News Archives

New York Giants Gloomy Tuesday Morning Storylines: Injuries Accrue, Eli Manning Questioned

November 13th, 2012 at 11:23 AM
By Simon Garron-Caine

'Eli Manning' photo (c) 2012, Mike Morbeck - license: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/ Man, what a dreadful day here in New York Giants land: it's grey and rainy outside, and we've got to mull over miserable storyline after miserable storyline, like "What's wrong with Eli Manning?" "How long will David Diehl play matador?" and "Between Domenik Hixon, Martellus Bennett and Ahmad Bradshaw, whose injury is worse?"

Without further ado, let's delve into this depressing pile of bad news. Let's start up top with the quarterback.

"What's wrong with Eli Manning?"

Depends on who you ask. Over at the Post, they're saying Tom Coughlin said there was far too much blame to go around for Eli to be at fault. Across town at the Daily News, Gary Meyers' column about the situation ran with the headline "Coughlin lays blame on Eli." And over at ESPN, Ohm Youngmisuk wrote that "Coughlin sees improvement in Eli." Go figure.

Honestly, we don't care enough to go back and listen to Coughlin's words and settle this week's New York back page semantics debate. Eli played pretty poorly (even he's not denying that), but there's not much you can do besides shrug it off and try to turn it around after the bye week.

Of course, if he doesn't turn it around people will keep asking about that shoulder.

"The Giants are back to being the walking wounded"

Okay, so Martellus Bennett (torn capsule, bruised ACL) will probably have to limp around the rest of the year, Ahmad Bradshaw (surprise, surprise) is back on the trainer's table getting "every test known to man," Domenik Hixon has one of those pesky high ankle sprains and Markus Kuhn will join Michael Coe on injured reserve.

Doesn't sound that bad, but Bear Pascoe, Travis Beckum, Ramses Barden, Justin Tryon and Marvin Austin all just bumped up one rung…and we've got a feeling that quite a few of you G101ers aren't too confident in at least a few of these names.

No word on how Kenny Phillips is doing and the Daily News notes that Jacquian Williams is aiming for a Week 12 return.

"Is Tom Coughlin loyal to a fault?"

This one's nothing new around here, but these questions are going to start getting some major play outside of G101 and our comments section if Ahmad Bradshaw and David Diehl aren't effectively replaced.

According to offensive line coach Pat Flaherty, Diehl will be "just fine" once the rust from his down time wears off. We're not buying that: Diehl has been trending down for years now, the offensive line was awful when he was in there early this season, much better without him, and is again trending down now that he's returned. He was awful last week.

As for Bradshaw, Gilbride did say that the lingering injuries are only part of the reason he split time with Andre Brown last week, so maybe the Giants are catching on here. Bradshaw complained that the Giants have been ignoring the running game, but if Bradshaw had to watch himself run right into defenders for no gain over and over again like we do, he might not be complaining.

For what it's worth, running backs coach Gerald Ingram said it was time "to grow up and be a man" for rookie running back David Wilson. To which we ask, how can we prove anything without being on the field?

"The New York Giants are still in first place"

The fact that the Giants are a game-and-a-half ahead of the Dallas Cowboys for first place in the division is about the only good thing Big Blue has going for them right now. Won't find much anybody talking about it though, because with the way the Giants have been playing a small lead like that can evaporate mighty quick.

Oh, yeah, and then there's this whole "Midseason Swoon" thing….

Here. Here. Here. Here (Hey, Mike Garafolo! Long time, no see!). Aaaaaaaand here.

Also…

Tags: Ahmad Bradshaw, Andre Brown, Dallas Cowboys, David Diehl, David Wilson, Domenik Hixon, Eli Manning, Football, Markus Kuhn, Martellus Bennett, New York, New York Giants, NFL, Tom Coughlin

No related posts.

16 Responses to “New York Giants Gloomy Tuesday Morning Storylines: Injuries Accrue, Eli Manning Questioned”

  1.  GOAT56 says:

    Repost:

    As much as it would be easier as a fan to take being 7-3 or 8-2 for our squad 6-4 might be for the best. Now we know the division is still in play and these games coming up we need to win. Thus having the bye at this time will force coaches to be more forceful in changes than they would have if we were in a better position. I doubt there will be as much change as many of us will like personnel wise. However, I do see some new plays and new players being mixed in a lot more. I really think a player like Jernigan can come out of nowhere to be decent contributor. I think watching the offense we all can see we need some more speed and quickness. Wilson is the answer that most come up with and while I don’t disagree I think Jernigan can some as well.

    I see some talk about Beckum. I guess for me Beckum is like how some feel about Barden. I don’t see why a defense when Beckum comes in the game wouldn’t play him like an extra WR. I don’t think he’s a better WR than our other options. Maybe I’m wrong. I think we have a group in which someone will step up and maybe that’s Beckum.

    I still think the main issue with our offense is that everything seems to be short or long. I think we need to attack the 10-20 yard area much more than we have. It appears teams want to take away the big play but that should leave open the medium play.

    Hopefully, the bye week helps Bennett because he can be a big answer in this offense. Unfortunately in reminds me of Ballard last year once he got hurt. Hopefully Bennett can show he’s closer to 100% after a week off.

    I think with KP back we can mirror many of the things we did at the end of last year. The key players will be Webster and Hosley. Prince is playing as well or better than Webster last year so the key is solid play from the others. Hosley with just moderate improvement should be better than Rolle in the slot. I think Hosley is due to make a play. Webster then just has to outplay Ross of last year. So far they are probably on par. But given Webster still will probably get the #1 WRs he has to step up. I think having a fresh Canty will help down these last 6 games. Remember he missed all of training camp and preseason so after the bye we should finally get to see him really ready for game action.

    I think the defense is close to being good. We are just missing a number of plays. I think healing another week and re-focusing on assignments can make a world of difference.

    Eli I think has to make slightly quicker decisions. He has to settle less for looking for the big play and more for the medium play. I’m not saying he needs to change who he is but I think he’s gotten a bit greedy because we had so much big play success.

  2.  GOAT56 says:

    “That’s what we saw on film, that if you get a lot of pressure in Manning’s face, he tends to short-arm some throws and just throw the ball up in the air,” Bengals nose tackle Domata Peko said. “We made him pay when he did that.”

    This is what Eli has to correct. He did last year but it seems like he’s reverted back to some bad habits.

  3.  kinsho says:

    Repost:

    TonyMW says:
    November 13, 2012 at 1:16 AM
    Unfortunately hits and hurries aren’t really an official stat thus making them somewhat inaccessible. It isn’t until after the season that some of the advanced stat sites compile lists containing that information. We’ll have to wait to get official numbers.

    For the time being, I can tell you that this year I am observing the same thing as I did last year. We’re getting the sacks, but we are NOT getting the pressure consistently. We literally hit Dalton 1 time. Anyway, to illustrate what I’m getting at, I found a list that was put together after last year and our seemingly “dominant” pass rush that racked up 48 sacks:

    http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2012/2011-pressure-plays-defense

    As you can see, sacks mean very little in terms of consistently pressuring opposing QB’s. Despite being at the top in terms of sacks, we’re very close to the bottom in terms of overall “pressure percentage”.

    TonyMW says:
    November 13, 2012 at 1:18 AM
    I obviously don’t have concrete numbers to back this up, but I’ll trust my eyes and my instinct on this one.

    Reply
    TonyMW says:
    November 13, 2012 at 9:23 AM
    I want to reiterate that I’m NOT saying last season has anything to do with this season (I know some on here like to point that out endlessly). I remember thinking that the pass rush was very hit or miss last season, and I ended up being proven right. I feel I’m seeing the same things thus far.

    •  kinsho says:

      Good argument that you brought up in that sacks do not necessarily equate to being able to consistently apply pressure.

      Sacks still do mean quite a bit in today’s football, and the Giants have been doing part than they were doing last year in terms of the pass rush. But yes, there’s no hard stat on the number of times we were able to successfully apply pressure. Even still, I do believe that one of the reasons why our team has been so proficient at racking up turnovers this year is our defensive line being to generate pressure at the right moments. Looking at the Redskins game, both Landfill and JPP were able to make a Redskins team not used to giving up the ball fumble twice.

      But you know, if the real question is whether the defensive line has lived up to its billing so far this season….well..that’s truly debateable. In fact, you’d probably have the edge in that argument given how bad the line was before the 49ers game.

      •  TonyMW says:

        Without a doubt sacks are very important. All I was trying to say is that I’d rather have 30 sacks and 100 QB hits then 45 sacks and 30 QB hits.

        I think the part that is debatable is if is if the Giants D-line is great or just good. I think we all can agree that they haven’t lived up to the hype they receive. If I didn’t know better, I’d think the was the greatest D-line ever assembled based off of everything I’ve heard the past few seasons.

        •  TonyMW says:

          Something else to ponder:

          While the Giants D-line is near the top in sacks per drop back (which is irrelevant in this discussion, no one is questioning our ability to get sacks), according to this metric they are 27th in terms of stopping the run. This also has to be a factor in determining how effective the D-line is.

          http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/dl

          •  kinsho says:

            Good thing you brought it up….I noticed that part and forgot to bring it up in my earlier post.

            Run blocking is something that should be used to assess the defensive front seven, not necessarily the defensive line alone. However, if you look at the stats on stuffing the run (which are primarily the domain of the defensive line) the Giants rank 12th. Not bad.

            What’s even better is the defense on power run blocking for 3rd/4th and short situations. It ranks 5th. Granted, in these situations, the linebackers usually stand further up front to assist the defensive line in these situations, so we can’t fully credit the line here for the high rank.

      •  kinsho says:

        Yeah, I’ll have to agree then. If giving up sacks means way more quarterback hits or hurry ups, I’d rather have that.

        •  TonyMW says:

          Also interesting is the fact that they are ranked 12th in “stuff” plays but near the bottom in both “open field” and “2nd level”. That tells me they are focused on getting to the QB and happen to make some plays on the ball carrier, but whiffing more often than not. In my opinion, that is also an indication of overall mediocre front 7 play.

          •  kinsho says:

            When we talk about the second level, we’re talking more about linebackers at this point. It’s primarily their responsibility to defend the flat.

  4.  TonyMW says:

    RT @ConorTOrr: Confirmed @JasonLaCanfora report Khalil Bell + Steve Slaton working out w/Jets. Bell also working out w/Giants per source.

  5.  kinsho says:

    Repost

    TonyMW says:
    November 13, 2012 at 9:20 AM
    My “jimmies” weren’t “rustled” until the 4th consecutive showing of poor play. Are you truly under the assumption that this the Bengals game was the first time they haven’t played well? Now I can understand why you’re “ok”….

    •  kinsho says:

      I think the Bengals game was the first game in which the whole team has not played well.

      As I keep saying, a huge issue here with the Giants is consistently. Some players come out to play, others don’t. For the Tampa Bay and Carolina games, the pass game was in full swing. For the 49ers and Browns games, the run game was great. For the Cowboys game and the Redskins game, the whole defense played well enough to cover up for the offense’s impotence. You can argue that our first Cowboys game and the Steelers game were bad games in that no one unit on the team really stood out, but I’d say they weren’t so bad considering we lost both games by a possession.

      This game was a real stinker. It was a blowout. It was a horrendous showing on all fronts, especially coaching. We were due one of these sooner or later anyway. Better now than later.

      •  kinsho says:

        “a huge issue here with the Giants is consistency” (not consistently)

        •  TonyMW says:

          The term “well” is highly subjective and all of this is about perception really. I personally don’t think the defense has performed very well for most of the season (turnovers not withstanding). The offense was playing good at the beginning of the season, and while the defense is outplaying the offense CURRENTLY, that doesn’t say much.

          My only point here is that you didn’t say “When the offense puts up a stinker” or “When the defense puts up a stinker”. You said the “Giants”. I take that as a team effort. When one side of the ball has to consistently bail out the other, whichever is which, that’s a poor team performance in my mind. Regardless of win or loss.

          •  kinsho says:

            That really is the fundamental difference here. When I say the team put up a real stinker, I mean the WHOLE team put up a poor performance, including the coaching. That stings all the more considering how badly blown out we were before the 4th quarter even began.

            Every team has one of these games where they just plain suck. Even the Packers last year ended up playing like duds against the Chiefs in their one and only regular season loss. What’s worse is that the Chiefs weren’t playing well at all up until that game; they were actually dominated by the Jets the week before.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Login with: