Loading ...Eli Manning saved his New York Giants last Sunday after being arguably outplayed by Robert Griffin III and the Washington Redskins, but after an uneven two-interception performance by Eli and over 500 yards of offense allowed by the Giants defense, how are the national pundits feeling about Big Blue?
In this week's look at the most useless thing we cover, the Giants appear to be inching closer to the top. They've finally cracked the top three in two of the four rankings we watch and they sit in fourth in the other two rankings.
ESPN.com
This week's ranking: 2
Last week's ranking: 3
Their comment: Befuddled most of the day by RG3 and the Redskins, the Giants still somehow managed to win. It's what they do.
Our comment: ESPN's Dan Graziano said it pretty well, so we'll just leave it at that. Fair enough to be ranked only behind the 6-0 Atlanta Falcons.
CBSsports.com
This week's ranking: 4
Last week's ranking: 5
Their comment: They have to get out of the habit of playing down to the competition, especially at home. That defense still has some major problems.
Our comment: While CBS' Pete Prisco also hits the nail on the head with his comment and we can handle being ranked behind the Houston Texans, we still can't believe a Jay Cutler and the Chicago Bears are ranked so high (second!), even if their defense being pretty darned good).
Profootballtalk.com
This week's ranking: 2
Last week's ranking: 3
Their comment: The schedule gets difficult now, which is good for a team that can't get focused when it's time to play inferior foes.
Our comment: Second time this week we've heard that we play down to the competition, which we suppose we can't argue with. However, given the team's history of mid-season swoons, we'd hardly say the insanely tough schedule is "good."
FOXsports.com
This week's ranking: 4
Last week's ranking: 5
Their comment: Eli Manning's 23rd 4th-quarter comeback came on a 77-yard catch and run to Victor Cruz. To put that into perspective, Tom Brady has 25 4th-quarter comebacks.
Our comment: Really, Brian (yes, the former Baltimore Ravens coach now writes up power rankings for Fox) Billick? How insightful. How many 4th-quarter comebacks does Drew Brees have? Or Peyton Manning? Wait, why does it matter here?
All in all, the Giants continued to inch up the charts. A more sound beating of the Redskins might have made for a bigger leap, but we're probably not leap-frogging the Falcons until they lose, and this little super scientific study we do every week has taught us two things:
First, defense goes a long way in Power Rankings, and there are still some reservations out there about the Big Blue D.
Second, as long as the Giants keep playing down to the competition people won't have a problem keeping them down in their rankings.
But hey, all style points aside, wins are wins. As Graziano wrote, "it's what they do."
photo credit: The U.S. Army via photopin cc
Also…
- Be sure to like Giants 101 on Facebook, follow Giants 101 on Twitter & +1 Giants 101 on Google+
- Check out the latest line of GMENShirts, including the new pink version which supports the fight against Breast Cancer
- Listen to Gameface with The Frattman every Sunday morning at 9 AM EST on 940 ESPN Radio
Related Videos
Returning Soon!!!!No related posts.
Short URL: http://sport-ne.ws/lzr
Simon, I interpreted Billick’s comment as “Eli is every bit as good as Brady!”
For most non-Giant folk – expert or otherwise – that’s pretty high praise
Agreed. Brady has the rep of being one of the most clutch QBs of all-time. Billick’s throwing Eli’s name into the mix.
JimStoll got it. To compare Eli to Brady is very high praise, especially when you consider that if you judge a QB by his body of work, Tom Brady is the best in the league right now.
Anyone who thinks the Giants don’t bring back Cruz and Nicks is bananas.. Nicks, Cruz, JPP and Beatty are all difference makers and will ALL be resigned.. Guys like Diehl, Osi Thomas and Webster will be gone in the next year or two to clear the room to resign them.. You don’t win championships by letting star players about to hit their prime walk.. Cmon, Wake the F*ck up already…
Reply
demo3356 says:
October 25, 2012 at 9:09 AM
Bradshaw costs over 8 million the next 2 years… buh bye… He will get cut LONG before Cruz or Nicks is let go.
Looking at it further, Nick and Cruz are under giants control next season, JPP though 2014. Between now and the end of next year, about 50 Million in salary will come off the books and another 10 is tied to Snee and Baas, who may or may not be worth that number going into 2014 season. I don’t think there is any doubt that the 4 difference makers are resigned, but many of the vets that currently make up this roster will be jettisoned this off season or next to clear room. Guys like Bradshaw, Diehl, Osi, Tuck, Canty, Boley, Snee are all likely gone by start of 2014 season. There wil be plenty of money to keep the irreplaceable guys
I might have said this in a less d’kish way, but demo is right. Teams don’t let the proverbial ‘difference makers’ leave. There are tough choices to be made … but not when it comes to those guys. That short list is Eli, Cruz, Nicks, JPP, and Beatty. The hard choices will be made on the ones a notch below … all solid performers who we don’t want to lose … but we will regrettably let them walk if it means keeping critical contributors.
You are both + 1k. No GM worth his salt will let important players leave unless he knows he has a > or = replacement on hand or on the way.
The trick is the role players and “up and coming” proven talent. Those are hard choices and that is where Reese, coaches and scouts earn their pay checks. Sometime they only have their “gut” to go with.
Power rankings are fine … but like statistics you can’t put too fine a point on them.
Where are these posts where people here are saying that core players won’t be resigned? I see some hypothetical discussion as to who is more valuable Nicks/Cruz and debate over the importance of Beatty. But I’m not clear where anyone is saying that Nicks, Beatty, etc. won’t be or shouldn’t be re-signed in thefuture. It’s just discussion. Passes the time between Sundays.
Someone suggested yesterday a few threads back, mostly as food for thought I believe, that it might be worth letting one of the WR’s walk for the sake of maintaining the rest of the team as two #1′s is more of a luxury than a a necessity. Kept my day at work a little more interesting!
I’ve read posts questioning the wisdom of spending big money on both Nicks and Cruz; I have read Dirt passive aggressively question Beatty’s importance to this offensive line; I’ve read people suggest Eli could just “make” another star receiver; and I myself said that I was confident that Reese would be able to replace one of those “core” players should he be unable to resign them.
But Chad, you’ve been here long enough to know that FF55 doesn’t let obnoxious little things like accurate descriptions of other folks’ arguments get in the way of his bloviating.
fanfor55years says:
October 24, 2012 at 11:13 PM
Have I really just read long commentaries as to why the Giants should plan on just signing one of Nicks and Cruz and that “Eli will make any receiver look good” so we wouldn’t be devastated without one or the other of them? And that Bennett will just be jettisoned because there isn’t enough money?
The first is perhaps the most ridiculous statement I’ve seen around here since the days when the majority of posters insisted that the Giants needed to draft a quarterback in 2006 and 2007 to replace that total bum Eli Manning. The second is probably just wrong.
Let’s see. John Unitas had Lenny Moore and Raymond Berry. Joe Montana had two future Hall of Fame receivers to throw to (I assume I don’t need to tell you their names, even though some of you may not have known about Lenny Moore). Eli Manning has, and will continue to have, Hakeem Nicks and Victor Cruz. To suggest the Reese will not move heaven and earth to assure that outcome is to be downright silly. Just stop it.
Dirt says:
October 24, 2012 at 11:17 PM
This. A whole lot of this.
GmenMania says:
October 24, 2012 at 11:21 PM
+100000
TonyMW says:
October 25, 2012 at 1:15 AM
While I always respect your opinions FF55, you just named 2 WR tandems that are in a complete different era than we are currently in. For me it’s not a question of if he SHOULD sign them both, it’s if he CAN sign them both. While I don’t expect either to command anything close to Fitz money, you have to assume they are gonna be looking for something in the 50-60 million dollar range. Can we really tie that up in one position?
TonyMW says:
October 25, 2012 at 1:51 AM
While we’re at it….why not name some Super Bowl winning QB’s that DIDN’T have 2 “great” receivers? I don’t mind if my opinion is popular or not, and I don’t really care for picking and choosing certain criteria to fit an argument. The FACT is that it’s not a necessity, and truly a luxury. Eli’s girl Tom Brady has been winning for the better part of a decade mostly with no name receivers and a marginal running game. Why? Because he makes those around him better. That’s what great QB’s do, and we have one.
While I was crunching some numbers in regards to being able to re-sign Nicks AND Cruz, I had an epiphany. I had a “What was I thinking”" moment. We can just sign Cruz to a huge, lucrative contract and not worry so much about Nicks. Why you ask?? It totally slipped my mind that Nicks just doesn’t care about the money, we just have to see how many football caps Jerry Reese is willing to offer!!!
I still say let’s just take care of Cruz ASAP and see what happens with the rest of the season before we start talking who to retain and who to let go.
Yeah, that’s the likely course of action. I’m just happy to know we don’t have to pay Nicks in actual money!!
Eli got 1% of the overrated votes? I guess that means that 1% of NFL players “got down syndrome or some type of sprinkle of retardation cause they ugly and talk slow.”
Have the Giants ever lost out on one of their own FAs who they really wanted to resign during the Reese regime? I’m sure there’s an example out there, but I can’t think of any.
Cofield, Ross, Jacobs, … they were all deemed expendable to some degree as we had already drafted younger, better replacements (Linval, Prince, Wilson).
Using that logic, couldn’t one make an argument that one of the WR’s is expendable because we drafted Randle?
To clarify…not saying Randle is better, but did we draft a WR in the 2nd to have him be a #3 for his whole Giants career?
I’m sorry if I insulted some with my comments about the discussions regarding who gets retained, but some of the arguments made just seemed silly.
So now I’d like to point out that while some have specifically objected to how the Giants bring in offensive linemen, whatever the means used they DO have a stable of younger guys who are being worked in order to see if they have in their system and solid coaching.the goods to step in when “non-essential” contracts come up for evaluation. All those late draft picks and UDFA pickups are learning at Flaherty’s knee and we may, in fact, have the successors of all of our current offensive linemen who won’t be retained (Beatty and Boothe will be, Snee might be, Baas should be if he can start proving he can stay healthy because centers can play well into their 30′s) in the stable already, or at least readying to compete with new draft picks made over the next 2-3 years. This is the way a really well-run team does things: anticipate the future.
The Giants believe that in Brewer and McCants they have superb athletes who can play tackle and just need seasoning. They believe that in Mosley they have one of those brawlers whom they love to get and refine under Flaherty, and who can play both guard and tackle. None cost them particularly high draft picks, and they could afford to wait for these guys knowing that most teams simply don’t have the ability to develop offensive linemen over time that they do. That is brilliant use of their competitive advantage: better scouting and better position coaching. And it puts Jerry Reese in a good position to do what he does: survey the market and then name a price that the Giants believe a player is worth when his contract is up, and be willing to have someone walk if he insists on more and he isn’t considered a “cornerstone” player.
Now look at what they’ve done in the defensive backfield. It’s the same deal. With Amukamara, Hosley, Hill, Brown, Sash, and Coe they have a nice group of young players who can make up much of what would be lost if they can only retain one among Webster, Thomas, Phillips and Rolle. Add a few higher profile draft picks and they’re in good shape. My guess is that Rolle will play out his career with the Giants, signing at least one more contract with them, that Thomas will be back next year on a cheap deal, and that Webster is probably a goner unless he’ll take 2nd-3rd corner money.
Look at the way they have covered for the possible loss of Osi by developing Tracy, retaining Kiwi, and hanging onto Ojomo rather than expose him on the practice team after what everyone saw in preseason. And if you don’t think retaining both Austin and Kuhn is thought of as possible insurance against the departure of Canty you’re not thinking deeply enough.
The Giants are brilliant at the player development process. They know that great scouting, excellent drafting, a few brilliant free agent signings (especially among the UDFAs), top position coaching and patience with young players is the ONLY way to “beat” the cap system. If a team does not always have talent boiling up from the depth chart and the practice squad it can seek to compete for a year or two, but not much beyond that thanks to the cap. But when you have a “Quarterback in Full” like Eli Manning who is probably going to be our guy under center for at least another 7-8 years you need to be ready to compete for the Lombardi Trophy each and every year you have him. The Giants have put themselves in position to do so, and we should all recognize that.
Posts like that make my day.
I agree. Great post!!
+1000
Ok I guess I really need to explain my stance on Cruz and Nicks. Of course I would like to keep but given the cost of WRs like that I don’t see it as an economically feasible maneuver to make while keeping the rest of our roster balanced with talent. Realize that Vincent Jackson is making 11 mil a year with I think 25-30 mil in guarantees. Both of our WRs would demand more on an open market given their talent and age. Cruz we can probably get as a little cheaper because he hasn’t made any money yet. But even Antonio Brown signed a 5 year 43 mil contract and don’t forget the rumored 5 year 35 mil with 15 mil guaranteed we offered Steve Smith. That Brown contract is probably the best case for Cruz or Nicks. So if we signed both WRs to that type of contract that’s 17 mil tied up in two WRs. We also are going to sign players like Beatty, Joseph and JPP that will command big money, probably 30 mil per year between all of them.
It’s one thing to invest a lot into your QB, OL, DL but WR too? I just look at it as an area where we need to invest in both Nicks and Cruz to make our offense elite. We didn’t draft Randle to be our future 3rd WR we drafted him because he can be a future very good starter. By losing one of Nicks or Cruz it doesn’t kill our offense. Eli can still pass the ball well. It hurts but we did invest in Wilson for a reason. By 2014 he should be our version of McCoy so our offense can be less dependent on WRs.
Other SB teams definitely had great WRs with their great QBs but they didn’t have to pay them the type of money we would have to for our pair. Pitt won a SB after they let go of Plax. We won a SB after losing Steve Smith. NE never won a SB with Randy Moss. I just don’t think WR is a smart investment on 2 big-time contracts. Eli is good enough that he can make average players good, good players great and great players HOFers. I’m not saying he has some magic powers but let’s not act like he hasn’t been successful with an ever changing cast of WRs. I rather bet that Eli can make a very good group look great and shore up our other core areas than rely on a great group of WRs carrying a team. I know that’s what we kind of did last year but to me that’s not a long term way of success. Just like Diehl at LT wasn’t.
I look at Indy and I think this is what they tried to do for Peyton, invest in the skill positions because he was familiar with them. I think that was a bad investment because Indy would have been better off with a better OL and defense. They relied on Peyton to be great, much like we did with Eli last year. But that’s not the way to have continued SB success IMO. I think the all-round team view that us and the Steelers have employed is far better for winning SBs.
In 2014 if we have Nicks or Cruz, Randle, Hixon, Jernigan and a 2013 1-3 round WR draft choice, Bennett, Robinison and Wilson then how is that not giving Eli a very good array of skilled position talent? Having both Nicks and Cruz makes us better but the increment better is likely not worth it financially if the numbers I’m looking at are in the ballpark. I don’t want to be NE or NE, I want to field a top defense as well. This type of investment means you are relying on players like Kuhn/Austin without injuries at various positions. I just don’t think that’s smart. Maybe I’m wrong and we can keep Nicks and Cruz with bargain deals and with a the cap expanding in 2014 we can still keep everyone we would like to. But I doubt it.
My thoughts EXACTLY (with about 10,000 words added, haha)
As for the power rankings, I don’t really have much interest although they do make for a nice discussion piece. I just can’t understand some fans that are like “Whaaaat?? We’re only ranked 5? But we beat this team who beat that team and that team is ranked 3? That’s crazy!!” I guess some people put too much credence into them, while I see them for what they are. Fun.
Okay, I’m not going into this any longer, but you are missing the point that Hakeem Nicks and Victor Cruz aren’t just “excellent” players. They are special. Their presence together makes EVERYTHING else on offense possible. It takes safeties out of the box. It makes our #3 receiver impossible to cover because three defensive backs have to worry about two elite receivers. It opens up the field for our running attack and tight end.
And yeah, someday Reuben Randle might be able to do a modest imitation of what Nicks and Cruz do except for one little thing: they are both game-breakers, a talent that is extremely rare in the NFL and cannot just be “found” among high-quality receivers.
Both of these guys could someday be enshrined in Canton. A barely decent GM doesn’t part with that. And Jerry Reese ain’t no “barely decent” GM.
You want to win in today’s NFL? Have a great quarterback who has great receivers, a great defensive line (the only way to defend great quarterbacks), excellent coaching and drafting, a “decent” defensive backfield and a “decent” running game.
You’re missing the forest for the trees, but obviously this argument is useless because you’ve convinced yourself of a logic that just ain’t so. I’m done with it.