Giants – Page 25 – Keefe To The City

Oct 1, 2013

Giants-Chiefs Week 4 Thoughts: A 12-Game Season

The Giants were embarrassed again and after an 0-4 start to their season they need to put the first quarter of the season behind them and focus on the remaining 12 games.

I didn’t think things could get worse after the six-turnover Opening Night performance. I was wrong. And I didn’t think they could get worse than losing by 18 despite being down 10-9 at halftime. I was wrong again. And then I didn’t think things could get worse than losing 38-0 and producing 150 yards of total offense. I was wrong about that too. Things have gotten progressively worse since the “Disaster in Dallas” and I’m not sure what’s left after getting embarrassed and run out of Kansas City by Alex Smith, Andy Reid and the Chiefs. Are the Eagles planning a “Miracle at the Meadowlands Part II” for this Sunday? If so, I wish someone would tell me now, so I can find something else to do like watch Knocked Up or Funny People or Five-Year Engagement.

The same day the Yankees season officially ended after 182 days and 162 games, the Giants season ended after 21 days and four games. Sure, the Giants are technically still alive in a division where the Cowboys of all teams are in first place at 2-2. And if there’s any team incapable of holding a division lead in the NFL, it’s the Cowboys.

But why would anyone think the Giants are going to suddenly figure it out? And by “it” I mean everything as in every facet of the game. Because right now there isn’t one thing the Giants are doing well. Well, unless we’re talking about throwing interceptions, losing fumbles, taking untimely and game-changing penalties and missing field goals because they are doing all of those things better than any team in the league.

Going to Kansas City in Week 4 with the Chiefs flying as high as they have in forever and the Giants at an all-time low in the Tom Coughlin era and maybe the lowest of low in franchise history was a recipe for disaster. It was a game the Giants were set up to lose after what had happened in the first three weeks for them and for the Chiefs. But even as 5-point underdogs, the Giants didn’t show up and were worked over the same way they were the previous two weeks and everything Carl Banks said about the team to Joe Benigno and Evan Roberts on WFAN last week held true again.

I’m not going to talk negatively about Tom Coughlin, question his decision making or call into question his job status. It’s not for fear of having Justin Tuck punch me in the face, but rather because I don’t think this debacle is because of Coughlin, even if he is the man in charge. Coughlin’s not the one who has thrown nine interceptions in four games and he’s not on the offensive line failing to hold up his man and he’s not on the defensive line failing to get to the quarterback. He’s the man on the sidelines, who is watching his highly-talented team underachieve and not play to their abilities and live up to their expectations. But Coughlin does get to call the shots during the game and he made a bad call on Sunday that changed the game.

In the third quarter with the Giants facing a third-and-17 at the Giants’ 14, Eli Manning hit Victor Cruz for 17 yards. A 17-yard pass in a third-and-17 situation. What’s that mean? First down, Giants. Right? Wrong. Andy Reid, whose history of poor challenges, poor use of the clock and bad in-game management helped end his tenure in Philadelphia, challenged the ruling on the field of a first down and the spot of the ball, a call that’s rarely and I mean RARELY ever overturned. But because it’s New York Giants football and because things are going as bad for the 2013 Giants as they did for Mischa Barton’s acting career after she left and ruined The O.C., Reid won the challenge and it became a fourth-and-1 for the Giants on their own 30.

Tom Coughlin had a decision to make: Go for it on fourth-and-1 from the Giants’ 30 and risk turning the ball over on downs in a 10-7 game or punt it away and rely on the defense to make another stop. He went with his second choice and Steve Weatherford, who has been part of the problem and not part of the solution like just about everyone on the team this season, punted 59 yards to Dexter McCluster and McCluster “DeSean Jackson’d” the punt 89 yards for a touchdown and a 17-7 lead. Game over.

Cruz didn’t agree with Coughlin’s decision by saying, “I thought we should have gone for it on that fourth down. It’s coach’s call at the end of the day. … We had the momentum. I felt it was a yard, not even a yard, half a yard, we’ve got to take a risk at some point and make something happen.” And I agree with Cruz. The Giants had to make something happen and they went with the safe play even if it was the supposed right play given their field position, but at 0-3 and on the road and a quarter away from being 0-4, the Giants had to do something to change the momentum of that game and trying to gain not even a full yard for a first down would have done that instead. Instead they changed the momentum for the Chiefs.

The 0-4 start is alarming because it’s 0-4, but it’s heightened because of how last season ended and the bad taste it left in everyone’s mouths. Usually we’re used to see a stretch like this in the second part of the season or near the end of the season as the Giants erase their division titles hopes and playoff chances. Never before during the Tom Coughlin era have we seen something like this where the patented second-half collapse takes place in the first half or the first four weeks.

An 0-4 start looks a lot worse than a 6-2 team becoming 6-6, which is more Giants-like. But it leaves open the thought that maybe the Giants are getting their collapse out of the way now. No, that doesn’t mean I think the Giants are going to go 12-0 and run the table like Antrel Rolle said he “believes” the Giants can. But they don’t need to this season in this division where a winless record only has them two games out with 75 percent of the season left. And while Rolle’s prediction of the Giants winning out was just a little bold, he did redeem himself by saying, “This is just a new beginning, a 12-game season for us.”

The 12-game season begins with two games in the next 10 days. It’s hard to believe in the Giants, but that’s when they are at their best.

Blogs • Email Exchanges • Giants

Sep 27, 2013

Giants-Chiefs Has Much Different Meaning Than Last Meeting

The Giants face a must-win game in Kansas City against old rival Andy Reid and the Chiefs and that calls for an email exchange with Joel Thorman of Arrowhead Pride.

Must-win game. I have said it 4,738 times this week and will probably say it that many more times between now and Sunday. The Yankees season is over (and really has been since the beginning of August), but will officially end on Sunday in Houston and there’s a chance the Giants season could end on the same day, just four games in and what will be two days before October.

Prior to Opening Night against the Cowboys I hadn’t been this exciting about a Giants team since … well, Opening Night against the Cowboys last year. Now the Giants are 0-3 and have lost all three games in embarrassing fashion and are a loss to Andy Reid, Alex Smith and the Chiefs on Sunday from playing three months of football for nothing.

With the Giants playing the Chiefs for the first time in four years and trying to save their season against an old foe in Reid, I did an email exchange with Joel Thorman of Arrowhead Pride to talk about the Chiefs’ 3-0 start, the perception of Andy Reid in Kansas City and whether or not Chiefs fans wanted Alex Smith as their quarterback.

Keefe: The last time the Giants and Chiefs met was Week 4 in 2009. The Giants won that game (a game I barely remember) 27-16 to open the season 4-0. The following week they beat the Raiders 44-7 to open the season with five straight wins, but after that it was all downhill. The Giants went 3-8 the rest of the way for one of their patented second-half collapses and finished the year being outscored 85-16 by the Panthers and Vikings in Weeks 16 and 17 respectively.

That Giants win gave the Chiefs their fourth straight loss to the open the season. The following week the Chiefs would lose to the Cowboys and were 0-5. They wouldn’t get much better from there, finishing the season 4-12 with two five-game losing streaks in the same season.

This year things are different. Very different. The Giants are 0-3 and pretty much facing postseason elimination if they can’t win on Sunday in Kansas City (or unless they go on a 10-2 run the rest of the way). The Chiefs are 3-0, having already beat the Cowboys and Eagles to help out the Giants, and are tied atop the NFC West with the Super Bowl-favorite Broncos.

What’s it like to be 3-0 and playing so well to open the season because I don’t remember?

Thorman: 3-0 is great.Things are going well and everyone just seems happy, the players, coaches and fans. I’m enjoying it so far and the reason for that is because it was so unexpected. Nobody expected the Chiefs to start 3-0. The debate in Kansas City was whether they’d win seven or nine games. No one expected the Chiefs to have a top three defense after three weeks. No one expected the lack of turnovers so far. We just didn’t see it coming. The expectations coming in were for the team to be competitive in December. Playoffs? Maybe if things went great. It reminds me of the 2010 Chiefs, who started 3-0. There were expectations to be competitive, but not make the playoffs.

Keefe: No head coach in the league knows the Giants or the NFC East like Andy Reid does. Sure the Giants have had their fair share of success against him over the years, but it was pretty even with a usual series split with the Eagles. So far Reid has put his knowledge of the division to good use with wins over the Cowboys and Eagles in back-to-back weeks, including getting a win at Lincoln Financial Field in Philadelphia in a sort of homecoming game

Everyone knew that Reid would be highly sought after on the open market once the Eagles decided to let him go after last season and it took about 15 minutes to get a new job with the Chiefs. I’m guessing you’re an Andy Reid fan now, but were you a fan of the decision to hire Reid at first? What do you think he will do to prepare his new team to face one of his familiar opponents?

Thorman: Yes, I was a fan of the move. For where the Chiefs were in their history and where they were coming from, Andy Reid was a perfect fit. The Chiefs last two coaches were Todd Haley, who had no experience as a head coach, and Romeo Crennel, who wasn’t very good. Chiefs owner Clark Hunt couldn’t afford to whiff on another coach. His franchise was in dire straits. He had to get it right. So he went from the most accomplished coach on the market. It’s a big change from the last two coaches the Chiefs have had and I think that’s exactly what was needed.

Reid brings respectability, stability and confidence. The Chiefs DO have talent. Outside of quarterback, that wasn’t the question. Reid’s arrival has brought out the best in anyone. Reid didn’t have anything special for the Cowboys two weeks ago and he knew them well so I don’t expect him to do anything too unique for New York. Just don’t turn it over, get after Eli Manning and hope for a win. That’ll be the formula in every game.

Keefe: I have never been an Alex Smith fan. Not when he was drafted, not when he was benched, not when he was benched again, not when several head coaches lost their jobs because he couldn’t perform, not when Jim Harbaugh figured out how to have him manage games, not when he reached the NFC Championship Game against the Giants and not when he was finally benched for good for Colin Kaepernick. I didn’t understand why the Chiefs decided to trade for him or why Reid was so adamant about wanting him as his quarterback. But so far everything has worked out in Smith’s favor, Reid’s favor and the Chiefs fans’ favor.

The Chiefs needed a change and needed a quarterback for the future when it was evident that Matt Cassel wasn’t going to be that guy. Was Smith the guy you wanted and if not, who?

Thorman: Alex Smith was the best option if you were looking for a quarterback last year. The Chiefs had the No. 1 pick so they could’ve taken anyone. It just wasn’t one of those years. So for where the Chiefs were, yes, I think Alex Smith was the option. It made me feel a little better knowing Andy Reid has liked Alex for a number of years. But, yeah, I see your concerns and I can’t really dismiss them.

Reid hasn’t changed his offense a whole lot so Alex Smith is passing the ball a lot, which isn’t what he did in San Francisco. I think Alex has grown a lot, which will help this relationship. I think Andy is also a smart dude who generally maximizes his quarterback’s ability. So from that standpoint I think Andy will get the absolute most out of Alex just like Harbaugh did. The real question, in my opinion, is whether Alex gets a new deal in Kansas City. He has this year and one more year on his contract. That will be the real sign of how committed they are.

Keefe: And what about Matt Cassel (who was the most fortunate quarterback to ever get rich until Matt Flynn came along)? What were your feelings when the Chiefs traded for Cassel after the 2008 season?

Thorman: I was very excited about Matt Cassel when the Chiefs traded for him. In fact, the failures of Cassel probably contributed to my pessimism about the Alex Smith trade. The Chiefs NEVER went after young quarterbacks and had it work out so this was exciting. Obviously it didn’t work out but if you’re asking how I felt back then … yeah, I was excited about it and thought it would work out. Remember now, at the time the Cassel trade was made, he was thought of so highly that reporters found it unbelievable that the Chiefs gave up “only'” a second round pick for him. In fact, one national reporter said the NFL should investigate the trade. So I wasn’t the only one who thought it was a good deal back then. Notice that I mentioned Alex’s contract above. I think the biggest mistake with Cassel was not the trade — can’t knock you for trading for a young quarterback — but the crippling contract that kept him in KC.

Keefe: This game on Sunday means everything to the Giants. It’s the difference between starting to climb out of the 0-3 hole and come back in a division that is still up for grabs or everyone packing it in for the season and Tom Coughlin’s job being called into question once again. For the Chiefs, sure it would be nice to win and be 4-0 and keep pace with the Broncos and I’m sure Reid wants to run the table on the NFC East, but it’s not like the Chiefs have to win.

With everyone pushing the Giants away and giving them no chance to figure out what has gone wrong over their last 11 games and how they could have lost eight of those games after being 6-2 last year and looking at a division title and a chance to defend their Super Bowl win, it puts the Giants in the perfect place. This team and franchise has always crumbled under pressure and failed to live up the hype or perform as a favorite. It’s when the odds are stacked against them and they can fly under the radar is when they start to play to their abilities.

Now this could also be me fresh off the Yankees being eliminated from reaching the postseason for just the second time since 1993 pretending that things will turn around for the Giants and my football season won’t be ruined the way my baseball season just was. Or it could be for real and the New York Football Giants I was excited about three Sundays ago before the season started could show up for the first time this season. Man, do I wish it was Week 4 four years ago.

What do you expect to happen on Sunday?

Thorman: I expect the Giants to play much better, but ultimately I’m picking the Chiefs. I don’t see this as a blowout. I have it as a four-point game. Ultimately Kansas City’s pass rush is going to be too much for Eli Manning. Whether it’s the sacks that get him or the interceptions that come after he’s hurried, the Chiefs can and will capitalize on the Giants mistakes. Kansas City won’t make many mistakes on their own which means they won’t be taking a lot of shots either. That’s why I see this being a close affair. The thinking here in Kansas City is that the Giants can’t possibly be that bad. No one expects a crappy Giants team to come to Arrowhead. 23-19 in favor of the Chiefs.

Blogs • Giants • NFL

Sep 26, 2013

NFL Week 4 Picks

The Giants face a must-win game in Kansas City and it’s basically a must-win week for my picks (whatever that means).

I’m used to must-win games right now after spending the last few weeks watching the Yankees endure them. But on Wednesday night at the Stadium (my last Yankees game of the year), I watched the Yankees go down in their last meaningful game of the season. It took the Yankees 158 games and 97.5 percent of the season for the season to finally end, which was way longer than anyone though it would last with the names they used to replace their stars. As for the New York Football Giants, it might only take four games and 25 percent of the season for their season to end.

Three weeks ago I would have chalked up a visit to Kansas City to face Andy Reid, Alex Smith and the Chiefs as a predicted win for the Giants, but three weeks ago I also didn’t see the “Disaster in Dallas” coming or the blowout from the Broncos or whatever the eff that was in Carolina last Sunday. Those who try to predict wins and losses with NFL schedules are always reminded that it doesn’t matter who you play, it only matters when you play them and right now the Giants in their current state couldn’t be facing a worse matchup than on the road in Kansas City against the Chiefs in their current state.

The Chiefs are 3-0 under Reid, who knows the Giants and how to beat them better than any other coach in the NFL. They are coming off 10 days rest following their Week 3 win on Sept. 19 over Reid’s former team in his former city. Everything about this game says the Giants will lose to the Chiefs the way the Jaguars, Cowboys and Eagles already have. But in this NFL with these Giants, nothing goes according to plan and this game likely won’t either.

The Giants are at their best when they have been left for dead and the entire football world has moved on from considering them a playoff team or contender. Right now the football world has a reason to do that at 0-3 even if they trail the always-ready-to-collapse Cowboys by only two games in the division with the Eagles at 1-2 and Redskins at 0-3.

I don’t expect the Giants to go on the 13-0-type run that Antrel Rolle alluded to the possibility of on WFAN this week, but I also don’t expect them to roll over and become the 2012 Eagles. Once again I had to learn the lesson of having expectations with the Giants the hard way and that’s why in Week 4 against the Chiefs I don’t have any expectations. The Giants have two options: 1.) Win and save the season or 2.) Lose and spend the next 12 games and 13 weeks playing meaningless football.

As for the picks, well it looks like we are coming to a crossroads with those as well and we’re not in “must-win mode” for the picks yet (whatever must-win mode translate to in terms of making picks), but we’re almost there. I said in Week 2 that it would be a grind to chip away at the damage done in Week 1 and since “The Disaster” I have answered with back-to-back 7-8-1 weeks, which isn’t going to cut it. While the Giants try to save their season on Sunday, I will be trying to save mine as well.

Week 4 … let’s go!

(Home team in caps)

San Francisco -3.5 over ST. LOUIS
If this game had taken place in Week 1 or Week 2 it would have been interesting to see what the line would have been. But it’s Week 4 now and the 49ers are tied with the Rams at 1-2 and two games back of the Seahawks in the NFC West. I thought after the 49ers’ Super Bowl run last season and the Rams’ gradual improvement over the last year that we were getting away from the NFC West matchups being must-not-watch TV and picks disasters. But maybe we’re heading back to that time period, which I wouldn’t mind since I miss the NFC West being the worst division in football and the NFC East being the best.

MINNESOTA +3 over Pittsburgh
When I first saw this line, my jaw dropped. The Vikings are getting three points at home against the Steelers?!?! Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaat?!?! This is too good to be true! And it was. Because I forgot about the NFL’s annual London game, which happens to be this one. So no, the Vikings aren’t home and neither are the Steelers. If anything though I’m guessing it will feel more like a home-field advantage for the Steelers if their fans, who travel well in the U.S., travel as well outside the U.S.

Baltimore -3 over BUFFALO
This game is a lot harder to pick than it appears. It appears as the defending Super Bowl champions -3 against the Bills in Buffalo, but it’s much more complicated than that after what we’ve seen from both teams over the first three weeks. I’m just going to hope that the Ravens defense has gotten its act together and will present never-before-seen problems for E.J. Manuel.

Cincinnati -3.5 over CLEVELAND
The Browns finally win a game with Brian Hoyer as their quarterback and suddenly their only 3.5-point underdogs against the Bengals? OK. Yes, I know the Bengals were in most of their games last year and in their two losses this year, but backing the Brian Hoyer era in its second week is a risky proposition.

Indianapolis -9.5 over JACKSONVILLE
This line could be -14 and I would still be on the Colts because we’re at the point right now where it’s going to be nearly impossible to pick the Jaguars. Last week, depending on where you got the line, the Seahawks were basically a 20-point favorite over the Jaguars and they covered that line with ease and I was willing to back the Seahawks as high as -35. I think the only way I wouldn’t pick against the Jaguars right now would be if they were playing the Giants. And unfortunately they’re not this season because the Giants could use a win.

Seattle -3 over HOUSTON
The Broncos are +300 to win the Super Bowl right now. The Seahawks are +450. I have no choice, but to ride this wave for as long as I can.

TAMPA BAY -2.5 over Arizona
Will the Buccaneers turn around their 0-3 season with a new quarterback in rookie Mike Glennon? Sure! Why not? In other words: Somewhere someone who isn’t a Buccaneers fan or a Cardinals fan is going to bet on this game and watch it in its entirety. Think about that.

Chicago +2.5 over DETROIT
Pretty even division rivals, who have both been handed early-season wins? I will go with the undefeated one and thank you for the 2.5 points, Vegas.

New York Giants +5 over KANSAS CITY
Save the season or end it. If it’s the latter, I will probably have to pick against the Giants for the rest of the season.

TENNESSEE -4 over New York Jets
Earlier in the season I was thinking I could use the “Somewhere someone who isn’t a Titans fan or a Jets fan is going to bet on this game…” line for this game, but now we have a 3-0 Titans team hosting a 2-1 Jets team and it’s like it’s 2008 again. I would actually enjoy a Kerry Collins-Brett Favre matchup over a Jake Locker-Geno Smith matchup … even in 2013.

SAN DIEGO +2 over Dallas
The Giants aren’t in as bad of a place as they should be at 0-3 because the Eagles and Redskins have both stumbled out of the gate and only the Cowboys have a winning record in the NFC East. What does that mean for the season? It means that the Giants are probably going to need a Cowboys collapse at some point to get into the playoff picture. What better time than now in San Diego to start the annual implosion?

OAKLAND +3.5 over Washington
When I go to pick Redskins games I envision RGIII running around the field, picking up first downs left and right and controlling the game. But really I need to envision the Redskins defense challenging the Giants defense for the belt as the worst defense in the league. I mean 98 points allowed in three weeks? If only the Giants hadn’t given up 115 in the first three weeks more people would be talking about the Redskins defense and less about what’s wrong, if anything, with RGIII. So far the Raiders nearly pulled of an upset in Indianapolis, beat the Jaguars and were dominated in Denver. The Raiders should have been 1-2 through their first three games and they are. The Redskins shouldn’t be 0-3 after their first three, but they are. Right now the Raiders are playing like the team everyone expected them to be and even a little better than expected while no one knows who the Redskins are or what they are going to be.

DENVER -11.5 over Philadelphia
Remember when Chip Kelly saved the Eagles and brought his Oregon spread offense to the NFL and it worked flawlessly against the Redskins? And remember when Chip Kelly managed the clock against the Chargers the way Grady Little managed a bullpen and cost his team a game and then when his team turned the ball over five times in Andy Reid’s Philadelphia homecoming? I do and I’m glad the last two weeks happened to the Eagles and their fans and the construction on the Chip Kelly statue in front of Lincoln Financial Field was halted while the team gave their fans a reminder and reality check as to who they are.

As for the Broncos, at some point the Broncos aren’t going to cover. If it’s this week, so be it. But I’m not going to be on the other side of another Broncos blowout.

ATLANTA -2.5 over New England
I will never forgive the Falcons for blowing a 17-0 lead and losing to the 49ers in the NFC Championship Game and costing me the two-team parlay at 10-to-1 odds I had along with the Ravens over the Patriots. But I need to put that devastating loss aside for Sunday Night Football this week and remember how good the Falcons are at home (nearly Saints-esque), the fact they are 1-2 and that the Patriots aren’t exactly the most convincing 3-0 team. A two-point win in Buffalo over a rookie quarterback making his NFL debut, a three-point win at home against the Jets and a rookie quarterback making his second career start and a Week 3 win at home over the Buccaneers in the middle of a quarterback crisis are the reasons for not being overly convinced that the 2013 Patriots are going to be anything more than a team handed a playoff spot because they play in a weak division (Hey, Los Angeles Dodgers!).

NEW ORLEANS -6.5 over Miami
I’m on the Dolphins bandwagon and I’m sitting in the front seat and making small talk with the driver of it. The Dolphins are responsible for three of my 17 correct picks through three weeks so I feel terrible turning my back on them for a week and going with the Saints, but until the Saints stop winning games by a touchdown at home, I don’t have a choice. With Sean Payton as head coach, the last time the Saints didn’t win a home game by at least seven points (including the playoffs) was also the last home game they lost with Sean Payton as head coach, which was a 23-13 loss to the Buccaneers on Jan. 2, 2011. So I’m sure the Dolphins will understand my decision.

Last week: 7-8-1
Season: 17-28-3

Blogs • Giants • NFL

Sep 19, 2013

NFL Week 3 Picks

It’s a busy week and that means a quick rundown for the Week 3 picks.

It’s a busy week, so let’s keep it short and sweet.

Week 3 … let’s go!

(Home team in caps)

PHILADELPHIA -3.5 over Kansas City
If Chip Kelly knew how to manage the clock in the NFL then the Eagles could be 2-0 with a chance to beat Andy Reid in his homecoming to be the best team in the NFC East.

BALTIMORE +2.5 over Houston

San Diego +3 over TENNESSEE
It’s the Must-Not Watch Game of the Week, so … Somewhere someone who isn’t a Chargers fan or a Titans fan is going to bet on this game and watch it in its entirety. Think about that.

St. Louis +3.5 over DALLAS
Are the Rams a team on the rise after their 7-9 season last year and impressive 4-1-1 record in the NFC West? Or are they just the usual Sam Bradford Rams? Even if they are only the Sam Bradford Rams, that should be good enough in Dallas against a Cowboys team that barely won a game in which their unnamed opponent turned the ball over six times and a Cowboys team that lost to Alex Smith and the Chiefs on the road.

Tampa Bay +7.5 over NEW ENGLAND
The Patriots don’t cover games. They still get the dynasty era respect, but they aren’t that same team. They will win enough games to win the AFC East and reach the postseason because of their schedule, but they can’t be trusted to win games for covering purposes. If you’re looking for that team, it’s the Broncos.

MINNESOTA -6 over Cleveland
I think the Vikings are better than their 0-2 record says they are because my girlfriend, a Vikings fan, makes me believe they are. So if they can’t cover against the Browns at home, I blame her.

NEW ORLEANS -7.5 over Arizona
The Saints at the Superdome against the Cardinals. That sentence should say all you need to know.

WASHINGTON -1.5 over Detroit
When you take a dome team out of their dome, bad things happen. The Saints and Falcons are unstoppable and unbeatable at their homes and while the Lions don’t have the same home success of those two teams, they play just as poorly as them when they are on the road.

Green Bay +3 over CINCINNATI
I want to buy into the Bengals and their bandwagon, which is running out of seats (I checked on StubHub and Craigslist), but against the Packers, even if they’re not the same Packers everyone is selling us on, I have to go with Aaron Rodgers over Andy Dalton.

New York Giants +1 over CAROLINA
The Giants aren’t playing for their season in Carolina, but they kind of are. A loss to the Panthers will start the “Only (some number) of teams have started 0-3 and made the playoffs” talk for every media outlet until next Sunday. So I have to pick the Giants to cover because I think they will win. They kind of have to.

MIAMI -2 over Atlanta
Remember what I said for about the Lions earlier? If you do, then you know that I wrote about the Falcons in that summary and what kind of road team they are.

SEATTLE -19 over Jacksonville
It’s the first college football line in the NFL in a while and it could be -35 and I would still take the Seahawks.

SAN FRANCISCO -10.5 over Indianapolis
The Colts are in a bad spot going to San Francisco with the 49ers coming off back-to-back losses. A very bad spot.

Buffalo +2.5 over NEW YORK JETS
The Giants are 0-2 and the Jets are 1-1 and the Giants are being talked about like they are the Jets, while the Jets are being talked about like they are the … well, they are still being talked about like they are the Jets because everyone is waiting for them to fall apart. The only way for them to fall apart is to start losing games like a home game against the Bills.

Chicago -2.5 over PITTSBURGH
If the Steelers’ team name were anything, but the “Steelers” this week, this line would be probably Chicago -4.5 or higher. But because the Steelers are the Steelers and have the following and garner the attention that they do, they are only 2.5-point underdogs at home despite being really bad.

DENVER -14.5 over Oakland
The Broncos’ line are only going to keep getting higher and higher and higher until you can’t take them anymore. So take them while you can.

Last week: 7-8-1
Season: 10-20-2

Blogs • Giants • Giants Thoughts

Sep 16, 2013

Giants-Broncos Week 2 Thoughts: Excuses for Eli Manning

Eli Manning isn’t worried that he threw four interceptions and lost to his brother again or that the Giants are 0-2 and playing for their season in Week 3.

I’m really good at making excuses for Eli Manning. Like really, really good. I’m so good that I would be surprised if Archie or Olivia or Peyton or Cooper are as good as me at making excuses for the youngest member of their family. Why am I so good at this? I think it’s because I think Eli is better than his numbers seem to suggest or better than everyone gives him credit for. And because of that I thought the Giants would get the last laugh at Vegas for making 5 1/2-point underdogs at home against the Broncos and Eli would win what’s likely to be the final Manning Bowl. Instead, Vegas got the last laugh (at me) and Peyton added another footnote to help his case in any Manning debate forever.

How am I supposed to make an excuse for Eli after Sunday’s performance against the Broncos after last Sunday’s performance against the Cowboys? How can I sit here and tell you neither loss was Eli’s fault (or at least mostly his fault)? Should I also tell you that the day after Sunday is Tuesday or that Thanksgiving isn’t always on a Thursday or that CC Sabathia isn’t a complete waste of $23 million this year or that I’m looking forward to a postseason-less October for the Yankees? No, no, no and no. I can’t sit here today and make excuses for Eli Manning, but I don’t need to. Eli has made excuses for himself.

That’s right. Two Super Bowl MVPs or not, Eli Manning answered questions after a four-interception performance in a loss as if to say, “No big deal.” And maybe it is “no big deal” for a quarterback playing with a $106.9 million contract, but that’s also why it should be a big deal. So instead of the usual “Thoughts” following each Giants game, let’s analyze Eli’s postgame answers.

On his level of concern for the way things are going.

“I think we’ll bounce back and I thought there were some good things. The first half I thought we had a lot of opportunities. I think that’s where we did some really good things. We just didn’t get touchdowns. We got field goals and in the second half we had a weird interception off of a foot and we tried to fight back.”

Wow. What a way to start answering questions after an 18-point, four-interception loss that puts the Giants in an 0-2 hole. What a way to open the postgame media session. This would be like CC Sabathia opening a postgame session after giving up five earned runs in five innings or blowing a late-game lead by saying that he needs to get better and he will fix things and turn it around only to never get better, never fix things, turn nothing around and continue to lose. Wait a second …

“Some good things?” “Some really good things?!?!” “SOME REALLY GOOD THINGS?!?!” You threw four interceptions. Hakeem Nicks dislocated his finger. David Wilson rushed for 17 yards on seven carries. Brandon Jacobs rushed for four yards on seven carries. The famous pass rush recorded zero sacks. Should I go on?

But you’re right, in the first half there were some opportunities. And you’re right that you and offensive genius Kevin Gilbride destroyed every opportunity by settling for field goals. And saying “We just didn’t get touchdowns” so nonchalantly is just a little bit of a problem. And it was a nice touch trying to act like the “weird interception off of a foot” was the reason for the loss or the only interception and not just one of four interceptions that included three incredible picks that left me asking myself if I even like football.

“When we got down a couple of scores and tried to press, it could go either way. You could make some plays hopefully and also make some mistakes. We were in a bind. The offense, we have to get a little more balanced. We have to run the ball better and we have to eliminate the turnovers. I think we’ll keep fighting and get back on track. I know everybody in our division lost today, so the way we can look at it, we’re one game back in the division. We’ve got to get back to winning some games.”

You don’t think the offense is balanced? You don’t think 812 passing yards and 73 rushing yards through two games is balanced? Get the eff out of here! Me too!

And everyone else in the NFC East lost on Sunday? Well, when you put it that way who even cares that the Giants lost? Just like who cares that the Yankees lost on Sunday since the Rays and Rangers lost?

On going 3-for-12 on third downs.

“We’ll have to look. Just had a couple … I can think of one drop, some misfires, I got pressured on a few things. I think a couple were down in the red zone that were unfortunate. If we could have converted on those, they could have led to scoring touchdowns and not field goals.”

Yes, “we’ll have to look” at how you can convert 25 percent of your third downs with a receiving trio of Hakeem Nicks, Victor Cruz and Rueben Randle. It’s at least a little reassuring that you do realize that converting first downs in the red zone is an important factor in scoring touchdowns and not settling for field goals. At least we’re on the right track.

On whether or not the season feels like 2007.

“We just have to play better. I’m not trying to make comparisons to years obviously … You can look at it the same, but we have to find a way to play better. Better offense, better defense. I thought the defense played really well that last two weeks, so we have to help them out by scoring some more points and putting the opposing offense in a bind.”

Thank you, Eli! Finally, someone with their head on straight. Can everyone else please stop talking about 2007? Please? Does every 0-2 team go on to win 10 of their remaining 14 games and then win four road games in the postseason and knock off what would have been the best team in NFL history in the Super Bowl? If so, then forget me telling you to stop talking about 2007 and go on and continue to lazily use that storyline and connection and try to relive the most improbable playoff run. But that team had a pass rush and an 1,000-yard rusher. This team has turned the ball over 10 times, has two sacks and 73 rushing yards in eight quarters. Let’s hold the comparisons for a week or two or until the Giants get a win.

On whether or not Peyton will tease him about never beating him.

“I don’t think so. I think this is something that we’re both passionate about. What we’re doing is our job. It’s my concern to this team and getting back to winning right now.”

Oh, he’s definitely going to tease you. But luckily you have that trump card in the second ring and both of them coming against Tom Brady, who Peyton has had trouble beating his entire career.

On if the loss is more disappointing because it’s against Peyton.

“It’s all team-related. You want to go out there and play well, so you’re frustrated that you lost another game. We had some opportunities early on. Their offense started clicking and making some plays. We had turnovers and we just couldn’t catch any breaks. We just really want to get back to where we’re playing better football offensively and get back on track.”

Oh, BS. You know it bothers you that you lost to your older brother and have never beat him.

On the interception intended for Nicks at the end of the first half.

“Just a bad decision by me. I was really just trying to kind of … in a little … on a blitz and trying to throw the ball away, where we wouldn’t get an intentional grounding, but we would get it close. It was unfortunate that I threw it in a spot where their guy could make a play.”

You didn’t “throw it in a spot where their guy could make a play.” You threw it to their guy as if he was the guy trying to make the play. “Unfortunate” was a good word to use.

On the fourth and final interception.

“The last one was on me. Rueben did the right thing, he ran the right route and I threw the wrong route.”

Not only did you throw the wrong route, but I would say that was the worst interception of your career. And that’s coming one week after I said your first throw of the 2013 season, which was an interception, was the worst of your career. OK, maybe the one from last week is still the worst, but this one has to be Top 5. I’m scared to know what’s in store for Week 3 and if you’re going to try to one-up yourself all season with these.

On the pass to Cruz on the first play of the game.

“It was honestly a great way to start the game. Our defense got us a turnover and to hit Cruz on a big one down the field on the first play and then got another first down running with Brandon, it was a good drive. We had a third and long and weren’t able to convert on that one, had to settle for a field goal, but it was a good start. First half there was really good things going on, we just didn’t finish some drives as well as we needed to.”

This is why the interception last week was so insane. The Giants had an entire offseason to decide what the first play of the season would be and Eli threw the ball directly into DeMarcus Ware’s chest. Then they had a week to decide how they would attack the Broncos from the start of the game and they decided on airing it out, which led to a 51-yard pass to Cruz. It was the best play of the day because it set the tone after the Broncos punted, but it also made the day that more frustrating (and of course last week’s season-opening interception that much more unfathomable).

On throwing seven interception in two games.

“Yeah, that’s never a goal. Before the season I like to set goals, keeping interceptions in the single digits. I kind of have to start over here. Obviously, some of them happen and you have to look at decisions and you get some bad breaks. Sometimes you get late in games, fourth-and-10 and we have to make a play and force something here and whether it’s intercepted or incomplete, an interception probably ends up being better right there for us field position-wise. At the end of games or when you’re competing, I’m going to be aggressive and not worry about the stats or quarterback rating at the end. Honestly I’m not trying to throw interceptions, but obviously I’m just worried about getting back to playing well offensively and eliminating some of these turnovers.”

I think you could have gone without saying “that’s never a goal.” I’m pretty sure no one was going to ask if you that was a goal of yours. And I hate to break it to you, but Brendan Ryan (who has 19 career home runs in 2,327 at-bats) has a better chance of hitting double-digit home runs in 2013 (he has four home runs and there are 12 games left) than you do of keeping your interception total to single digits this season. Starting over is a good idea. We can come up with some goals this week before the Carolina game. (I already have some in mind.) And good for you for not worrying about stats or quarterback rating or anything that puts your team in a better position to win. Just keep doing what you’re doing. It’s obviously working.