To paraphrase Nuke LaLoosh, losing is like, worse than winning. It's been a long time since Giants fans had to face the post-loss feeling and the central accompanying question: Was it merely a bad day or a revelation of serious flaws?
After the Giants first loss last year to Cleveland, people gravitated to the bad-day theory. There was no way Cleveland was better than the Giants, went the thought, so what transpired on the field must have been some sort of aberration. Paradoxically, losing convincingly to a good team like the Saints seems a little more alarming. No, the Saints won't score seven touchdowns if these teams play again, but it's hard to imagine how the Giants will close the gap.
Giants fans should keep in mind that Sunday was the perfect storm: The Giants played exceptionally poorly, the Saints played exceptionally well, and most momentum-swinging plays seemed to go the Saints' way (think of Webster's near interception on the first drive, the penalties on kickoffs, and the Eli's fumble on the final drive of the first half.) The Giants pass rush was non-existent on Sunday, which won't be the case when these teams play again. And either the coverage scheme or the players' execution of it can't get any worse than it was Sunday.
**
What's to like:
The Running Game: The running backs had 81 yards on 17 carries, averaging 4.76 yards per. Obviously it wasn't a big factor, but before it became confirmed that the Giants wouldn't be stop the Saints all game, the running game was one thing they had going for them. As usual, Bradshaw looked like he did more with the blocking than Jacobs. On the Giants' first drive, Jacobs ran a counter that looked like it could have gone for big yardage. He was in the open-field trying to run away from an oncoming safety, but he was caught from behind by Charles Grant, a defensive end. Bradshaw possibly could have taken that for big yardage, which would have provided the Giants with an answer for the Saints first score. That was a big play.
Lawrence Tynes: A 49-yarder and a 38-yarder, and the kicks were sailing through the middle. That makes five in a row, and he looks on the cusp of a good stretch. Additionally, he did a nice job on the onside kick at the end of the game, which Derek Hagan wound up dropping. His kickoffs were short, however.
Domenik Hixon: Good to see him, and not Sinorice Moss, returning kicks - they guy's a natural. The returns were excellent, including a play toward the end of the game, when Hixon hustled to catch a short punt and bring it back to the 50. But here's the question: Why was Hixon featured early on as a receiver and not...
Hakeem Nicks?: Sure, his touchdown was a pure product of garbage time, but it's hard to sneeze at 5 catches for 114 yards. With Manningham's nagging torso injuries (chest last week, back this week) it seems like all three guys - Nicks, Hixon, and Manningham - will figure.
**
What's not to like:
Bill Sheridan: Obviously, the plan to rely on the front four to provide the pass rush didn't work out. That was apparent after New Orleans' first two series, but Sheridan mostly stuck to the script while the Saints ran away with the game. Then he finally mixed in some blitzes, but I'd be surprised if a single one worked. In the secondary, the Giants played a soft zone that Drew Brees easily exploited. Whether that was the result of the scheme or the execution, the result falls on Sheridan's shoulders.
The Defensive Line: We knew they would be the X-factor in this game, and they turned in the worst performance in memory. To say there was zero pressure on Drew Brees would be an exaggeration. But to say that the Giants laid a finger on Brees only three times would not be. Sure, the secondary and linebackers got gashed, but at least part of this was due to Brees' being able to comfortably sit back in the pocket and get into a rhythm. Bad coverage or not, allowing 15 straight completions does not happen if there's a pass rush.
C.C. Brown: All you need to know about this game is that C.C. Brown led the team with 12 tackles. Because of the backbreaking plays that he was involved in, C.C. was probably "the face" of this loss, and is now the biggest question mark on the defense. When C.C. wasn't completely out of position (the play-action TD to Moore, the touchdown pass to Colston when Dockery thought he had safety help) he was making a bad play on the ball (the touchdown to Meacham, the bomb to Colston that went as an imcomplete pass because Colston had gone out of bounds by a few inches). At this point, one has to think that the substitution of Brown for Phillips turns the Giants' safeties from an above-average group to a below-average one. With Boley gone, their linebacking corps is now below-average in pass coverage as well. This is worrisome as the Giants go into a stretch against teams that have good over-the-middle passing games and tight ends (Arizona, Philadelphia, San Diego, Atlanta).
Penalties: Two encroachments on Fred Robbins, one on Barry Cofield, and two important fifteen-yard personal fouls on kickoffs that put the defense even more on its heels than it already had been. (Bad job by Fox not producing replays on those, though). In total, the Giants gave up 110 yards on nine penalties. The pass interference call on Webster and the holding on O'Hara on Jacobs' touchdown were bogus, however.
Eli Manning: Eli's line was bad (14-for-31 with 178 with a touchdown and a pick, a 61.1 rating), but it would have looked much worse had not Vilma bailed him out by going helmet-to-helmet on him, and had Sharper not whiffed on a pick he would usually make on Manningham's second quarter touchdown. Shoddy pass protection didn't help - as Eli made perfectly clear when he yelled at Bradshaw for blocking the wrong man on his interceptions - but Eli made plenty of bad throws and plenty of bad decisions. The worst decision of them all was not spiking it after completing a pass at the end of the second quarter. It seemed like the Giants' pre-snap confusion led to the protection breakdown that resulted in Eli's fumble. In an afternoon full of bad plays, it was that play that was the most devastating.
Pass Protection: Obviously some breakdowns, but overall not so terrible. Eli was sacked twice and hit four times. I'll say this: the protection would have looked a lot better if Eli had hit some of those throws.
Linebacker Pass Coverage: Of all the "It was over when..." plays in this game, the one that truly ended it was the 3rd and 17 completion to Lance Moore late in the third quarter, which put the Saints in position to score another touchdown and go up 41-17. That play was completed in front of the safeties, who gave way too big of a cushion. But as Troy Aikman astutely pointed out, the throw was so easy because the linebackers did not get enough depth. Another big play at the expense of the linebackers was Moore's 12-yard touchdown catch in the second quarter, which came with Pierce in coverage.
McKenzie's Injury: Beatty is a promising prospect, but a serious injury to McKenzie would threaten our offensive line continuity, one of the best thing about this generation of Giants teams. McKenzie's groin is wait-and-see at this point.
Derek Hagan: Had a chance to grab a beautiful onside kick by Tynes, but dropped it. It was that kind of day.
Rubberneck: The Saints are good. There's no doubt about it. But don't expect to see them play any better than they did the other day. If you're a Saints' fan, I'd be concerned about them peaking too early. (Not to mention that if/when the Gmen see the Saints again, assuming that they Giants are healthy this time around, it'll be a much different ballgame).
I'm very curious to see how the Dolphins fare against the Saints this weekend. Something tells me the Fins won't panic and succumb to playing the type of shootout the Saints want their opponents to play, but will instead stick with what Miami does best -- running the ball, controlling the clock and keeping Brees off the field. Something also tells me they give the Saints a much better game than the Giants did.
If you are not a believer now, wait till we demolish Washington and Dallas.
Also look at the best and worst possible outcomes. Best case is we get 3 points, so we're down 7 at the half (which isn't THAT different than being down 10). We saw the worst case -- down by 17 with no momentum and the game effectively over. Given those choices you clearly take a knee, keep the momentum, and be happy that you are only down 10 to a team that played as good a first half as a team can play.
Assume we needed to get to the 35 to give Tynes a chance. That's 50 yards in 55 seconds against a D dropping back in the prevent, and again, WE HAD NO TIMEOUTS. Very slim chance of getting any points, and scrambling like that increases the chances of a turnover and also plays right into the type of shootout the Saints want to play.
I love TC, but that was an extremely dumb and costly decision.