Pyper's Post Game Analysis - NYG

[Garbanza]

Re: Pyper's Postseason Game 4 Analysis

Chung was definitely doing things he wouldn't be asked to do in the regular season (at least until he develops more). Coming out of college he was thought to be awful in coverage, so it's not a surprise. Hopefully he can learn a few things and be more comfortable in that area next year

I have a question. Why draft a safety that is AWFUL in coverage? This is the NFL, you know.

 

[italia44]

Re: Pyper's Postseason Game 4 Analysis

I have a question. Why draft a safety that is AWFUL in coverage? This is the NFL, you know.

jeez.....chung was a safety in college...watch the rerun of the game last nite.I dvr'd it,,,,,he actually played pretty good..
When he's playing safety,he's squared-up on the receiver,hits hard and is much more confident.

All the rooks are having trouble with the pats rotating zone coverage scheme.......that's why they're out there.....and that's why Pees is running it.

i remember when they put Meriweather at CB,as a rookie,and he looked awfull,They don't play these kind of schemes in college.

I'll tell you what you should be lloking at:
The DL and LB's are getting serious pressure on the opposing QB's......even the backups,last nite,looked well-coached and confident.

Across the board,the red-zone defense has been terrific....they could have had 6 int's in the last 2 preseason games.

In preseason.....I don't care what happens between the twenties....I do care what happens in the red zone and that defense looks confident,energized and primed for the home opener.

Oh........and Coughlin is a D-ckhead for playing his starters like that,in the first half.

 

[mcmurtry86]

Re: Pyper's Postseason Game 4 Analysis

Oh........and Coughlin is a D-ckhead for playing his starters like that,in the first half.

A lot of teams did/do that. Don't see how he's a "********" for wanting to get his starting players some more reps. He obviously didn't do it to run up the score on the Pats.

 

[Ring 6]

I liked what I saw out there tonight.

Positives:
1) Hoyer showed a lot of poise tonight. He struggled early against the Giants #1 but once he found his rhythm he was practically Brady like. Actually, he kind of reminds me of Chad Pennington. His ball doesn't have the zip that Brady's does but he seems to have all the intangibles. There were a number of throws where the pass rush was all around him and he stepped up in the pocket and delivered an excellent throw. I'm starting to wonder if KOC's release might have had more to do with Hoyer's development than his own shortcomings. In any case, Hoyer did what he needed to do to garner consideration for the 53 man roster and may even challenge Walter for the #2 spot at some point this season although that would still seem to be a bit unlikely.

2) BJGE: It's awfully hard not to like this guy. The Maroney vs BJGE debate will rage on. I'll try to clarify my thoughts on the matter since some clown took a poorly worded comment I made in a post last week out of context and thought it clever to put it as his signature. Seriously...Who does that??? Anyhow I digress. Here's my point. While Maroney likely possesses the greater talent and the more established track record, the issue here is "STYLE" and who's style is more conducive to help the team. I would argue that a "lesser" talent with a superior style might be a better fit than the opposite. Hopefully BB can find a way to keep them both as I'm sure they both can help us. I like Maroney returning kicks and in the passing game. He's excellent in the open field. Faulk is getting up there in years so perhaps it's time we started grooming him to take over that role when Faulk's days are over.

3) Receivers: Aiken and Nun had excellent games. Aiken is vastly underrated by most as a receiver but he's been a reliable target every time he takes the field. He impressed me late last season and continues to do so. Despite Nun's effectiveness, he's caught in a numbers game and still has no shot unless the team pulls off the surprise move and cuts Galloway which wouldn't be completely shocking as he has yet to impress. I don't think the team will be able to keep Nun on the PS but we may have lucked out a bit as he appeared to tweak his ankle late in the game. I doubt its serious but I've already convinced myself that BB is going to place him on the PUP list which might be the best solution to the BJGE quandary as well.

4) Run defense: The Giants are as good a running team as we'll face this year and I was extremely impressed by how well our scrubs defended the running game. We got chewed up in the air but the DLine and LB'ers played the run very well. In particular I liked Ninkovich. Now, I don't have scouting tape and can't tell you how he performed on every play but I saw him set the edge very well on a couple of occasions against the ones.

Negatives:

1) The knee-jerk reaction would be to scream bloody murder over Chung's performance. In short, the kid had a very rough night. I believe he was victimized by Moss on all three of NY's TD's. However, on each of those plays he was essentially lined up 1on1 against Moss. Moss while not a great receiver, has some of that Branch/Welker quickness that can be tough to cover. I gotta believe that in a game situation BB wouldn't leave Chung, a safety, in 1on1 coverage out there. I think it's likely that BB did that in this game so that Chung could get some work on this area of his game. Chung is a guy who's at his best when he's facing the action. BB is trying to develop his weaknesses which mainly arise in coverage with his back to the action. As such I'm not sure I'd be so quick to get worried about him just yet. In real games, BB will make sure to utilize his strengths, not his weaknesses.

Summary:
I think we've got a strong team with a lot of depth and also a lot of question marks. It will be an entertaining season watching this team grow as they start providing the answers.

OT: Does anybody know what happened to Edelman? He seemed to have a huge role in that first game and I really haven't noticed him at all since then. Did he even play?

The fact that you like Green-Ellis's style better doesnt mean it is better for the football team.
When there is no hole and one back runs into the defense for no gain, and the other hesitates to wait for a hole, it is the same thing if nothing develops and an advantage to hesitation if it does.
Unfortunately, this leads to fans ignorantly thinking that the back who hesitated was confused, afraid to be hit, or stupid.
The end result is that the difference between BJGE and Maroney is that YOU(and other fans) like the looks of his no gains better, while in reality it makes no difference to the football team, and in fact, the lack of patience hurts on some plays.

 

[PYPER]

The fact that you like Green-Ellis's style better doesnt mean it is better for the football team.
When there is no hole and one back runs into the defense for no gain, and the other hesitates to wait for a hole, it is the same thing if nothing develops and an advantage to hesitation if it does.
Unfortunately, this leads to fans ignorantly thinking that the back who hesitated was confused, afraid to be hit, or stupid.
The end result is that the difference between BJGE and Maroney is that YOU(and other fans) like the looks of his no gains better, while in reality it makes no difference to the football team, and in fact, the lack of patience hurts on some plays.

Another way to look at it is that one style (BJGE) attacks the defense. It initiates the contact and through the course of four quarters this contact wears down the defense. This is the primary value of a solid running game.....That it can turn defenses into swiss cheese.

The other style (Maroney) avoids contact which ironically means that instead of hitting the defense, it inevitably ends up getting hit "by" the defense.

At the end of the day you have to choose what kind of running game you want. Do you want the type of running game we had in 2004 or would you prefer the type of soft running game utilized by the Colts.

Do you want to be a physical team that imposes your will on the defense or a soft finesse team like the Colts?

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

Re: Pyper's Postseason Game 4 Analysis

One of these days, we'll have to dig up some of the old Pierre Woods threads and force the haters to eat some humble pie. Better to wait until he performs in the regular season, though (and he will).

I'm glad Woods did something last night, but he's going to have to make an impact in the regular season in order for me to eat crow. However, because the Pats will probably play more of a 4-3 defense, Woods lost out to Gary Guyton for the spot at OLB. In fact, Guyton didn't even play last night (which says how much the coaching staff has confidence in him). So once again, Woods looks to be a back up until they play more 3-4 again.