense and their QB, always a very good player, is playing particularly well this year, apparently adapting well to the new OC's offense. This will be a real test for Giants defense. Steelers defense is ranked high statistically, so the Steelers should be a real tough match up, with both a proficient offense and a strong defense. However, they are 4-3 in a weaker AFC conference for a reason. For one thing, defensive statistics can be misleading, because they are so dependent on the overall flow of the game. We'll have to see how they do Sunday.
One holdover note from the Cowboys game: Canty played really well and the Giants defense badly missed him when he was out - I forgot how good he really was. He will be very important against the Steelers that have some questions about their interior OL. We all expected Marvin Austin to be a star and he has been barely seen, with Markus Kuhn getting in on the regular DL rotation and Austin hardly playing. When Bernard comes back and the Giants have Canty, Joseph, Bernard and Kuhn, Austin's role will diminish even more.
Blackburn is out of practice with a hamstring and they can take a little while to heal. He may not be ready so it looks like Herzlich will get a start this week against the Steelers. It might be a good match up since the Steelers have a very good TE in Heath Miller who Big Ben will undoubtedly target after Witten's big game last week against Giants secondary. Herzlich is more athletic and might do a better job in pass coverage. Of course the MLB comes off the field when Giants go to nickel coverage and the Steelers play a lot of 3-WR looks, so Herzlich may not get as much ice time as we think.
In a slightly surprising move, Diehl has reclaimed his starting RT job and Locklear is moving to the bench. Locklear has been playing fairly well, though certainly not great. But Diehl was not playing well at all, IMO when he was healthy. The OL has been going pretty well, I don't know why the Giants coaches would try to fix what ain't broken.
Kenny Phillips has been practicing fully this week and may be ready to come back. Rolle is still not practicing with his concussion symptoms but also may be ready to play by Sunday. This means that Stevie Brown may make his way back to the bench. It makes perfect sense: why shouldn't the Giants bench the best secondary player they've had this year. (???) Will Hill might come back soon also, this is the last week of his suspension. I really think with the emergence of Brown that Tyler Sash's roster spot might be in jeopardy, although with the way Reese's draft picks get protected, it might be Tryon that goes instead.
Steelers can't get a hotel for their players because of lack of hotel space due to hurricane Katrina, er I mean Sandy, so they're flying in Sunday morning. (If NBA commish David Stern can do it, so can I.) I don't know what the big fuss is; business people do this all the time..... fly in to a city in the morning, have their meetings and fly back at night.
Giants need their WRs to play better than they have last two weeks. Cowboys DBs got away with a lot of holding last week, but still the Giants WRs have to win their one on one battles to give Eli some targets to throw to. It will be interesting to see if the league tries to copy the tactic that the Cowboys used against the Giants WRs. We'll see starting this Sunday. To defeat that tactic, Giants have to get a good release off the line and take some shots deep. This has been hard to do with Nicks somewhat limited;the hope is that he will get healthier week by week. Giants also need to use their TE in the middle of the field to attack the S position and open things up for the WRs. With Polamalu out this is particularly important. Pascoe appears injured so we may get a first real sighting of rookie TE Adrien Robinson, who has only been dressed for games two weeks this year and has seen the field for only a few snaps.
Steelers have a very good offense and their QB, always a very good player, is playing particularly well this year, apparently adapting well to the new OC's offense. This will be a real test for Giants defense. Steelers defense is ranked high statistically, so the Steelers should be a real tough match up, with both a proficient offense and a strong defense. However, they are 4-3 in a weaker AFC conference for a reason. For one thing, defensive statistics can be misleading, because they are so dependent on the overall flow of the game. We'll have to see how they do Sunday.
One holdover note from the Cowboys game: Canty played really well and the Giants defense badly missed him when he was out - I forgot how good he really was. He will be very important against the Steelers that have some questions about their interior OL. We all expected Marvin Austin to be a star and he has been barely seen, with Markus Kuhn getting in on the regular DL rotation and Austin hardly playing. When Bernard comes back and the Giants have Canty, Joseph, Bernard and Kuhn, Austin's role will diminish even more.
Thursday, November 1, 2012
Cowboys game review II
A few other observations about the game, some courtesy of my friend Ray:
Weatherford had an outstanding game with a net of 46.5 yards punting. He should also get some credit for the Bryant fumble, since he kicked it way over his head, made Bryant chase back for it to try a very difficult catch which he bobbled, never really secured and gave the Giants punt coverage team a chance to get downfield for the strip. Weatherford has been having an outstanding season; in fact he was excellent last year also, but this year he seems to be even better with more length to his punts. Jets genius ST coach Mike Westhoff (blocked punt, blocked FG and onside kick recovery against his unit by Dolphins last week) let him go two years ago and in fact really kicked him to the curb when he did so. He could have said something vanilla or nondescript when asked why they cut him, like we decided to go in a different direction. Instead, he went out of his way to explicitly say that there were performance issues, meaning he was just not a good punter. Since then, Weatherford has been excellent for the Giants and the Jets have had trouble finding a decent, consistent punter.
Some notes and analysis on the Bryant TD/reversal: I did not get a look at the entire field, but it looked like the Giants were not in the normal cover-2 shell that you would expect them to be at that point in the game. I say this because I saw S Sash underneath and Webster was running deep with Bryant. If they were in cover-2, Bryant would have had a S giving help on top. Witten stayed in to block and give max protect, and Giants did not blitz, which explains why Romo had time to throw. Bryant ran a double move on his side, out and up, to the sideline and then deep. With 16 seconds left in the game, it's hard to understand why Webster bit on the fake and let Bryant get behind him, but he did. Coe who was deep in the middle of the field came over to try and deflect the ball, had a clear shot at it but just whiffed on it. With all those things defensively going wrong for the Giants, it was lucky that Bryant has long fingers.
Speaking about defensive coaching - did you notice Coughlin running down the sidleline with about 1:30 left to call a timeout? It seems to me that Coughlin didn't like the defensive play call (it looked like Giants were showing blitz) and he was overruling the DC Fewell. Maybe the Giants just weren't lined up right on defense, but either way, that is DC Fewell's responsibility.
Romo threw 4 picks, but I have to say that not all were his fault. On the first by Stevie Brown, Bryant did not run a good route. The second was a bad decision/throw by Romo and a good play by Webster. The third was a great play by JPP, but Romo should get some blame. On his last pick, it was 4th down, he was being chased by the defense and had to make a low probability throw. If he throws it away, Giants get the ball anyway, so that was not a damaging INT. But the truth is Romo is a gambler and makes throws of high risk. Breaking down a particular throw and absolving him of blame misses the point. He takes chances, throwing some high risk passes and from a simple probability point of view, that results in INTs and some great plays.
This was an enormous swing game for the Giants, but mostly for the Cowboys. If the 'Boys had won they would be only 1 game behind the Giants in the loss column and would hold the tiebreaker of head-to-head sweep against them. Now, instead, the Giants are 2 up in the loss column and even in the head-to-head tiebreaker. With the Giants difficult schedule coming up, they could use the padding to their lead.
A note about schedule: the schedule for all the teams in the NFC East (as it is for every division) has 14 games that are identical for every team in the division and the remaining 2 that vary from team to team based on previous year's standings. Every team in the NFC East plays each other (6 games) and this year plays all 4 teams in the NFC South and the AFC North respectively. There are 2 games that are different for each team and determine whether one team's schedule is harder than the others. Each team in NFC East plays the team in the NFC West and the NFC North that finished in the same spot in the standings as they did last year. Let's call these games the "variable" games. Specifically, Giants play 49ers and Packers because they finished first in their divisions as the Giants did in theirs. The point that I am getting to is that the Cowboys already played their "variable" games against the Bears and the Seahawks and lost both. Similarly, the Eagles played both of their variable games against the Cardinals and Lions and also lost both. The Giants already won one of their variable games against the 49ers and still have the Packers at home. But even if they lose that game, they will be 1-up on the Cowboys and Eagles in those variable games and the rest of the schedule is identical. Giants may have a bunch of tough games in a row, but they have weathered the variable part of their schedule relative to their NFC East opponents.
One more interesting schedule note (thanks again to Ray for this one): Every intradivision game in the NFC East so far this season has involved the Giants. No NFC East played any other NFC East team this year, aside from NYG. This may be a simple quirk in the schedule, but it benefits the Giants. Because those NFC East teams will be playing each other, assuming no single team sweeps, they will all pile up some losses in their games, making the Giants first place position stronger.
Weatherford had an outstanding game with a net of 46.5 yards punting. He should also get some credit for the Bryant fumble, since he kicked it way over his head, made Bryant chase back for it to try a very difficult catch which he bobbled, never really secured and gave the Giants punt coverage team a chance to get downfield for the strip. Weatherford has been having an outstanding season; in fact he was excellent last year also, but this year he seems to be even better with more length to his punts. Jets genius ST coach Mike Westhoff (blocked punt, blocked FG and onside kick recovery against his unit by Dolphins last week) let him go two years ago and in fact really kicked him to the curb when he did so. He could have said something vanilla or nondescript when asked why they cut him, like we decided to go in a different direction. Instead, he went out of his way to explicitly say that there were performance issues, meaning he was just not a good punter. Since then, Weatherford has been excellent for the Giants and the Jets have had trouble finding a decent, consistent punter.
Some notes and analysis on the Bryant TD/reversal: I did not get a look at the entire field, but it looked like the Giants were not in the normal cover-2 shell that you would expect them to be at that point in the game. I say this because I saw S Sash underneath and Webster was running deep with Bryant. If they were in cover-2, Bryant would have had a S giving help on top. Witten stayed in to block and give max protect, and Giants did not blitz, which explains why Romo had time to throw. Bryant ran a double move on his side, out and up, to the sideline and then deep. With 16 seconds left in the game, it's hard to understand why Webster bit on the fake and let Bryant get behind him, but he did. Coe who was deep in the middle of the field came over to try and deflect the ball, had a clear shot at it but just whiffed on it. With all those things defensively going wrong for the Giants, it was lucky that Bryant has long fingers.
Speaking about defensive coaching - did you notice Coughlin running down the sidleline with about 1:30 left to call a timeout? It seems to me that Coughlin didn't like the defensive play call (it looked like Giants were showing blitz) and he was overruling the DC Fewell. Maybe the Giants just weren't lined up right on defense, but either way, that is DC Fewell's responsibility.
Romo threw 4 picks, but I have to say that not all were his fault. On the first by Stevie Brown, Bryant did not run a good route. The second was a bad decision/throw by Romo and a good play by Webster. The third was a great play by JPP, but Romo should get some blame. On his last pick, it was 4th down, he was being chased by the defense and had to make a low probability throw. If he throws it away, Giants get the ball anyway, so that was not a damaging INT. But the truth is Romo is a gambler and makes throws of high risk. Breaking down a particular throw and absolving him of blame misses the point. He takes chances, throwing some high risk passes and from a simple probability point of view, that results in INTs and some great plays.
This was an enormous swing game for the Giants, but mostly for the Cowboys. If the 'Boys had won they would be only 1 game behind the Giants in the loss column and would hold the tiebreaker of head-to-head sweep against them. Now, instead, the Giants are 2 up in the loss column and even in the head-to-head tiebreaker. With the Giants difficult schedule coming up, they could use the padding to their lead.
A note about schedule: the schedule for all the teams in the NFC East (as it is for every division) has 14 games that are identical for every team in the division and the remaining 2 that vary from team to team based on previous year's standings. Every team in the NFC East plays each other (6 games) and this year plays all 4 teams in the NFC South and the AFC North respectively. There are 2 games that are different for each team and determine whether one team's schedule is harder than the others. Each team in NFC East plays the team in the NFC West and the NFC North that finished in the same spot in the standings as they did last year. Let's call these games the "variable" games. Specifically, Giants play 49ers and Packers because they finished first in their divisions as the Giants did in theirs. The point that I am getting to is that the Cowboys already played their "variable" games against the Bears and the Seahawks and lost both. Similarly, the Eagles played both of their variable games against the Cardinals and Lions and also lost both. The Giants already won one of their variable games against the 49ers and still have the Packers at home. But even if they lose that game, they will be 1-up on the Cowboys and Eagles in those variable games and the rest of the schedule is identical. Giants may have a bunch of tough games in a row, but they have weathered the variable part of their schedule relative to their NFC East opponents.
One more interesting schedule note (thanks again to Ray for this one): Every intradivision game in the NFC East so far this season has involved the Giants. No NFC East played any other NFC East team this year, aside from NYG. This may be a simple quirk in the schedule, but it benefits the Giants. Because those NFC East teams will be playing each other, assuming no single team sweeps, they will all pile up some losses in their games, making the Giants first place position stronger.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)