2 hours ago, RLC said:

It makes such a difference. Look at the Chiefs vs. the Bengals. The Chiefs came out flat after that game vs. the Bills. The Chiefs also had an easy playoff game the week before, but it's just hard to play 3 straight, locked-in playoff games. Can Dallas beat SF & us? Sure. It's just asking a lot to go on the road for *5* straight weeks (last 2 regular season games were on the road). That does catchup with you.
 

Short week flying to the WC as well for what should be a very physical game

8 minutes ago, metal said:

Would be nice if our 2019 1st round pick could play RT. That would probably solve all of these issues, or at least some of them, but oh well.

Driscoll hasn't been bad. The Eagles didn't hide him at all in his two starts and he held up fairly decently.

If you look at how bad Evan Neil has been for the Giants, I would be way more concerned about their right tackle than ours even if Lane can't go.

I think people get used to seeing Lane, and think that's how right tackles are supposed to look. The truth is that probably half the starting right tackles in the league are way closer to Driscoll than they are to Lane.

 

39 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

I dont know who Id rather play should be advance to the NFCCG.

Don't sweat it.  It will work itself out one way or the other. 

Looking at the Giants over the last few weeks, I think the way to stop their offense is fairly straight forward.   Crowd the LOS.   This will limit their running game and the short passing game that Jones has been feasting on.  AND, if you play zone, focusing on taking away the short stuff, you will also limit Jones' ability to run.  Force him to beat you over the top.  If he does, then you tip your cap.  But, that's not his strong suit.  Force him to beat you doing what he's weakest at.  DO NOT give him the easy stuff.

 

Just now, ManuManu said:

 

That's ok.  I have complained about it too.

 

I've also complained about teams lining up offsides to try to stop it.  

Good start. 

9 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

 

The league sure is using it a helluva lot if they have such a problem with it.

Almost every team does it now.  All perfectly legal, they can complain to the Rules Committee

1 minute ago, ManuManu said:

Good start. 

I think this would indicate Brandon Staley is being kept?  Usually firing the head coach would have this impact organically.

7 minutes ago, Mike31mt said:

The league sure is using it a helluva lot if they have such a problem with it.

Almost every team does it now.  All perfectly legal, they can complain to the Rules Committee

Yup.  Would require a rule change.  And what would they say... "Only one player is permitted to push a player in a scrum"?  How do you enforce that?  In a scrum, how do you know how is pushing whom?  Could be pushing defender, or ball carrier?  Or pushing another blocker... 

 

I hate that they are using Hurts as a battering ram... but I've said my piece on it.   It is effective with him.  The fact that the coaches went back to that well with Minshew is my bigger concern.  It's like they have forgotten that other plays are allowed in those short yardage situations.

13 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

Good start. 

This is a place that would be awesome for Brian Johnson. I think Chargers will probably go with a bigger name though.

15 minutes ago, Alphagrand said:

I think this would indicate Brandon Staley is being kept?  Usually firing the head coach would have this impact organically.

A scapegoat was needed

26 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

 

The best defense to something very successful in the NFL. 

 

Complain about the rules.

7 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Yup.  Would require a rule change.  And what would they say... "Only one player is permitted to push a player in a scrum"?  How do you enforce that?  In a scrum, how do you know how is pushing whom?  Could be pushing defender, or ball carrier?  Or pushing another blocker... 

 

I hate that they are using Hurts as a battering ram... but I've said my piece on it.   It is effective with him.  The fact that the coaches went back to that well with Minshew is my bigger concern.  It's like they have forgotten that other plays are allowed in those short yardage situations.

Exactly, on both points.

I dont mind the rule at all, I know you may disagree.  But I like forcing teams to innovate and it's a decision point: do we take the easy candy and subject our QB to the mass of humanity with a sneak?  Or do we try to come up with safer ideas for Inches-To-Go situations?

The fact is that the Eagles identified a strength and have been abusing the league with it.  So almost every team has followed suit.  It works.  

 

On your last point, oddly, that is why Im quietly confident going into this game.  The more I look back on the last 3 weeks of the season, the more I believe the coaches were just playing a risky game where they held everything close to the vest and went with bland gameplans.  It almost burned them big time.    But my brain cant process how bad the coaching was vs. Dallas and NO at times.   The Giants game was thankfully a walkthrough, so it bailed the coaches out a little bit 

 

I would like to see Sanders do the QB sneak, why wouldn't it work

 

4 minutes ago, Sack that QB said:

 

The Chargers fired Reich as their OC in 2016; I doubt they would bring him back under those circumstances.

 

26 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

This is a place that would be awesome for Brian Johnson. I think Chargers will probably go with a bigger name though.

Should have fired Staley too

11 minutes ago, BwianWestbwook said:

I would like to see Sanders do the QB sneak, why wouldn't it work

Good idea - but can he handle a direct snap (it would need to be practiced)...

3 hours ago, eagle45 said:

And that’s why one upset was critical for us.  Our SB odds are much better with NYG —> SF than DAL —> SF.

The Giants win over the Vikings was not an upset.

50 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Looking at the Giants over the last few weeks, I think the way to stop their offense is fairly straight forward.   Crowd the LOS.   This will limit their running game and the short passing game that Jones has been feasting on.  AND, if you play zone, focusing on taking away the short stuff, you will also limit Jones' ability to run.  Force him to beat you over the top.  If he does, then you tip your cap.  But, that's not his strong suit.  Force him to beat you doing what he's weakest at.  DO NOT give him the easy stuff.

Yes.

This is the game where we want to play zone coverage with an extra player in the box, as it limits what Jones can do as a runner + helps against Barkley. If the Giants want to test us deep, so be it.

26 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Yup.  Would require a rule change.  And what would they say... "Only one player is permitted to push a player in a scrum"?  How do you enforce that?  In a scrum, how do you know how is pushing whom?  Could be pushing defender, or ball carrier?  Or pushing another blocker... 

 

I hate that they are using Hurts as a battering ram... but I've said my piece on it.   It is effective with him.  The fact that the coaches went back to that well with Minshew is my bigger concern.  It's like they have forgotten that other plays are allowed in those short yardage situations.

It seems a lot safer than having him sneak it without support from the backside. A lot of times a QB might run too high and then he gets bent backward on top of the pile. Daniel Jones did a sneak where that happened and it looked like it hurt like hell.

14 minutes ago, BwianWestbwook said:

I would like to see Sanders do the QB sneak, why wouldn't it work

Sanders can’t squat 12,000 lbs like Hurts can, would never work

3 minutes ago, mattwill said:

The Giants win over the Vikings was not an upset.

Yes it was