dockeryfan Posted November 2, 2009 Share Posted November 2, 2009 OK, so basically to me, this says that NY did keep a back in or a TE in to help the Tackles. lol. You have some comprehension problems if that's what it says to you. 3 times the tackles had TE help and 5 times they had RB help. 8 out of 36. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Posted November 2, 2009 Share Posted November 2, 2009 I have it on tape, I'll go back and chart the plays and post it sometime tonight. I don't have any faith that the beat writers have any clue of what it is that they are looking at to be honest... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABQCOWBOY Posted November 2, 2009 Share Posted November 2, 2009 lol. You have some comprehension problems if that's what it says to you.3 times the tackles had TE help and 5 times they had RB help. 8 out of 36. The article says that out of 39 drops, the Giants tackles locked up one on one 20 times. Who has comprehension problems here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeHateMe Posted November 2, 2009 Share Posted November 2, 2009 A Falcons fan last week. A Seahawks fan yesterday. An Eagles fan this week. tr1's fascination with birds continues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeHateMe Posted November 2, 2009 Share Posted November 2, 2009 It was the Giants. They're in a tailspin. You sound like Bart Scott. No credit to the Eagles dominating performance at all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeHateMe Posted November 2, 2009 Share Posted November 2, 2009 Got to give credit to Doncherry and TRPB for manning up and making a prediction. I give the rest of the puke posters credit for providing entertainment. IMHO, tough game to call. The Birds are beatable and it is early in November with the Pukes playing well. The Pukes need to contain the Eagle big plays and don't let them get up early. Romo sits to pee needs to step up and make plays. This is not a big game with a lot of the season left to play so the pressure is not on him as it will be later. Philly wins a close one. Dallas gets the game in Arlington. As well as Dallas has been playing the last month, the Eagles look darn good and more importantly, their WRs have emerged. Gonna be a long day if Dallas can't pressure McNabb into some mistakes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Blue Joe Posted November 2, 2009 Share Posted November 2, 2009 You sound like Bart Scott.No credit to the Eagles dominating performance at all? It was the third dominating performance the Giants have been on the losing side of in three weeks. The Giants are starting to approach once in decade team defensive lows. When does it become OK to say that the Giants aren't playing well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OWUeagleMD Posted November 2, 2009 Share Posted November 2, 2009 Peters shouldn't be left alone with Ware. But it's patently absurd to say the Eagles are in the same situation with pro bowler Jason Peters as they are with seventh round stiff King Dunlop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeHateMe Posted November 2, 2009 Share Posted November 2, 2009 You need to rewatch the Giants game. Not only were their tackles successful against Ware, but on a few occasions tight ends handled him one-on-one.DEN Bronco Ryan Clady didn't seem to have much trouble with him either. Since the bye week, he's been a completely different player. Not sure what happened exactly, but he's been dominating since. He'll get to McNabb, sack him once, maybe twice and I can even picture a forced fumble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mooka Posted November 2, 2009 Share Posted November 2, 2009 Depends on how hot Philly is after the total butt-whipping they put on NY yesterday. Its very rare for McNabb to be able to pick you apart from the pocket, but the Giants had severe problems in their coverages. I think Dallas will pull away in the 2nd half like they always do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABQCOWBOY Posted November 2, 2009 Share Posted November 2, 2009 It was the third dominating performance the Giants have been on the losing side of in three weeks. The Giants are starting to approach once in decade team defensive lows. When does it become OK to say that the Giants aren't playing well? I think it's OK to say that when all of your guys are back healthy and your still playing at the levels you are playing now. Until then, it's a live to fight another day kinda thing. That's what the NFL season is. Your not going to be at the top of your game the whole year. If you get 10 good games and 5 bad, that's a good season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABQCOWBOY Posted November 2, 2009 Share Posted November 2, 2009 Peters shouldn't be left alone with Ware. But it's patently absurd to say the Eagles are in the same situation with pro bowler Jason Peters as they are with seventh round stiff King Dunlop. I'm not sure anybody is suggesting that. I am certain that regardless of which is playing on Sunday, it's probably a mistake not to give them help. As I said earlier, I think it comes down to the Eagles OL vs the Cowboys DL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Posted November 2, 2009 Share Posted November 2, 2009 The article says that out of 39 drops, the Giants tackles locked up one on one 20 times. Who has comprehension problems here? What I will do is then breakdown those 20 times and see what really happened. Did he get stonewalled, was it a rollout away from ware, was it a quick throw, did he hit the qb... all of these things are important. Stats can say anything you want, unless they are in perspective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Blue Joe Posted November 3, 2009 Share Posted November 3, 2009 Oh yeah, I almost forgot to say: GO COWBOYS!!! :puke: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dockeryfan Posted November 3, 2009 Share Posted November 3, 2009 OK, so basically to me, this says that NY did keep a back in or a TE in to help the Tackles. lol. You have some comprehension problems if that's what it says to you.3 times the tackles had TE help and 5 times they had RB help. 8 out of 36. The article says that out of 39 drops, the Giants tackles locked up one on one 20 times. Who has comprehension problems here? Yep. Still you, lol. I don't know how you are believing that there was this magical help from the backs and TEs. The tackles were handling him one-on-one for the most part. 39 dropbacks 20 one-on-one 3 TE help 5 RB help 3 going one-on-one against the TEs 4 times dropped into coverage. 1 TE+RB+Tackle Your statement that NY had to have the TEs and RBs help is way off base. They only did so like 23% of the time. Then you accuse me of reading comprehension. Joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordac Posted November 3, 2009 Share Posted November 3, 2009 Well, this isn't a diss, but Ware really didn't show up much in the first 3 or 4 games. I think I heard yesterday he has 5 sacks in his last 3 games, tho. The key to this game for the Cowboys is going to be defending the pass. If their DBs can stay with Jackson and Maclin long enough for the rush to get to McNabb, they've got a chance. There will probably be some big plays in both directions. The team that makes the most (or gives up the fewest) probably wins. I know, deep insight, huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Jones Posted November 3, 2009 Share Posted November 3, 2009 Oh yeah, I almost forgot to say: GO COWBOYS!!!:puke: You can say those two bad words on your Big Blue site, but those words are not uttered on this site. The appropriate words to use are edited in the title of the thread at the top of the main ATN page just in case you needed a refresher. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
esloan Posted November 3, 2009 Share Posted November 3, 2009 I think.... Oh hell, I am not sure what to think. 1. Both teams have played poorly against bad teams. Eagles lost to the Raiders, Cowboys needed overtime to put away the Chiefs. 2. Both teams have played great against good teams. Eagles obliterated the Giants, Cowboys destroyed the Falcons. 3. Both teams have traded losses/wins in the last two seasons. The record for the two teams is 2-2 over the last two seasons. No matter how you view it, it's pretty close. I think if the Cowboys can control Jackson and get pressure on McNabb they can pull out a win. I'm gonna call it 21-17 Dallas but it should be a good game no matter what. I will say that whoever wins this game will probably lose the next meeting between the two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeHateMe Posted November 3, 2009 Share Posted November 3, 2009 It was the third dominating performance the Giants have been on the losing side of in three weeks. The Giants are starting to approach once in decade team defensive lows. When does it become OK to say that the Giants aren't playing well? They may not be playing well. And Eli had the worst game I've seen him have in a long time. Not even close to resembling the quality QB he is. That said, the Eagles brought their A game yesterday, and even though the Giants were off, had they even played a lot better, the Eagles were still winning that game. And Arizona also played a darn good game vs. New York the week before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeMarco Murray 29 Posted November 3, 2009 Share Posted November 3, 2009 Well, this isn't a diss, but Ware really didn't show up much in the first 3 or 4 games. I think I heard yesterday he has 5 sacks in his last 3 games, tho.The key to this game for the Cowboys is going to be defending the pass. If their DBs can stay with Jackson and Maclin long enough for the rush to get to McNabb, they've got a chance. There will probably be some big plays in both directions. The team that makes the most (or gives up the fewest) probably wins. I know, deep insight, huh? As simple as it seems, you are exactly right. The game boils down to can the Dallas secondary contain the Eagles Receivers. The Eagles will run and score. Dallas will run and score. But the key ingredient is can McNabb and his Receivers have a big day? If they do, Philly wins. If Dallas can shut down Jackson and the Receivers I think Dallas takes this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABQCOWBOY Posted November 3, 2009 Share Posted November 3, 2009 Yep. Still you, lol. I don't know how you are believing that there was this magical help from the backs and TEs. The tackles were handling him one-on-one for the most part.39 dropbacks 20 one-on-one 3 TE help 5 RB help 3 going one-on-one against the TEs 4 times dropped into coverage. 1 TE+RB+Tackle Your statement that NY had to have the TEs and RBs help is way off base. They only did so like 23% of the time. Then you accuse me of reading comprehension. Joke. I am content to see what Ken sees. As I said earlier, the statement that NY locked up on Ware 20 times one on one doesn't mean that they didn't keep a back in just in case or that they didn't shade a TE just in case. It means that on 20 snaps, the OT didn't need assistance. I don't expect an NFL Pro OT to get beaten every single passing down. That's not reasonable. However, if a team is forced to give help on half the passing plays they run, then it's reasonable to say that they doubled him IMO. If that's not yours, fine. If you believe I'm way off base, fine. People can judge for themselves. It's not like everybody doesn't know Ware is a beast. It's just you that has an issue with the idea it seems. Not a big deal in my mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kapolani Posted November 3, 2009 Share Posted November 3, 2009 They may not be playing well. And Eli had the worst game I've seen him have in a long time. Not even close to resembling the quality QB he is. Was/is he really a quality QB? Or, is he suffering the "no TO" syndrome with Plax gone? It's amazing how far he has regressed. That throw to Samuel that sealed the deal had no explanation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Blue Joe Posted November 3, 2009 Share Posted November 3, 2009 Was/is he really a quality QB?Or, is he suffering the "no TO" syndrome with Plax gone? Eli had a 91 QBR in the games he played without Plax last year, and he has an 86 QBR through 8 games this season.That throw to Samuel that sealed the deal had no explanation.That was excellent scouting by Samuel. That play was one the Giants have run successfully on several occasions. And the particular route that Beckum ran had worked fairly well against zone coverage (which is what the Eagles were in). Samuel read the play, knew exactly what route Beckum was going to run, and beat him to the spot. The Giants have become very predictable in recent weeks; teams are starting to read them like a book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABQCOWBOY Posted November 3, 2009 Share Posted November 3, 2009 Eli had a 91 QBR in the games he played without Plax last year, and he has an 86 QBR through 8 games this season. I don't see Eli play every week but it seems to me that since the injury to his foot, he hasn't been the same. He just doesn't seem like he has the same mobility in the pocket. It looks to me like he's trying to make more plays with his arm. His accuracy has fallen way off. Mechanics just look poor to me. Perhaps one of you Giants fans can confirm or deny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OWUeagleMD Posted November 3, 2009 Share Posted November 3, 2009 Eli had a 91 QBR in the games he played without Plax last year, and he has an 86 QBR through 8 games this season. McNabb's QB rating is over 100 and he just played his first good game of the year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.