After watching NE and other teams successfully use  the hurry up offense at different times in the game,  and considering the fact that Eli has been successful in his limited use of the hurry up, I think KG and TC have their heads up there backsides for stubbornly refusing to integrate some form of the hurry up in the Giants offensive schemes. And not with 1 minute left before halftime or when the game is hopelessly out of reach..

As long as NE has Brady and Belechick, they will continue chugging along and heading to the Superbowl no matter which supporting players they have. That team is a well oiled machine. But yes, I agree with you. TC and KG are extremely pigheaded when it comes to making modifications. Which is why we settle for 3 points most of the time we're in the redzone.

Can you say " slow to adapt ".

ordinaryG wrote: Can you say " slow to adapt ".

Yup, I think it is pronounced, "Two SuperBowls."

mrc72 wrote: As long as NE has Brady and Belechick, they will continue chugging along and heading to the Superbowl no matter which supporting players they have. That team is a well oiled machine. But yes, I agree with you. TC and KG are extremely pigheaded when it comes to making modifications. Which is why we settle for 3 points most of the time we're in the redzone.

Why would you post something that is factually wrong when it is so easy to check?

We converted 55% of the time in the red zone, same as last year.  We may not e the best in th keague but for several years now we have been in the top half of the league.

It's amazing how much of a machine Brady is when he gets on a roll.   Unfortunately.....Wade Phillips just doesn't have any answers for the Pats offense within his scheme.    Not than many teams do.....but it is pretty crazy how effective they are.   


Yeah Tupp, it wouldn't be bad to see us push on the gas once in a while and see if teams could keep up with us.   Instead.....we tend to be the masters of snapping the ball with one second left.    

The Ravens/Pats game will be interesting next week.   Tough game to choose a team to root for.    I'm easily Ray Lewis'd out........but I'm also tired of the Patriots being in the Super Bowl.    Can the Ravens get revenge for last year's improbable finish?

CAGiantFan wrote:

mrc72 wrote: As long as NE has Brady and Belechick, they will continue chugging along and heading to the Superbowl no matter which supporting players they have. That team is a well oiled machine. But yes, I agree with you. TC and KG are extremely pigheaded when it comes to making modifications. Which is why we settle for 3 points most of the time we're in the redzone.

Why would you post something that is factually wrong when it is so easy to check?

We converted 55% of the time in the red zone, same as last year.  We may not e the best in th keague but for several years now we have been in the top half of the league.

We were also ranked third overall in field goal attempts per game. How many of those field goals were the result of a drive in which we had to settle for a FG instead of a TD?

Regarding redzone efficiency, including the Giants there were 24 teams in 2012 whose percentage was 50% or higher. And there were 12 teams who were better than us in redzone efficiency including the Miami Dolphins, Carolina Panthers, and Tampa Bay Buccaneers. Great. Unfortunately when we played against good teams such as the Ravens and Falcons, when we needed it most, our redzone effciency was on life support.

I don't think it's asking too much to want to see more creativity with this offense instead of being so damn predictable...

the pats also have far more weapons on offense that the Giants.

olderfan wrote: the pats also have far more weapons on offense that the Giants.

I dont think thats true, but I do feel that the Pats alter their game plans around the players, where the Giants wont use a player till they fit into their gameplans, Wilson is a great case and point to this, he was a weapon that was seldom used because he wasnt ready for KGs system.  What I think some teams do better then the Giants is coming up with plays tailored to a players skillsets.

CgkenBMC wrote:

olderfan wrote: the pats also have far more weapons on offense that the Giants.

I dont think thats true, but I do feel that the Pats alter their game plans around the players, where the Giants wont use a player till they fit into their gameplans, Wilson is a great case and point to this, he was a weapon that was seldom used because he wasnt ready for KGs system.  What I think some teams do better then the Giants is coming up with plays tailored to a players skillsets.

+1  The Giants use injured starters rather than healthy backups a lot.  The Pats use a lot more of their roster at game time than the Giants do.  We are "developing" players instead of playing them.  What a concept - get more players involved and maybe someone unexpected will make some plays.

Tupperlake wrote: After watching NE and other teams successfully use  the hurry up offense at different times in the game,  and considering the fact that Eli has been successful in his limited use of the hurry up, I think KG and TC have their heads up there backsides for stubbornly refusing to integrate some form of the hurry up in the Giants offensive schemes. And not with 1 minute left before halftime or when the game is hopelessly out of reach..

I agree. Why the no huddle isn't used more often is beyond me.

I think this is a great topic and something I have been thinking for a long time.  We need to incorporate some speed into our offense.  It doesn't mean we have to play no huddle, but it means hurry up and move the chains.  NE is excellent at this and has been for years.  I believe we have most of the personnel required for this type of effort.

A good example is this, it's 4 and 1 and you know you are going for, well lets hustle up, get to the line, and snap the ball quickly before the DEF can dig in.  The Giants would run down the entire play clock with motions and signal calls, etc.  Snap the ball quickly before the DEF can get in perfect position.

Basically we just need to play faster on OFF.  Look at how many points were going up on the board this past weekend.  I'm hopeful the coaching staff is paying attention.

Actually pretty much all of the playoff teams use the no huddle fairly effectively. We've seen Eli run it to perfection a ton of times, so it really bugs me that we don't break it out a little bit each game. You don't have to do it all game like the Broncos Manning read offense, but more than the predictable times.

RTPGiants wrote: Actually pretty much all of the playoff teams use the no huddle fairly effectively. We've seen Eli run it to perfection a ton of times, so it really bugs me that we don't break it out a little bit each game. You don't have to do it all game like the Broncos Manning read offense, but more than the predictable times.

Exactly.  You don't have to use the hurry up to take risks or heave the ball down field. Lets us it to keep the chains moving on a more consistent basis.  When def get back on their heels, it's not that difficult to pick up first downs.

CAGiantFan wrote:

ordinaryG wrote: Can you say " slow to adapt ".

Yup, I think it is pronounced, "Two SuperBowls."

...and 2 Superbowl victories over the GREAT Brady/Bellichick combination no less.

mrc72 wrote:

CAGiantFan wrote:

mrc72 wrote: As long as NE has Brady and Belechick, they will continue chugging along and heading to the Superbowl no matter which supporting players they have. That team is a well oiled machine. But yes, I agree with you. TC and KG are extremely pigheaded when it comes to making modifications. Which is why we settle for 3 points most of the time we're in the redzone.

Why would you post something that is factually wrong when it is so easy to check?

We converted 55% of the time in the red zone, same as last year.  We may not e the best in th keague but for several years now we have been in the top half of the league.

We were also ranked third overall in field goal attempts per game. How many of those field goals were the result of a drive in which we had to settle for a FG instead of a TD?

Regarding redzone efficiency, including the Giants there were 24 teams in 2012 whose percentage was 50% or higher. And there were 12 teams who were better than us in redzone efficiency including the Miami Dolphins, Carolina Panthers, and Tampa Bay Buccaneers. Great. Unfortunately when we played against good teams such as the Ravens and Falcons, when we needed it most, our redzone effciency was on life support.

I don't think it's asking too much to want to see more creativity with this offense instead of being so damn predictable...

Is that your way of saying "yes, my bolded statement was wrong"?

CAGiantFan wrote:

mrc72 wrote:

CAGiantFan wrote:

mrc72 wrote: As long as NE has Brady and Belechick, they will continue chugging along and heading to the Superbowl no matter which supporting players they have. That team is a well oiled machine. But yes, I agree with you. TC and KG are extremely pigheaded when it comes to making modifications. Which is why we settle for 3 points most of the time we're in the redzone.

Why would you post something that is factually wrong when it is so easy to check?

We converted 55% of the time in the red zone, same as last year.  We may not e the best in th keague but for several years now we have been in the top half of the league.

We were also ranked third overall in field goal attempts per game. How many of those field goals were the result of a drive in which we had to settle for a FG instead of a TD?

Regarding redzone efficiency, including the Giants there were 24 teams in 2012 whose percentage was 50% or higher. And there were 12 teams who were better than us in redzone efficiency including the Miami Dolphins, Carolina Panthers, and Tampa Bay Buccaneers. Great. Unfortunately when we played against good teams such as the Ravens and Falcons, when we needed it most, our redzone effciency was on life support.

I don't think it's asking too much to want to see more creativity with this offense instead of being so damn predictable...

Is that your way of saying "yes, my bolded statement was wrong"?

It's my way of saying often times when the Giants made trips into the redzone and needed a TD (sans the 2 minute drill when they're usually very good due to Eli's comeback ability) they appeared to settle for a FG due to predicatable playcalling. We can go back and forth on this all day long but it's meaningless really. You're defending Gilbride's playcalling by quoting a statistic and i'm basically saying stats aside there is room for improvement because Gilbride becomes very predictable throughout the course of a game. I don't feel like pouring over stats or getting into a pissing contest over this. Let's just say we agree to disagree and leave it at that...

mrc72 wrote:

CAGiantFan wrote:

mrc72 wrote:

CAGiantFan wrote:

mrc72 wrote: As long as NE has Brady and Belechick, they will continue chugging along and heading to the Superbowl no matter which supporting players they have. That team is a well oiled machine. But yes, I agree with you. TC and KG are extremely pigheaded when it comes to making modifications. Which is why we settle for 3 points most of the time we're in the redzone.

Why would you post something that is factually wrong when it is so easy to check?

We converted 55% of the time in the red zone, same as last year.  We may not e the best in th keague but for several years now we have been in the top half of the league.

We were also ranked third overall in field goal attempts per game. How many of those field goals were the result of a drive in which we had to settle for a FG instead of a TD?

Regarding redzone efficiency, including the Giants there were 24 teams in 2012 whose percentage was 50% or higher. And there were 12 teams who were better than us in redzone efficiency including the Miami Dolphins, Carolina Panthers, and Tampa Bay Buccaneers. Great. Unfortunately when we played against good teams such as the Ravens and Falcons, when we needed it most, our redzone effciency was on life support.

I don't think it's asking too much to want to see more creativity with this offense instead of being so damn predictable...

Is that your way of saying "yes, my bolded statement was wrong"?

It's my way of saying often times when the Giants made trips into the redzone and needed a TD (sans the 2 minute drill when they're usually very good due to Eli's comeback ability) they appeared to settle for a FG due to predicatable playcalling. We can go back and forth on this all day long but it's meaningless really. You're defending Gilbride's playcalling by quoting a statistic and i'm basically saying stats aside there is room for improvement because Gilbride becomes very predictable throughout the course of a game. I don't feel like pouring over stats or getting into a pissing contest over this. Let's just say we agree to disagree and leave it at that...

No, I'm not defending anything, I'm challenging a FACTUALLY WRONG statement.  You said "most of the time" we settle for a field goal and that is just wrong.  All of the rest is just your deflection.  And I an not going to agree to disagree about whether your statement was factually wrong.  Because it just was.  Facts are stubborn things.  Maybe you really meant to say something else, but you didn't.

And, BTW, since you cite some lousy teams that did better in the red zone than we did, there were 5 of the 12 playoff teams that didn't do as well in the red zone as we did.  Just sayin'.

And isn't it interesting that Gilbride takes a hit for being in the top half in red zone success yet Fewell gets NO CREDIT for being in the top 4 in red zone defense?

VAJim wrote: I think this is a great topic and something I have been thinking for a long time.  We need to incorporate some speed into our offense.  It doesn't mean we have to play no huddle, but it means hurry up and move the chains.  NE is excellent at this and has been for years.  I believe we have most of the personnel required for this type of effort.

A good example is this, it's 4 and 1 and you know you are going for, well lets hustle up, get to the line, and snap the ball quickly before the DEF can dig in.  The Giants would run down the entire play clock with motions and signal calls, etc.  Snap the ball quickly before the DEF can get in perfect position.

Basically we just need to play faster on OFF.  Look at how many points were going up on the board this past weekend.  I'm hopeful the coaching staff is paying attention.

Overall, you are correct.  The one thing you brought up also points out a problem with the Giants.  Gilbride takes to damn long to send the play in and the Giants only have 10-12 seconds to line up and let Eli read the coverages and make adjustments to the point where there is only 2 seconds left to get rhe snap off.  Its annoying to see the Giants have to waste a timeout because of this during games.  The Giants can move at a faster pacer, but I don't know why the don't take advantage of that.  Go no huddle for a drive or two during games.  It can't freaking hurt.

No, KG forgot that no huddle stuff,even when they needed to hurry to catch up in the games. Eli is really good at the no huddle and IMO it should be used alot more. Unless they thought the defense was in need of more rest between possessions?