2018 NFL Game Thread - Week 10

Greg29fan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
20,487
NC
Woof, Cowboys somehow almost blow a game that should have been basically wrapped up, and Philly botches the chance they're handed.
I wasn't very enamored with that offensive sequence when a first down would have ended the game, but I think almost blew it is a bit of a stretch. They had six guys around the ball on that pass to the ten or whatever...they were never getting in the end zone.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,467
I wasn't very enamored with that offensive sequence when a first down would have ended the game, but I think almost blew it is a bit of a stretch. They had six guys around the ball on that pass to the ten or whatever...they were never getting in the end zone.
They let them drive 60 yards in 27 seconds, to get to around the 30 with 11 seconds which should have allowed multiple endzone shots, that's pretty awful
 

Bosoxen

Bounced back
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 29, 2005
10,186
They let them drive 60 yards in 27 seconds, to get to around the 30 with 11 seconds which should have allowed multiple endzone shots, that's pretty awful
Should have allowed multiple end zone shots. But not a single one was taken. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out why their only shot was a desperation toss to the middle of the field at the 10.

It didn't look pretty (prevent defenses rarely do) but anything short of a Tyreek Hill miracle play was going to result in a Cowboys win.
 

normstalls

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 15, 2004
4,486
Apparently no one is watching this lame matchup... but there was just an interesting call of a supposed ‘simultaneous catch’.

I thought it was an interception
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,214
Landon Collins whiffing on a tackle because he tried for an INT would lead to a 502/503 error on our servers if he played for the Patriots.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,949
LOL, once again, a team fails to clock it, or take a timeout, wastes 15 seconds, and ends up in 2nd and 10 anyway. So fucking stupid.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,949
WTF did Booger just say? It was incidental contact? Goodson was going for the ball? Goodwin was going to tackle Goodson, and put his head down. He probably shouldn't have been on the field, considering it looked like he was concussed about 3 minutes ago. Booger is fucking useless.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,214
Goodwin just had the worst possible thing happen as a WR after an earlier helmet hit. Ball bounces off his arms, is intercepted by the Giants and then Goodwin goes to tackle the Giant defender and gets rocked by incidental helmet-to-helmet contact. Ugh.
 

Mugsy's Jock

Eli apologist
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 28, 2000
15,069
UWS, NYC
McAdoo was right. The world wasted 45 metric tons of butt hurt when he benched Eli last year, but if the Giants had faced reality last year that Manning was toast, the franchise would be in much better shape today.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,949
They were making sure Eli won this game on national television no matter what it took. Forget the DPI calls. The refs threw a flag for offensive holding on the very last play, so if there was even chance the 9er's scored a miracle touchdown, it wasn't going to count. They haven't called offensive holding all fucking year, and they're going to throw the flag in that situation. So predictable.

That said, I still argue the Giants did the right thing. If they believed Mayfield was the only legit starter to come out of college last year (as I did, and still do), then why not take a once-in-a-decade talent like Barkley, keep rebuilding, and bring in your QB next year. Worst thing they could do now is win games, and hurt their draft pick. They should be tanking.

If they had drafted a QB that high, it would have been a season full of QB controversy, and then when they finally made the move and benched Eli, they would have gotten the poor rookie killed in the process, because the offensive line has been shit, and without Barkley there to keep defenses honest, my God, it would be a jailbreak on every play. Now, they have Barkley, OBJ is locked up, they are starting to get better on the offensive line, they have a very good young tight end in Engram, and Shepard is an excellent #2 receiver. If they hit on their QB next year, or even the year after, they'll be in great shape moving forward.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
The problem is that's a big "if." They had the second pick in a draft with multiple QB options. This next draft is not supposed to be QB-rich ... and if they end up with like the seventh pick, they might miss out.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,949
The problem is that's a big "if." They had the second pick in a draft with multiple QB options. This next draft is not supposed to be QB-rich ... and if they end up with like the seventh pick, they might miss out.
If they don't hit on a QB in the next draft, is that worse than taking a QB you didn't like instead of Barkley and committing a shit ton of money and years to him and having them suck? Or is it worse than taking a QB who literally has no chance of succeeding because of the team around him?

If they take a quarterback in the upcoming draft, would anyone disagree with the fact that whoever it is, they are going to be coming into a much better situation in 2019 than Rosen/Allen/Darnold would have come into in 2018? And I'm only talking about the quality of the team around them, without even getting into the Eli controversy that would have been going on day and night in NYC since the first snap of the season.

I just don't know why everyone thinks they should have built a team around a QB, rather than build the team and then get the quarterback. Is it a risk to wait for a quarterback next year? Sure. Is it really that much bigger of a risk than guessing which of the 3-4 guys available to them last year would actually turn out to be good? If they picked a QB at #2 last year, and missed on them? They'd be fucked for years and years to come, and they wouldn't even have Barkley to at least prop up the offense until they could recover. If they miss next year, or if they don't like a QB in next year's draft, they can simply wait another year or go after a free agent or someone in the trade market. If they don't like a QB in next year's draft, they should go take a flyer on Bridgewater in the offseason and see what he has left. He'll be cheap, sign him, see what happens and if it doesn't work, you're still picking high in 2020.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
If they take a quarterback in the upcoming draft, would anyone disagree with the fact that whoever it is, they are going to be coming into a much better situation in 2019 than Rosen/Allen/Darnold would have come into in 2018? And I'm only talking about the quality of the team around them, without even getting into the Eli controversy that would have been going on day and night in NYC since the first snap of the season.
Much better situation? No, I wouldn't say that. This Giants team is terrible. They still have a terrible OL and a terrible defense. Getting a talented running back doesn't move the needle a lot.

I just don't know why everyone thinks they should have built a team around a QB, rather than build the team and then get the quarterback. Is it a risk to wait for a quarterback next year? Sure. Is it really that much bigger of a risk than guessing which of the 3-4 guys available to them last year would actually turn out to be good? If they picked a QB at #2 last year, and missed on them? They'd be fucked for years and years to come, and they wouldn't even have Barkley to at least prop up the offense until they could recover. If they miss next year, or if they don't like a QB in next year's draft, they can simply wait another year or go after a free agent or someone in the trade market. If they don't like a QB in next year's draft, they should go take a flyer on Bridgewater in the offseason and see what he has left. He'll be cheap, sign him, see what happens and if it doesn't work, you're still picking high in 2020.
I'm all for building the supporting cast up until you can get your quarterback, but getting a quarterback is so difficult that you have to get one when you can get one. Not every draft even has one QB worth a damn, sometimes there's just one and he goes #1 overall, etc. They are hard to get, and picking #2 in a draft with five first-round QBs looks like a prime opportunity. Yes, there is a risk of the QB busting, but there is always risk of the QB busting. If they delay until the 2019 draft, or 2020, and they pick the wrong guy, they're still going to be screwed.

The other issue I have is that, if they didn't love any of the QBs and wanted to build the supporting cast, they should have traded back from 2 and filled multiple holes instead of taking Barkley. This Giants team is still a complete mess. They should have been able to turn #2 in multiple picks. I don't hate a RB, especially Barkley, going #2 to a team in the right situation, but the Giants weren't it.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,949
Much better situation? No, I wouldn't say that. This Giants team is terrible. They still have a terrible OL and a terrible defense. Getting a talented running back doesn't move the needle a lot.

.
See, I think this is the crux of our disagreement. I don't think they're terrible. The offensive line has been a disaster, but it's not like they ignored it last offseason. How much can you blame them when guys like Solder, and Omameh who they signed in the offseason forgot how to block? Their starting center (also a Patriots draft pick) broke his leg in like the third game of the season, and Flowers was so bad, they had to give up on him, but they made a serious effort to rebuild that line last offseason and it didn't work out. If I'm the Giants, I'm damn happy that didn't take place with a rookie QB standing behind them. Let Eli take that beating this year.

Aside from that though? They're skill position players, outside of QB, are arguably top 5 in the NFL. I completely disagree that their defense is terrible. It's not like they've been getting blown out all year. I think they're basically a middle-of-the-pack defense in today's NFL, which in a division with offenses as weak as the one they are in, should be enough to keep them competitive. They moved JPP last year, which is going to net them about 15million to spend this offseason, they've got a leader in Landon Collins, and some young guys who weren't expected to be any good who are playing pretty darn well.

They've lost 7 games this year, but only 2 of them were by more than one score, New Orleans and Philly, neither of whom are bad teams. They lost to Panthers by 2 points at Carolina, they lost at Dallas (which is a tough place to play), they lost at Atlanta by 3 points, and they lost to Washington, who is their division leader. They beat Houston (who has won, I think, every game since then) and they just beat the Niners on the road. Outside of Dallas and the Niners, their other 7 opponents are all playoff contenders (or were in the playoffs last year, like Atlanta and Philly).

IMO, I think their biggest weakness, besides Eli, is the coach. Unfortunately, I don't think they're going to move on from him after this season, but I truly believe they are much closer to a playoff team now, than they would have been if they took Rosen/Allen/Darnold last season.

Think about it this way. If you were naming the 5 worst teams in the NFL, wouldn't the Bills, Cardinals and Jets be right near the top of that list? All 3 of them took a quarterback last year in the top 10, and they are all in deep, deep shit now. The Giants haven't made that huge mistake yet. Maybe they still will, but I think letting Eli take the pounding this year, grabbing a talent like Barkley and freeing up cap space for the future was and is a solid plan. If they don't like any of the college QB's out there this year, they have the option of looking for one in free agency (or giving Lauletta, the one they did draft last year, a chance). They even have the option of waiting another year and building the rest of the roster out some more.

Time will tell, but IMO, I'd rather be a fan of the Giants than the Bills/Jets/Cardinals right now, both for this season and going forward, because I'd be a hell of a lot more optimistic that they'll hit on a QB before any of those rookie QB's figure it out.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
See, I think this is the crux of our disagreement. I don't think they're terrible. The offensive line has been a disaster, but it's not like they ignored it last offseason. How much can you blame them when guys like Solder, and Omameh who they signed in the offseason forgot how to block? Their starting center (also a Patriots draft pick) broke his leg in like the third game of the season, and Flowers was so bad, they had to give up on him, but they made a serious effort to rebuild that line last offseason and it didn't work out. If I'm the Giants, I'm damn happy that didn't take place with a rookie QB standing behind them. Let Eli take that beating this year.
I agree they attempted to fix it, but they failed. The problem is that they got rid of their two decent starters (Pugh and Richburg) at the same time they got rid of their bad starters. The line isn't better, on paper or on the field, than it was in 2017, and it's likely to need another overhaul before it gets good.

The Giants also had the option to take a QB #2 and still let Eli take the beating while the QB sat, as the Chiefs did with Smith / Mahomes last year.

They've lost 7 games this year, but only 2 of them were by more than one score, New Orleans and Philly, neither of whom are bad teams. They lost to Panthers by 2 points at Carolina, they lost at Dallas (which is a tough place to play), they lost at Atlanta by 3 points, and they lost to Washington, who is their division leader. They beat Houston (who has won, I think, every game since then) and they just beat the Niners on the road. Outside of Dallas and the Niners, their other 7 opponents are all playoff contenders (or were in the playoffs last year, like Atlanta and Philly).
They're a little unlucky to be 2-7, as you say, but their point differential is that of a 3-6 team: still awful. They are 0-4 at home. They have lost to four sub-.500 teams. They are 20th in scoring D, 22nd in total D, basically below average in all defensive numbers across the board, and 31st in sacks.

Time will tell, but IMO, I'd rather be a fan of the Giants than the Bills/Jets/Cardinals right now, both for this season and going forward, because I'd be a hell of a lot more optimistic that they'll hit on a QB before any of those rookie QB's figure it out.
I think it depends on how bullish you are on Allen / Darnold / Rosen and the coaching staffs there. We've seen with the Rams that things can turn around pretty fast with the right coaching and right offseason moves. I'd rather have Rosen or Darnold than Allen or the NYG QB situation, I think the Bills have the best coach of the bunch, and the Giants have most stable ownership. I don't see how you can have any confidence the Giants will hit on a QB though. We don't know where the Giants are going to pick or who's going to be available.