Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Mr. Matt

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
Big Blue Huddle / Re: Vernon Not At OTAs
« on: May 28, 2017, 10:41:31 PM »
It's becoming almost unbearable around here.

I thought this was supposed to be a forum for the "best informed fans" to have intelligent discussions.

Insightful posts with great information about the team, history, or x's and o's are generally ignored while threads where people spout off about baseless theories surrounding celebrity soap opera nonsense go on for pages.

Not my interest. But I think Uconnjack brings up a good point worth considering.
Big Blue Huddle / Re: Can the Giants keep injuries down again?
« on: May 21, 2017, 11:05:11 PM »
After leading the NFL with injuries two years in a row, the law of a averages was bound to happen in 2016.  I agree with Painter - there is nothing you can do about torn ACLs, linemen getting rolled up on, hamstring pulls, lis franc or foot injuries etc.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It was three, that's 3 years in a row. In 30 previously analyzed years, no team had ever led the league in games lost to injury twice in a row. For a team to do it three years in a row indicates a significant pattern.

Luck? Law of averages? I'm not so sure.

If the Giants had been last in the league in anything else for three straight years, then changed coaches or tactics related to that thing, and improved to 7th in the league, how would that be viewed?
Big Blue Huddle / Re: Weekend Mailbag: Call for Questions
« on: May 20, 2017, 02:43:43 PM »
What do those inside the Giants organization think was the reason why they were dismantled in the Green Bay playoff game? All their games had been close up to that point, and the defense never unraveled like that. Was it a reflection of a deeper issue Green Bay unmasked which other teams may exploit this season?
Big Blue Huddle / Re: Who is the strongest player you've ever seen?
« on: May 20, 2017, 09:53:48 AM »
Chris Snee had incredible strength, both in the gym and on the field. Pound-for-pound my answer is Joe Morris. I believe he was 5-9/190 and carried the load as a N-S power runner. Never seen the likes of him since.
From the week 14 Monday Night victory over Dallas:

Big Blue Huddle / Re: 538 believes running the ball overrated.
« on: May 15, 2017, 03:58:20 PM »
So, since this article is statistical analysis, it limits itself to a specific criteria. That criteria is yards gained.

Some things relevant to a comparison of the effectiveness of run v. pass would be points scored, time of possession, points scored/yards gained against, turnovers, and wins and losses.

The value of having a strong running game is evident for winning teams because it has secondary and tertiary benefits beyond gaining yards:
1. Holding the ball and keeping it away from your opponent, limiting their opportunities to score, keeping your defense fresh, and wearing down their defenders
2. The physical toll a strong running game takes on the opponent, testing their players strength and will to win
3. Limiting turnovers which alter the flow of the game and give opponents additional opportunities to score.
4. Making your passing game even more effective by inc r easing the probability of big plays when defenders have to respect the run
5. Making it easier to score touchdowns to end drives when the field is shorter and the passing game is easier to defend.
Well done Rich.

As we saw with Coughlin, I think young men's expectations of how they should be treated by a coach have changed over time. There is an ethic in the "millennial" generation of respect being a two-way street, and screaming, yelling, and punishment are seen as signs of weakness and disrespect rather than strength. However, accountability is key. Players need to feel responsible to themselves and each other, and a part of a collective with a shared goal.

Parcells always said that his motivational abilities were overblown, rather he had a good eye for chosing self-motivated people to be on his teams. Look at the guys the Giants added last year, and you'll see a bunch of self-motivated guys who also hold themselves, and teammates accountable.
Big Blue Huddle / Re: Mike Sullivan on OTs Hart and Flowers
« on: May 12, 2017, 04:07:16 PM »
The fact that Sullivan repeated his "Frank Air" joke twice, juse to make sure everyone got it, struck me pretty funny.
Just listening now. You guys did a good job. The sound quality is getting better each episode, and I think Ed's radio voice is really coming into its own on the intro!

Big Blue Huddle / Re: WR Brandon Marshall on Ben McAdoo
« on: May 10, 2017, 08:04:52 AM »
I like McAdoo so far. He's not perfect, and he's not Coughlin, but he doesn't need to be, he can chart his own course.

As far as this praise from Marshall, I'd take it with a grain of salt. One of the characteristics of BPD is having inflated opinions of the new -- new job, new girlfriend, new home, whatever -- that all come crashing down to a very pessimistic view at the first sign of adversity.
The Bean Bag incident raises a red flag.

It certainly seems to have been an incidence of poor judgment. But now that we've all welcomed a man with multiple domestic violence arrests to the team, I suppose the official policy of BBH is that we, by virtual consensus, believe strongly in second, or ninth, chances.
Fluker was pursued by many teams.  He came to the Giants only accepting a one year deal to "improve his stock" so he could generate a big payday off a good year.  Apparently San Diego did not pick up his 5th year option because they are one of many teams that are hesitant to sign guards and interior linemen to big contracts. Bill Polian used to always say that he would never sign interior linemen for huge dollars because you can fill those positions with cheaper players. As we saw by his PFF Scores, Fluker is a solid guard in this league.  He was hardly a flop in San Diego, just not the "great player" that they envisioned when they drafted him so high.

As I understand it, those solid scores were in his rookie and second year at RT, actually. From what I've read, he struggled more at guard because he is not quick enough to get out and block LBs when asked.

However, I've never watched him so if you have studied him I would defer to your judgment.
I think another big factor was the wideouts- OBJ was not "new" anymore and teams had more of a chance to gameplan for him.  Plus Cruz being MIA and not having another established receiver to pick up the slack, hurt.

Beckham's production has dropped off each year. It's something that is not really talked about, because the things he can still do are so phenomenal. But he has entered the stage of his career where the book on him has been written.

What's more, McAdoo made some necessary changes in 2014, and after a bumpy start, the offense started to function well. That corresponded to Beckham coming back from and injury and erupting.

I think what you saw last year was a combination of the league having enough experience defending Beckham, and enough tape on McAdoo's tendencies, that they were able to defend a little better. I also believe they may have asked Eli to do too much last year. Eli is a great QB, and one of my favorite Giants of all time, but he is not a pure passing talent along the lines of Aaron Rodgers or Peyton. He has to be put in positions to succeed, and he doesn't always understand his own limitations. I have a sense that Coughlin understood how to set Eli up better than McAdoo did.

What the Giants need now is for a new element of their offense to remove that will take attention and pressure off the Beckham-Eli connection. They have given themselves some good options for that this year. Could it be second year guys like Perkins or Shepard taking a step forward? Or maybe Marshall will have a great year? Or what if Engram is a rookie star? Four good possibilities that could put opponents in a game-planning bind. Think about the Giants most successful years offensively in recent memory, they have all involved a surprise element emerging. No matter how good you are, NFL coaches will figure out ways to limit you if you stay the same for very long.
Fun exercise, I think you have the top 2 receiver's roles mixed up:

Marshall is the X, the Jennings/Javon Walker/Terrell Owens/ John Taylor/Dwight Clark role. He lines up on the line of scrimmage and can beat jams with his hands.

Beckham is the Z, the Donald Driver/Jerry Rice role. He lines up off the line of scrimmage to avoid jams and runs timing routes where he can utilize his speed after the catch if the pass is delivered on time.
Big Blue Huddle / Re: Jerry Reese, former scout
« on: May 04, 2017, 08:19:16 PM »
Rich, I appreciate you sharing this guy's perspective, and I agree with many of your long-standing criticisms about the Reese regime's roster-building tendencies. What I don't agree with is your opinion that he doesn't have an overarching vision. I think he has a clear one and is very just happens to be one many of us don't like or disagree with.

I'm going to quote myself from the last time we discussed this:
To all those worried about the money/salary cap implications, here are roster priorities in the Accorsi/Reese philosophy:

1. Quarterback
2. Pass rushers
3. Offensive "playmakers" (mostly WR, occasionally a RB)
4. Cornerbacks

Way down on a second tier: DT, S, OL
Third tier: TE, RB, Special teamers
Fourth tier: LB

Reese, like Accorsi before him, believes that you need a great QB, and defensive linemen to disrupt the opponents' QBs. He believes offensive playmakers make big plays for their great QBs, and that cornerbacks prevent opponent's playmakers from making game-changing plays.

He believes deficits elsewhere on the roster, like on the OL or at LB, can be overcome by focusing resources on the above positions. He thinks this kind of unevenness is smart in a salary-cap era. His viewpoint is validated because he won two titles with this type of roster.

I don't like this philosophy. I grew up with George Young and Parcells and their belief in strong OLs and defensive front 7s, where "dancing elephants" and dudes with big butts were put up on pedestals and WRs were "shiny hood ornaments." But we've been in a different era for a long time, and if you look at the evidence, you'll see that since 1998, the team has been remarkably consistent in following the priorities I listed above in how they build the roster and allot resources.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10