PDA

View Full Version : Pick A Team ...



Kruunch
12-19-2012, 12:02 PM
... that you think is run better than the Giants (or you would like to see the Giants emulate) over the course of the past decade with respect to offense and defense and let's see if we can figure out what they're doing better.

P.S. - I bet I can debunk most of your picks.

Rudyy
12-19-2012, 12:04 PM
THE JETS. No seriously, the Patriots. Very fast paced, dink and dunk team that has a mixture of different plays.

GameTime
12-19-2012, 12:05 PM
... that you think is run better than the Giants (or you would like to see the Giants emulate) over the course of the past decade with respect to offense and defense and let's see if we can figure out what they're doing better.

P.S. - I bet I can debunk most of your picks.

of course you can debunk them since yout think you are always right.....:)

Toadofsteel
12-19-2012, 12:06 PM
Patriots
Niners (under harbaugh only though)
Texans
Steelers

GameTime
12-19-2012, 12:06 PM
... that you think is run better than the Giants (or you would like to see the Giants emulate) over the course of the past decade with respect to offense and defense and let's see if we can figure out what they're doing better.

P.S. - I bet I can debunk most of your picks.
2 SBs in 10 years.....I have may get annoyed at stuff they do but they are doing somehting right so I like the Giants. Different strokes for different folks. Better for one team is not better for another.

Kruunch
12-19-2012, 12:14 PM
of course you can debunk them since yout think you are always right.....:)

Well .... duh.

Kruunch
12-19-2012, 12:28 PM
THE JETS. No seriously, the Patriots. Very fast paced, dink and dunk team that has a mixture of different plays.

I'm glad you started with the Pats because I think they happen to be the best team in the NFL, year to year over the past decade.

The absolute key to their success ... Bill Bellichick. They've been a revolving door for players (sans Brady) and coordinators (both OC and DC) and yet they always manage to remain on top of the pile. The last time they missed the playoffs, Brady was out the whole year and they STILL went 11-5 (can you imagine missing the playoffs with 11 wins?!).

HOWEVER, the Pats haven't always been that fast paced dink and dunk team. In fact, when they were in the epitome of their dink-and-dunk offense (2001-2006) they were winning SBs (and not being favored in doing so) and since moving away from that they've whiffed twice (although their regular season record has tended to improve over that duration). The Pats made the move away from the dink-dunk-run to a more vertical game with Randy Moss in 2007 and have spent the last two seasons flailing a bit (still making the SB mind you) trying to reorganize their offense.

Overall, the Pats define excellence in transition by CONSTANTLY being in transition.

Having said all that, we DID beat them twice in the biggest game the NFL has to offer :D

P.S. - I also happen to think Bellichick is the best HC to ever stand a side line in NFL history. Much man-love for this guy and I'm proud that he was part of the Giants organization.

Kruunch
12-19-2012, 12:34 PM
Patriots
Niners (under harbaugh only though)
Texans
Steelers

Patriots (noted above)

Niners - You can't be serious? All 1 3/4 seasons? Talk about fickle :p ... come see me in 8 years and lets see where the Harbaugh regime stands.

Texans - Have been to the playoffs ONCE in their existence.

Steelers - The Rooneys and Maras are probably the closest friends of any two ownership groups in the NFL. Not coincidentally, they also happen to be run almost identically. The major difference in my mind; Tomlin inherited one of the best DCs in the game, whereas their OCs have caused them to be offensively sputtering in fits and starts during the past decade. Conversely, our own OC has continually kept the Giants in the top third of the league in offensive production during his tenure. The Steelers earn one more trip to the SB than the Giants under their current regimes and lost. Otherwise, they could be virtual twin franchises (fraternal twins obviously).

Laurah1275
12-19-2012, 12:37 PM
I'm glad you started with the Pats because I think they happen to be the best team in the NFL, year to year over the past decade.

The absolute key to their success ... Bill Bellichick. They've been a revolving door for players (sans Brady) and coordinators (both OC and DC) and yet they always manage to remain on top of the pile. The last time they missed the playoffs, Brady was out the whole year and they STILL went 11-5 (can you imagine missing the playoffs with 11 wins?!).

HOWEVER, the Pats haven't always been that fast paced dink and dunk team. In fact, when they were in the epitome of their dink-and-dunk offense (2001-2006) they were winning SBs (and not being favored in doing so) and since moving away from that they've whiffed twice (although their regular season record has tended to improve over that duration). The Pats made the move away from the dink-dunk-run to a more vertical game with Randy Moss in 2007 and have spent the last two seasons flailing a bit (still making the SB mind you) trying to reorganize their offense.

Overall, the Pats define excellence in transition by CONSTANTLY being in transition.

Having said all that, we DID beat them twice in the biggest game the NFL has to offer :DOk, so then what goes wrong for them when they play us? What is it about the Giants that puts a sudden screech to all their greatness?

Rudyy
12-19-2012, 12:40 PM
Ok, so then what goes wrong for them when they play us? What is it about the Giants that puts a sudden screech to all their greatness?We control TOP by running the ball and putting pressure on Tom Brady. Not just pressure, but actually getting to him and hitting him.

Rudyy
12-19-2012, 12:41 PM
I'm glad you started with the Pats because I think they happen to be the best team in the NFL, year to year over the past decade.The absolute key to their success ... Bill Bellichick. They've been a revolving door for players (sans Brady) and coordinators (both OC and DC) and yet they always manage to remain on top of the pile. The last time they missed the playoffs, Brady was out the whole year and they STILL went 11-5 (can you imagine missing the playoffs with 11 wins?!).HOWEVER, the Pats haven't always been that fast paced dink and dunk team. In fact, when they were in the epitome of their dink-and-dunk offense (2001-2006) they were winning SBs (and not being favored in doing so) and since moving away from that they've whiffed twice (although their regular season record has tended to improve over that duration). The Pats made the move away from the dink-dunk-run to a more vertical game with Randy Moss in 2007 and have spent the last two seasons flailing a bit (still making the SB mind you) trying to reorganize their offense.Overall, the Pats define excellence in transition by CONSTANTLY being in transition. Having said all that, we DID beat them twice in the biggest game the NFL has to offer :DP.S. - I also happen to think Bellichick is the best HC to ever stand a side line in NFL history. Much man-love for this guy and I'm proud that he was part of the Giants organization.Well said. I like how they utilize everyone on their offense. Ridley, the receivers and the tight ends.

Laurah1275
12-19-2012, 12:45 PM
We control TOP by running the ball and putting pressure on Tom Brady. Not just pressure, but actually getting to him and hitting him.I don't follow the Patriots too much, so I'm not sure but, there must be other teams in the NFL that pressure and hit Brady as well, but the Patriots still come out the victor. What is so special about the Giants?

Kruunch
12-19-2012, 12:48 PM
Ok, so then what goes wrong for them when they play us? What is it about the Giants that puts a sudden screech to all their greatness?

Well, I wouldn't consider it a "screech to their greatness". You're talking about recent history (3 out of 4 in the past 5 years) and 4 games in 5 years does little to ding a franchise ... except when two of those are the biggest game. :D

But to answer your question, the playoffs are played much tighter than regular season games (a few exceptions aside of course) and that tightness only grows more as you approach the Super Bowl. Evidenced by how both teams don't manage to reach their offensive averages during those games and conversely, how both of their defenses come alive (a lot less flags called in the playoffs and SB).

Looking a little more closely at each SB:

2007: We ran an aggressive blitz happy defense that ran some really off-scheme blitzes (for that period). Namely the Zone Dog blitz (dropping the DE into coverage and blitzing the Safety or LB) and the defensive Muddle Huddle (also called the Amoeba by Cris Collinsworthless). Our aggressive defense and one absolutely amazing offensive play was the difference in a close game.

2011: We ran a similar D to the Pats that year ... the bend-don't-break defense with a two deep shell, one under as a base look (our Safety Nickle vs. their Shell Nickle). Most teams tend to run a defense that can beat their offense (purposefully or accidentally) and in this case, the Giants defense was perfectly suited to the Patriots offense. Also the Patriots offense was much more constrained that year, having lost Randy Moss and not having a vertical threat to stretch the field made our defensive game plan much easier to execute. Finally, this Super Bowl came down two plays ... one amazing offensive play by us ... and one fairly routine pitch and catch that was missed by them.

It's not so much a mystery that we match up well against each other when you consider that TC and BB are close friends and have come up through the same organization in the NFL at the same time under the same guru HC (Parcells).

Rudyy
12-19-2012, 12:50 PM
I don't follow the Patriots too much, so I'm not sure but, there must be other teams in the NFL that pressure and hit Brady as well, but the Patriots still come out the victor. What is so special about the Giants?Well you look at their 4 losses. All of them are against (or were against at one point) the top defenses in the nfl. Seattle, San Fran, Baltimore and Arizona (despite their record).

BlueJayC
12-19-2012, 12:51 PM
As everyone has already said.....THE PATRIOTS......the Giants offense has the capability of being just as if not more potent and consistent......the Giants actually have better receivers, backs and Manning has shown he can be just as effective as Brady if given the opportunity. I just don't think their offensive personnel are being utilized correctly.

Kruunch
12-19-2012, 12:51 PM
I don't follow the Patriots too much, so I'm not sure but, there must be other teams in the NFL that pressure and hit Brady as well, but the Patriots still come out the victor. What is so special about the Giants?

Not consistently.

Both Brady and Eli are the two least sacked QBs over the past decade.

That's why you also hear so much about our vaunted pass rush ... we did what few other teams could do and NO other team could reproduce.

But that's just how we beat the Pats recently ... the Jets managed to beat the Pats their first two years under Ryan by playing superior in the secondary.

Kruunch
12-19-2012, 12:54 PM
As everyone has already said.....THE PATRIOTS......the Giants offense has the capability of being just as if not more potent and consistent......the Giants actually have better receivers, backs and Manning has shown he can be just as effective as Brady if given the opportunity. I just don't think their offensive personnel are being utilized correctly.

I think ANY team has the capability of doing what the Pats do. Talent (as proven) is secondary to scheme and execution. The Pats have been doing what they do with nobodies their entire run; nobodies who go on to do nothing with other teams.

Hence the man-crush for BB.

Short of that, I think the Giants have grown their team better than the Pats (if not utilized that team better). Keep in mind that we're talking about THE exception here.

Kruunch
12-19-2012, 12:55 PM
Well you look at their 4 losses. All of them are against (or were against at one point) the top defenses in the nfl. Seattle, San Fran, Baltimore and Arizona (despite their record).

I think Arizona was just a trap game for them and got caught in the rare nap but good point.

Laurah1275
12-19-2012, 01:00 PM
Not consistently.

Both Brady and Eli are the two least sacked QBs over the past decade.

That's why you also hear so much about our vaunted pass rush ... we did what few other teams could do and NO other team could reproduce.

But that's just how we beat the Pats recently ... the Jets managed to beat the Pats their first two years under Ryan by playing superior in the secondary.OK, I get you.


Side note: "we did what few other teams could do and NO other team could reproduce"........god I love the Giants! ;)

Kruunch
12-19-2012, 01:02 PM
Well said. I like how they utilize everyone on their offense. Ridley, the receivers and the tight ends.

The Giants used to be really good at this. This year I think we've locked on to Cruz and Bradshaw too much.

Kruunch
12-19-2012, 01:03 PM
OK, I get you.


Side note: "we did what few other teams could do and NO other team could reproduce"........god I love the Giants! ;)

Enjoy it ... in context, the Giants of 2007 beat the best NFL team to ever set foot on a field in the biggest game there is.

History right before our eyes :)

nhpgiantsfan
12-19-2012, 01:04 PM
I think ANY team has the capability of doing what the Pats do. Talent (as proven) is secondary to scheme and execution. The Pats have been doing what they do with nobodies their entire run; nobodies who go on to do nothing with other teams.

Hence the man-crush for BB.

Short of that, I think the Giants have grown their team better than the Pats (if not utilized that team better). Keep in mind that we're talking about THE exception here.

Nobodies??? Pretty sure their best offensive year was 2007 when Brady to Moss were breaking records. Along with 1200 yards for Welker. And they now revolve around Brady, Welker, Gronk, and Hernandez. Hardly nobodies. Just because they never played anywhere else, it doesn't make them nobodies. These are star players that would have success anywhere.

However, they have done it all without a real stud RB. And up until 2007 they were stacked with big names on defense.

Kruunch
12-19-2012, 01:38 PM
Nobodies??? Pretty sure their best offensive year was 2007 when Brady to Moss were breaking records. Along with 1200 yards for Welker. And they now revolve around Brady, Welker, Gronk, and Hernandez. Hardly nobodies. Just because they never played anywhere else, it doesn't make them nobodies. These are star players that would have success anywhere.

However, they have done it all without a real stud RB. And up until 2007 they were stacked with big names on defense.

Mulroney, Givens, Brown, Branch, Milloy, Law, Greer, Dillon, Watson, the list goes on and on ... all made names for themselves on the Pats and all went on (or came from) other teams where they did nothing.

In fact the only person I've heard of actually being even somewhat notable after leaving the Pats was Assante Samuel (you could possibly say Seymour but he got banished to Oakland where careers go to die).

Oh and btw, the Fins thought Welker was a bust ... that's why they traded him. And I bet he'd be back to dropping slants over the middle on any other team.

ozzie0075
12-19-2012, 01:48 PM
Mulroney, Givens, Brown, Branch, Milloy, Law, Greer, Dillon, Watson, the list goes on and on ... all made names for themselves on the Pats and all went on (or came from) other teams where they did nothing.

In fact the only person I've heard of actually being even somewhat notable after leaving the Pats was Assante Samuel (you could possibly say Seymour but he got banished to Oakland where careers go to die).

Oh and btw, the Fins thought Welker was a bust ... that's why they traded him. And I bet he'd be back to dropping slants over the middle on any other team.

People tend to forget that the Pats best player when they won the SB in 2004 wasn't Brady. It was Corey Dillon who ran over 1600 yards. That was their last SB win and they didn't because they ran balanced offense.

Toadofsteel
12-19-2012, 01:50 PM
I think ANY team has the capability of doing what the Pats do. Talent (as proven) is secondary to scheme and execution. The Pats have been doing what they do with nobodies their entire run; nobodies who go on to do nothing with other teams. Hence the man-crush for BB.
Ergo, Killdrive is the problem on offense.


Short of that, I think the Giants have grown their team better than the Pats (if not utilized that team better). Keep in mind that we're talking about THE exception here.
The Giants also have a history of players that did well here going to other teams only to disappear or die. Shockey, Boss, Plax, SS12, Goff, Ross, Tollefson, Jacobs, Manningham.

nhpgiantsfan
12-19-2012, 01:51 PM
Mulroney, Givens, Brown, Branch, Milloy, Law, Greer, Dillon, Watson, the list goes on and on ... all made names for themselves on the Pats and all went on (or came from) other teams where they did nothing.

In fact the only person I've heard of actually being even somewhat notable after leaving the Pats was Assante Samuel (you could possibly say Seymour but he got banished to Oakland where careers go to die).


Oh and btw, the Fins thought Welker was a bust ... that's why they traded him. And I bet he'd be back to dropping slants over the middle on any other team.

Lawyer Milloy was a 4 time probowler, and Ty Law went to 5 pro bowls. You never heard of them afterward because they went to irrelevant teams. Deon Branch wasn't even a star when he was a Patriot. Never even had a 1000 yard season. And it's not even worth talking about Welker and Miami. Take any receiver in the league and would they have better numbers with Brady or whoever was in Miami. WR's can't be stars on their own. Their success has a lot to do with who is tossing them the ball.

TroyArcher
12-19-2012, 01:51 PM
Only the Pats, Steelers and Packers come close over the past 10 years. Pats win 10+ games every year (although they have the luxury of a very weak AFC East most years) but have not won a SB in a while. I like the way the Steelers play, tough defense and good coaching. Packers have been pretty good for awhile and very good the past few years. Overall I'd go with the Steelers as a very close second.

Kruunch
12-19-2012, 02:11 PM
Ergo, Killdrive is the problem on offense.


Yes we all know you don't like KG.

But if you're going to hold up the most efficient and craftiest HC in NFL history as the example, then I think you make the point for me why we should be happy to have KG as our OC.

Point being ... the Giants aren't as bad as their last game ... all the Chicken Littles to the contrary. And are in fact, one of the top franchises of the past decade. Be proud, not angry.

Kruunch
12-19-2012, 02:17 PM
Lawyer Milloy was a 4 time probowler, and Ty Law went to 5 pro bowls. You never heard of them afterward because they went to irrelevant teams. Deon Branch wasn't even a star when he was a Patriot. Never even had a 1000 yard season. And it's not even worth talking about Welker and Miami. Take any receiver in the league and would they have better numbers with Brady or whoever was in Miami. WR's can't be stars on their own. Their success has a lot to do with who is tossing them the ball.

Milloy was a 3 time All Pro ... all with New England.

Ty Law was a 2 time All Pro ... all with New England.

That's not to say they weren't good players over all ... just that they were MUCH better players under the Pats' scheme.

Welker couldn't catch a ball to save his life on the Fins. Massive case of the dropsees. The Pats traded for him because they couldn't cover him and coached him up.

Learning is fun! :D

nhpgiantsfan
12-19-2012, 02:44 PM
Milloy was a 3 time All Pro ... all with New England.

Ty Law was a 2 time All Pro ... all with New England.

That's not to say they weren't good players over all ... just that they were MUCH better players under the Pats' scheme.

Welker couldn't catch a ball to save his life on the Fins. Massive case of the dropsees. The Pats traded for him because they couldn't cover him and coached him up.

Learning is fun! :D

Ok this will be my last post in this thread.

Lawyer Milloy pro- bowls. 1998, 1999, 2001, 2002. All-pro 1999

Ty Law pro-bowls 1998, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2005. All-pro 1998, 2003.

I do my home work before I post. You should do the same...

And you look silly trying to minimize Wes Welker...

Kruunch
12-19-2012, 03:32 PM
Ok this will be my last post in this thread.

Lawyer Milloy pro- bowls. 1998, 1999, 2001, 2002. All-pro 1999

Ty Law pro-bowls 1998, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2005. All-pro 1998, 2003.

I do my home work before I post. You should do the same...

And you look silly trying to minimize Wes Welker...

Ok you just confirmed EXACTLY what I just said (with respect to Milloy and Law) ... you could have just said "Oh I looked it up and you were right, my bad!".

BTW which, the one Pro Bowl (non-All Pro appearance) by Law that wasn't with New England, was the year he left. Pro Bowl voting being the popularity contest it is, there you go.

And I wasn't trying to minimize Welker ... he's an excellent receiver. Rather I was illustrating the point that the Pats get the best out of these players due to their scheme and coaching (ergo, why these players look less impressive elsewhere). Point being, the Pats make the players, the players do not make the Pats (call it the uber version of "next man up").

TheEnigma
12-19-2012, 03:33 PM
Alabama Crimson Tide

Kruunch
12-19-2012, 03:35 PM
Alabama Crimson Tide

I'll be impressed when Saban puts his big boy pants on and takes an NFL HC job again.

Assuming he's gotten over the ***** slapping he took the first time around.

P.S. - Another Bellichick disciple.

TheEnigma
12-19-2012, 03:41 PM
I'll be impressed when Saban puts his big boy pants on and takes an NFL HC job again.

Assuming he's gotten over the ***** slapping he took the first time around.

P.S. - Another Bellichick disciple.

I can't understand the excitement in watching more than half of Alabama's games. You know they're going to win and do it by a hefty margin. Just takes the fun out of it.

Kruunch
12-19-2012, 03:44 PM
I can't understand the excitement in watching more than half of Alabama's games. You know they're going to win and do it by a hefty margin. Just takes the fun out of it.

I feel that way about most college ball.

TheEnigma
12-19-2012, 03:51 PM
I feel that way about most college ball.

You know, we usually complain about how the Giants keep most games too close to the point it's bad for our health but this season has certainly had it's fair share of lopsided games. We owned CAR, SF, and GB while getting dominated by CIN and ATL. We could of even added DAL to this list if we knew better how to close them and PIT certainly outplayed us most of that game where we had questionable calls in our favor.

Rudyy
12-19-2012, 03:53 PM
How do you feel about the Saints offense? I know they've only been relevant the past couple of years, but once they get going, they are hard to stop. You dont have to comment on their defense lmao.

nhpgiantsfan
12-19-2012, 03:54 PM
Ok you just confirmed EXACTLY what I just said (with respect to Milloy and Law) ... you could have just said "Oh I looked it up and you were right, my bad!".

BTW which, the one Pro Bowl (non-All Pro appearance) by Law that wasn't with New England, was the year he left. Pro Bowl voting being the popularity contest it is, there you go.

And I wasn't trying to minimize Welker ... he's an excellent receiver. Rather I was illustrating the point that the Pats get the best out of these players due to their scheme and coaching (ergo, why these players look less impressive elsewhere). Point being, the Pats make the players, the players do not make the Pats (call it the uber version of "next man up").

Players like Welker and other WR's can't dictate who their QB is. You can call it "coaching them up" all you want. I will call it going from receiving passes from Jay Fiedler, A.J. Feeley, Gus Frerotte, Joey Harrington, & Daunte Culpepper, to taking passes from Tom Brady.

TheEnigma
12-19-2012, 04:00 PM
How do you feel about the Saints offense? I know they've only been relevant the past couple of years, but once they get going, they are hard to stop. You dont have to comment on their defense lmao.

Easily the best offense in the league when all the parts are present (Sean Payton included). Doesn't hurt that they fielded a top 5 offensive line the last few years. Carl Nicks and Jahri Evans were the best G duo I've seen in years. Outside of Graham and maybe Colston, they don't field any extraordinary talent at the skill positions but their depth is tremendous.

Kruunch
12-19-2012, 04:09 PM
How do you feel about the Saints offense? I know they've only been relevant the past couple of years, but once they get going, they are hard to stop. You dont have to comment on their defense lmao.

Sean Peyton has done a great job of engineering one of the most dynamic offenses in the NFL (and in my mind, the only offense continually better than the Pats).

Ironically, as an OC he did little for the Giants, including getting benched from play calling by Jim Fassel in 2002. Of course that probably wasn't the easiest group of players to get on the same page (including the HC himself).

But half a team is half a team. The Saints are suffering from similar problems as the Packers ... great offenses, crappy defenses. Look at what a great DC did for the Texans.

Sean Payton is certainly more dynamic (offensively) than KG is. And his willingness to turn a blind eye (something TC would never do I think), definitely helped the Saints for a couple of years but in the long run, that's really come back to bite them in their collective asses.

From an organizational standpoint, the Giants are SOOOOO much better than the Saints. From ownership to front office practices to drafting, the Giants win in every category. Not to mention so much more classy.

Ironically, both their HC (who is also their true OC) and their DC are Giants alumnists.

Kruunch
12-19-2012, 04:15 PM
Players like Welker and other WR's can't dictate who their QB is. You can call it "coaching them up" all you want. I will call it going from receiving passes from Jay Fiedler, A.J. Feeley, Gus Frerotte, Joey Harrington, & Daunte Culpepper, to taking passes from Tom Brady.

I knew you couldn't say away :D

True ... but balls that hit the player in the hands, are catchable balls. It's not like Tom Brady puts some super secret super catchable spin (or lack thereof) on the ball. And you certainly don't have to be a HoF QB to get a receiver to produce (just ask Keyshawn Johnson).

BTW which, you put Tom Brady on the Jaguars and I bet he becomes a very mediocre QB that pounds the turf a lot. Or have you not caught the Matt Cassel show before it went off the air?

Rusty192
12-19-2012, 04:20 PM
Sean Peyton has done a great job of engineering one of the most dynamic offenses in the NFL (and in my mind, the only offense continually better than the Pats).

Ironically, as an OC he did little for the Giants, including getting benched from play calling by Jim Fassel in 2002. Of course that probably wasn't the easiest group of players to get on the same page (including the HC himself).

But half a team is half a team. The Saints are suffering from similar problems as the Packers ... great offenses, crappy defenses. Look at what a great DC did for the Texans.

Sean Payton is certainly more dynamic (offensively) than KG is. And his willingness to turn a blind eye (something TC would never do I think), definitely helped the Saints for a couple of years but in the long run, that's really come back to bite them in their collective asses.

From an organizational standpoint, the Giants are SOOOOO much better than the Saints. From ownership to front office practices to drafting, the Giants win in every category. Not to mention so much more classy.

Ironically, both their HC (who is also their true OC) and their DC are Giants alumnists.I'd take Payton back in a second. He has made Brees and Graham what they are.

freeoscar
12-19-2012, 04:20 PM
So you claim that the Pats 'coach people up'. but how does that explain the defense? Bellicheck is a supposed defensive genius, yet he has had middling defenses for years (and that's with getting 6 games/yr against the offensively putrid dolphins, jets and bills). You need talent, and he hasn't hit the right buttons recently on the defensive side of the ball. when you are constantly drafting in the bottom third of the draft, it is hard to get things right. Thankfully, that's a problem the giants have as well.

Kruunch
12-19-2012, 04:22 PM
You know, we usually complain about how the Giants keep most games too close to the point it's bad for our health but this season has certainly had it's fair share of lopsided games. We owned CAR, SF, and GB while getting dominated by CIN and ATL. We could of even added DAL to this list if we knew better how to close them and PIT certainly outplayed us most of that game where we had questionable calls in our favor.

I think it's more from games like the Red Skins (both this year and last year) where the general sentiment was we should have beat them decisively and we either squeaked it out or flat lost.

The Bucs and Browns games were similar ... teams we should have soundly beat but we decided to spot them a few TDs.

But there is no rhyme or reason to their wins/losses this year ... you'd expect the Giants and 49ers to have been a close game and we blow them out as we did to a bad Panthers team. And then we also get blown out by a very mediocre Bengals team and a hot Atlanta team (media makes WAYYYYY too much of how they won imo).

All in all it should tell you, that at the end of the day it's not HOW you win ... it's just whether you win. The opponent is regardless.

So while big scores and flashy regular season totals are nice, I'll take the slogs and the multiple SBs. Otherwise we'd be the Eagles :D

Kruunch
12-19-2012, 04:25 PM
I'd take Payton back in a second. He has made Brees and Graham what they are.

As an OC? Oh yeah in a heart beat. I like KG but I'm not stupid :D

As an HC I'm not sure ... Payton hasn't had a long enough resume yet and this whole BountyGate thing sends off huge red flags for me (of course, BB survived SpyGate sooooo ....).

BUUUUUUUUUUUT ... where I think BB would have success with any QB he worked with in New England, I don't think Payton is the same kind of coach. I think he relies on how dynamic Brees is and I'm not sure he could get the same level of performance out of Eli (just a gut feeling).

ozzie0075
12-19-2012, 04:28 PM
As an OC? Oh yeah in a heart beat. I like KG but I'm not stupid :D

As an HC I'm not sure ... Payton hasn't had a long enough resume yet and this whole BountyGate thing sends off huge red flags for me (of course, BB survived SpyGate sooooo ....).

BUUUUUUUUUUUT ... where I think BB would have success with any QB he worked with in New England, I don't think Payton is the same kind of coach. I think he relies on how dynamic Brees is and I'm not sure he could get the same level of performance out of Eli (just a gut feeling).

A real interesting question is would BB and Brady be where they are today if Bledsoe doesn't get hurt?

TheEnigma
12-19-2012, 04:30 PM
A real interesting question is would BB and Brady be where they are today if Bledsoe doesn't get hurt?

Probably not. That's why it always irked me when experts gave the Patriots so much credit for drafting Brady. He was never taken under the intentions of being the next QB or anything - he was just meant to be a career backup at the time. You have to give Brady major props for taking advantage of a huge opportunity because he probably knew it was now or never to snag a starting job and jump start his career.

Rusty192
12-19-2012, 04:31 PM
As an OC? Oh yeah in a heart beat. I like KG but I'm not stupid :D

As an HC I'm not sure ... Payton hasn't had a long enough resume yet and this whole BountyGate thing sends off huge red flags for me (of course, BB survived SpyGate sooooo ....).

BUUUUUUUUUUUT ... where I think BB would have success with any QB he worked with in New England, I don't think Payton is the same kind of coach. I think he relies on how dynamic Brees is and I'm not sure he could get the same level of performance out of Eli (just a gut feeling).Back in his original capacity as OC of course. TC is great. I love him as our coach.

It's funny cuz you got people saying how Brees is not the same without Payton. I guess it just depends on opinion.

If you put Eli in a big stat offense, I bet he will give you big stats. No doubt in my mind. Not to mention being inside a dome 50% of the year, but I digress.

Kruunch
12-19-2012, 04:31 PM
So you claim that the Pats 'coach people up'. but how does that explain the defense? Bellicheck is a supposed defensive genius, yet he has had middling defenses for years (and that's with getting 6 games/yr against the offensively putrid dolphins, jets and bills). You need talent, and he hasn't hit the right buttons recently on the defensive side of the ball. when you are constantly drafting in the bottom third of the draft, it is hard to get things right. Thankfully, that's a problem the giants have as well.

If you notice, a bunch of great defensive teams all of a sudden became very mediocre a couple of years ago. About the same time the new receiver and QB rules were put in. Hmmmmmm.

But the Pats also have a prolific offense that offsets that. Same with the Packers and ... haha ... the Giants :D

Ultimately the old equations of how you defined "good" and "bad" defenses have to change in this new era of offensive oriented football.

PPG and defensive red zone efficiency should be the stat of note with defenses today ... not yards.

Kruunch
12-19-2012, 04:36 PM
Back in his original capacity as OC of course. TC is great. I love him as our coach.

It's funny cuz you got people saying how Brees is not the same without Payton. I guess it just depends on opinion.

If you put Eli in a big stat offense, I bet he will give you big stats. No doubt in my mind. Not to mention being inside a dome 50% of the year, but I digress.

Brees has shown he can do it without Peyton when he took the Chargers (out of the blue I might add) to the post season. Now I don't think he'd be as prolific because Peyton's offense squeezes all of the ability out of Brees. Conversely, I don't think Payton would be successful with mediocre QB (whereas BB already has been ... a couple of times).

And as far as Eli is concerned, we won't know but off the top of my head I'd say no ... he doesn't have the touch for those short routes the way Brees does. He'd be prolific but I think an offense like the Giants or Packers (or the Pats when they ran their vertical game) suits Eli best.

Kruunch
12-19-2012, 04:40 PM
A real interesting question is would BB and Brady be where they are today if Bledsoe doesn't get hurt?

BB yes (to a greater or lesser degree). But we could very well be talking about Matt Cassel being the future HoF that replaced Bledsoe when he retired.

Think of the other QBs BB has had success with ... Bernie Kosar and Matt Kassel. Had they had full careers under BB, I think we're talking about those guys being HoFers.

I don't mean to minimize Brady's career or accomplishments ... but I think he's been put in the absolute best situation a QB could ask for.

TheEnigma
12-19-2012, 04:48 PM
BB yes (to a greater or lesser degree). But we could very well be talking about Matt Cassel being the future HoF that replaced Bledsoe when he retired.

Think of the other QBs BB has had success with ... Bernie Kosar and Matt Kassel. Had they had full careers under BB, I think we're talking about those guys being HoFers.

I don't mean to minimize Brady's career or accomplishments ... but I think he's been put in the absolute best situation a QB could ask for.

True but I respectfully disagree with you on Brady not being able to succeed outside of NE at this point in his career. The man has seen enough shifts in offensive philosophy and has gone through tons of players to the point that he could probably make a contender out of most teams in the NFL if you give him one training camp. I'd argue that the Patriots recent troubles of not being able to acquire a SB would fall on BB's lack of good drafting for the defensive side of the ball. He has missed on a ton of DBs.

ozzie0075
12-19-2012, 04:59 PM
True but I respectfully disagree with you on Brady not being able to succeed outside of NE at this point in his career. The man has seen enough shifts in offensive philosophy and has gone through tons of players to the point that he could probably make a contender out of most teams in the NFL if you give him one training camp. I'd argue that the Patriots recent troubles of not being able to acquire a SB would fall on BB's lack of good drafting for the defensive side of the ball. He has missed on a ton of DBs.

I also think Brady would be good regardless of what system he played in.

Rusty192
12-19-2012, 05:06 PM
Brees has shown he can do it without Peyton when he took the Chargers (out of the blue I might add) to the post season. Now I don't think he'd be as prolific because Peyton's offense squeezes all of the ability out of Brees. Conversely, I don't think Payton would be successful with mediocre QB (whereas BB already has been ... a couple of times).

And as far as Eli is concerned, we won't know but off the top of my head I'd say no ... he doesn't have the touch for those short routes the way Brees does. He'd be prolific but I think an offense like the Giants or Packers (or the Pats when they ran their vertical game) suits Eli best.Betcha Eli would rock on an offense like GB runs with Rodgers. He'd prob consistently put up gaudy numbers. Fans like that sorta thing. I really couldn't care less.

nhpgiantsfan
12-19-2012, 11:29 PM
BB yes (to a greater or lesser degree). But we could very well be talking about Matt Cassel being the future HoF that replaced Bledsoe when he retired.

Think of the other QBs BB has had success with ... Bernie Kosar and Matt Kassel. Had they had full careers under BB, I think we're talking about those guys being HoFers.

I don't mean to minimize Brady's career or accomplishments ... but I think he's been put in the absolute best situation a QB could ask for.

Come on. The guy has been the most dominant QB for the past decade, maybe the best ever, and you're acting like it could've been just as good with any other QB because of BB. This is nonsense. I mean this guy made his name as a defensive coach. Now all of a sudden he is a QB guru. Give some credit to the guys that are actually making the plays. I mean BB may have made Brady a smarter football player, no doubt, but the stats this guy puts up with, in your own words "a bunch of nobodies" playing around him. I mean come on, you can only coach a guy up so much.

Maybe BB is very lucky that Bledsoe got hurt. Just sayin...

Hessian
12-20-2012, 01:13 AM
over the past 10 years? Only the patriots, and maybe the steelers. You are talking the entire time frame and not anyone and their sister witha one year wonder right?

Kruunch
12-20-2012, 08:56 AM
Betcha Eli would rock on an offense like GB runs with Rodgers. He'd prob consistently put up gaudy numbers. Fans like that sorta thing. I really couldn't care less.

You realize that our offense and the Packers offense are very similar? The only real difference is they stunt more out of the backfield, where we run a more traditional run game.

Kruunch
12-20-2012, 09:10 AM
Come on. The guy has been the most dominant QB for the past decade, maybe the best ever, and you're acting like it could've been just as good with any other QB because of BB. This is nonsense. I mean this guy made his name as a defensive coach. Now all of a sudden he is a QB guru. Give some credit to the guys that are actually making the plays. I mean BB may have made Brady a smarter football player, no doubt, but the stats this guy puts up with, in your own words "a bunch of nobodies" playing around him. I mean come on, you can only coach a guy up so much.

Maybe BB is very lucky that Bledsoe got hurt. Just sayin...

Well it's hard to prove since we haven't seen Brady without BB ... BUT we have seen BB without Brady. We've seen BB do it as a DC with both the Giants and the Jets. We've seen him rebuild a whole franchise with the Browns just before it got yanked out from under him. And he did it with QBs like Bernie Kosar, Mike Tomzcak and Vinny Testaverde. We've seen Brady go down for a whole season and Matt Cassel go in and pick up right where Brady left off and go 11-5 that season. And that's something Cassel hasn't be able to duplicate with the Chiefs, even with them having most of the Patriots staff.

And no, he's not an especially prolific QB guy ... but he is a life time coach and an orchestrator of great football schemes on both sides of the ball. It's this flexibility (or call it knowledge migration) that makes him such a great coach. That and an eye for talent (that's all Parcells' legacy imo) that doesn't include any of the glitz of hype (hence the low key drafts).

And I don't believe the same could be said of Brady. And yes, that's just an opinion based on nothing much more then gut instinct. Brady gets frustrated too easily and it's only BB's calming influence that keeps him from being the next Cutler.

nhpgiantsfan
12-20-2012, 10:11 AM
Well it's hard to prove since we haven't seen Brady without BB ... BUT we have seen BB without Brady. We've seen BB do it as a DC with both the Giants and the Jets. We've seen him rebuild a whole franchise with the Browns just before it got yanked out from under him. And he did it with QBs like Bernie Kosar, Mike Tomzcak and Vinny Testaverde. We've seen Brady go down for a whole season and Matt Cassel go in and pick up right where Brady left off and go 11-5 that season. And that's something Cassel hasn't be able to duplicate with the Chiefs, even with them having most of the Patriots staff.

And no, he's not an especially prolific QB guy ... but he is a life time coach and an orchestrator of great football schemes on both sides of the ball. It's this flexibility (or call it knowledge migration) that makes him such a great coach. That and an eye for talent (that's all Parcells' legacy imo) that doesn't include any of the glitz of hype (hence the low key drafts).

And I don't believe the same could be said of Brady. And yes, that's just an opinion based on nothing much more then gut instinct. Brady gets frustrated too easily and it's only BB's calming influence that keeps him from being the next Cutler.

I think you are giving him way too much credit for his time with the Browns. In 5 years he had 1 winning season.

Nobody is disputing his accomplishments as a defensive coordinator , but ask yourself this question.

When did Belechik go from being a great defensive mind with a so/so resume as a head coach, to being an all world, greatest ever, head coach??

The answer: Right about the time Tom Brady took over as QB for the Pats. Oh and he may have been assisted by some video tape. And let's not forget since then, he has been out coached by the Giants staff twice in the biggest game.

Great coach, no doubt. But he's not the saviour that your making him out to be.

Kruunch
12-20-2012, 10:32 AM
I think you are giving him way too much credit for his time with the Browns. In 5 years he had 1 winning season.

Yes ... but each of his seasons was successively better (what you look for in an HC) and he also totally rebuilt that team (not to mention doing so in the time of the FA transition in the NFL). In addition, his groundwork was the basis for the Ravens 2000 Championship (Ozzie Newsome has attested to this) and the building of THAT team (which really was just an extension of what BB started with the Browns prior to them moving).



Nobody is disputing his accomplishments as a defensive coordinator , but ask yourself this question.
When did Belechik go from being a great defensive mind with a so/so resume as a head coach, to being an all world, greatest ever, head coach??
The answer: Right about the time Tom Brady took over as QB for the Pats.


Well kind of hard to separate the two since BB and Bledsoe only had one year (the inaugural year I might add). However as I said before, we haven't seen Brady without BB, so it's hard to determine if Brady could do it elsewhere, but we have seen BB without Brady and he has been very successful elsewhere, on both sides of the ball.



Oh and he may have been assisted by some video tape. And let's not forget since then, he has been out coached by the Giants staff twice in the biggest game.

SpyGate is a topic for people who don't know a thing about football, please don't fall into that trap. As for the Giants beating him twice since in the biggest game, that's a testament to both franchises ... the Pats for getting back again and again and the Giants for beating a team that was heavily favored ... twice (and my main point about the Giants franchise being one of the best franchises in football over the past decade).



Great coach, no doubt. But he's not the saviour that your making him out to be.

Name another coach that's come remotely close to doing what Bellichick has done with the Pats during the FA period of the NFL (post 1993).

Then name a coach that's come remotely close to doing what Bellichick has done in the HISTORY of the NFL.

Nuff said.

nhpgiantsfan
12-20-2012, 11:19 AM
His last year in Cleveland, he went 5-11. That was 1995. The Ravens didnt win the SB until 2000. I am not gonna try and look up how many of those players were holdovers from the BB regime, but I would say it's probably a stretch to say he built the Ravens SB team.

And you say BB has been very successful elsewhere on both sides of the ball?? He had one great year as a HC prior to New England. 11-5 1994. His team had losing seasons in the remaining 4 years. And he followed up that 11-5 with a 5-11 season. I wouldn't consider that very successful at all.

It's a stretch to say BB was very successful before Brady. AS a DC? Of course. But he became a HOF head coach when Tom Brady came into the picture. It's basically a chicken or egg scenerio, that I guess is unanswerable. So everything else is just opinion.

And as far as spygate. I tend to agree that more is made of it than should be, but we'll never really know on that either.

Kruunch
12-20-2012, 11:38 AM
His last year in Cleveland, he went 5-11. That was 1995. The Ravens didnt win the SB until 2000. I am not gonna try and look up how many of those players were holdovers from the BB regime, but I would say it's probably a stretch to say he built the Ravens SB team.


Sorry I should have put an asterix by the 1995 season ... that was the season Art Modell announced that he was moving the Browns to Baltimore and the whole city erupted. The football team suffered accordingly (think of the Saints this year, but much worse seasonal distractions) so I don't normally mark that as a good indication of what the team was doing that season. Same with the Saints this year for example.

The Ravens front office (to this day) used BB's formula for finding and developing players. That was BBs biggest thing ... how to evaluate players (he went so far above and beyond what the NFL had currently been doing when he took over the Browns). Ozzie Newsome built the 2000 Ravens. Ozzie directly attributed his success to BB (publicly).



And you say BB has been very successful elsewhere on both sides of the ball?? He had one great year as a HC prior to New England. 11-5 1994. His team had losing seasons in the remaining 4 years. And he followed up that 11-5 with a 5-11 season. I wouldn't consider that very successful at all.


Read up. And then consider what that franchise was like when he took it over and where he took it.



It's a stretch to say BB was very successful before Brady. AS a DC? Of course. But he became a HOF head coach when Tom Brady came into the picture. It's basically a chicken or egg scenerio, that I guess is unanswerable. So everything else is just opinion.


Correct ... which I believe I've said already. Don't get me wrong, Brady is an excellent QB. I just happen to think he is more scheme dependent than some other QBs (Favre, Marino, Peyton Manning, etc ...). Again, just my opinion (what else would it be?!).



And as far as spygate. I tend to agree that more is made of it than should be, but we'll never really know on that either.

Either way he's been very successful since (if not actually winning the big game). The fact that producing a SB win is so elusive to begin with and that he's been in half of them in the past decade kind of makes my point about BB. As for Brady, we'll just have to agree to disagree (certainly your opinion is no more or less valid than mine).

BillTheGreek
12-20-2012, 12:06 PM
... that you think is run better than the Giants (or you would like to see the Giants emulate) over the course of the past decade with respect to offense and defense and let's see if we can figure out what they're doing better.

P.S. - I bet I can debunk most of your picks.


Patriots !

Consistent

Kruunch
12-20-2012, 12:14 PM
Patriots !

Consistent


OMG read the thread :p

BillTheGreek
12-20-2012, 12:22 PM
OMG read the thread :p

Is this a Trick Question ? I need a second chance !

Rudyy
12-20-2012, 12:24 PM
Is this a Trick Question ? I need a second chance ! Read post #7 on the first page.

M00KIE
12-20-2012, 12:33 PM
My top 3 are NE, Giants, Steelers in no particular order. They are truly pro franchises from the top and that matters.

BillTheGreek
12-20-2012, 12:33 PM
Read post #7 on the first page.

Ok Got it !................... Sorry , Can't read all the Posts ! ... If I did I Will be here forever ! LOL .

BTW .........Next time,Lets have a More difficult Question ! lol


There’s always somebody saying that Giants can’t do it, and those people have to be ignored.

BuffyBlueII
12-20-2012, 01:18 PM
I don't follow the Patriots too much, so I'm not sure but, there must be other teams in the NFL that pressure and hit Brady as well, but the Patriots still come out the victor. What is so special about the Giants?

Tom Coughlin knows Bill Bellichek very, very well. That is what the difference is in my opinion. Any QB will be thrown off rythym when he is pressurred. Tommy Brady has less than 10 bad games over the past decade.

Captain Chaos
12-20-2012, 01:20 PM
REDSKINS.....

BuffyBlueII
12-20-2012, 01:22 PM
I knew you couldn't say away :D

True ... but balls that hit the player in the hands, are catchable balls. It's not like Tom Brady puts some super secret super catchable spin (or lack thereof) on the ball. And you certainly don't have to be a HoF QB to get a receiver to produce (just ask Keyshawn Johnson).

BTW which, you put Tom Brady on the Jaguars and I bet he becomes a very mediocre QB that pounds the turf a lot. Or have you not caught the Matt Cassel show before it went off the air?

Tommy Brady is one of The Greatest QBs ever and he will shine on any team.

Matt Cassel took a team that went 16-0 during the previous season and then went 10-5 the next season when Tommy Brady got hurt.

BuffyBlueII
12-20-2012, 01:28 PM
His last year in Cleveland, he went 5-11. That was 1995. The Ravens didnt win the SB until 2000. I am not gonna try and look up how many of those players were holdovers from the BB regime, but I would say it's probably a stretch to say he built the Ravens SB team.

And you say BB has been very successful elsewhere on both sides of the ball?? He had one great year as a HC prior to New England. 11-5 1994. His team had losing seasons in the remaining 4 years. And he followed up that 11-5 with a 5-11 season. I wouldn't consider that very successful at all.

It's a stretch to say BB was very successful before Brady. AS a DC? Of course. But he became a HOF head coach when Tom Brady came into the picture. It's basically a chicken or egg scenerio, that I guess is unanswerable. So everything else is just opinion.

And as far as spygate. I tend to agree that more is made of it than should be, but we'll never really know on that either.

More of SpyGate has been made of it than it should.

BB is a great HC but it is Tommy Brady that is the one that makes that team. He gets the most out of the players around him.

BuffyBlueII
12-20-2012, 01:34 PM
Maybe BB is very lucky that Bledsoe got hurt. Just sayin...

Watch it because some of these folks are going to start claiming that Coach Bellichek offerred a bounty to oppossing teams to hurt Bledsoe. lol......

It is amazing how folks are trying to marginalize Tom Brady and how they are also trying to claim that NE Patriots losing 2 SuperBowls since SpyGate proves it was all SpyGate for the reason they won. Going undefeated during regular season and making it to SuperBowl the next year blew that theory out and showed exactly how little SpyGate contributed to their wins.

Going to 2 SuperBowls and losing may be dissapointing but it is still a very successful season. Heck, when folks were screaming after SuperBowl XXXV that they wished we had just not made SuperBowl because of how bad B-More beat us I told them they were nuts. It is better to go to SuperBowl and lose then not go at all.

Kruunch
12-20-2012, 02:50 PM
Tommy Brady is one of The Greatest QBs ever and he will shine on any team.

Matt Cassel took a team that went 16-0 during the previous season and then went 10-5 the next season when Tommy Brady got hurt.

Curtis Paynter took over for a team that won its division the previous year and couldn't win a single game.

More to my point ... BB system > Brady. :popcorn:

BuffyBlueII
12-20-2012, 03:18 PM
Curtis Paynter took over for a team that won its division the previous year and couldn't win a single game.

More to my point ... BB system > Brady. :popcorn:

Actually you are disproving your point. If it were BBs system then Matt Cassell would have taken NE Patriots to playoffs but he didn’t. With Matt Cassel behind center, NE was nowhere nearly as good as they were with Tommy Brady.

Trying to downgrade Tom Brady is ridiculous. The guy is probably The Greatest QB of all time.

Kruunch
12-20-2012, 03:50 PM
Actually you are disproving your point. If it were BBs system then Matt Cassell would have taken NE Patriots to playoffs but he didn’t. With Matt Cassel behind center, NE was nowhere nearly as good as they were with Tommy Brady.

Trying to downgrade Tom Brady is ridiculous. The guy is probably The Greatest QB of all time.

The Patriots went 11-5 that year. Playoffs or not, the Pats didn't miss a beat with Cassel at the helm. Could Brady have done better? Sure ... there was possibly a game or two Brady might have made the difference on. But to win that many games with yet another nobody kind of screams system doesn't it?

I can understand why you'd think Brady is greatest QB of all time. While I disagree, he has certainly been an excellent QB for the Pats. My contention is that had he been drafted by the Lions that year (as a starter mind you), you'd never know his name.

Rusty192
12-20-2012, 10:13 PM
You realize that our offense and the Packers offense are very similar? The only real difference is they stunt more out of the backfield, where we run a more traditional run game.yeah and we run in the redzone and much more on the goaline. Huge hit to Eli's FF stats.

Rudyy
12-20-2012, 10:26 PM
yeah and we run in the redzone and much more on the goaline. Huge hit to Eli's FF stats.Running the ball more than most is a huge hit to his stats in general.

Giantterp
12-20-2012, 10:38 PM
I'll take RG3 for the next 15 years or so and give you the rest of the field.

Kruunch
12-21-2012, 08:49 AM
I'll take RG3 for the next 15 years or so and give you the rest of the field.

Unless RGIII changes his style quickly, he's going to go the route of Michael Vick, injury wise.

Redeyejedi
12-21-2012, 09:36 AM
... that you think is run better than the Giants (or you would like to see the Giants emulate) over the course of the past decade with respect to offense and defense and let's see if we can figure out what they're doing better.

P.S. - I bet I can debunk most of your picks. As franchises as a whole or are we talking design of Offense and Defense. I think the Giants approach to building a team is fine.You cant argue with the recent success they have had.The Pats are very well run and so are the Packers. I would like to see some changes on defense I like how the Seahawks are designed

Kruunch
12-21-2012, 11:08 AM
As franchises as a whole or are we talking design of Offense and Defense. I think the Giants approach to building a team is fine.You cant argue with the recent success they have had.The Pats are very well run and so are the Packers. I would like to see some changes on defense I like how the Seahawks are designed

On the whole.

There are always facets to any team that can improve.

brad
12-21-2012, 11:32 AM
On the whole.

There are always facets to any team that can improve.

As a whole, few organizations are run better than the Giants are. They are a class organization, but there are a few I would consider to be run just as well just as long. My top 4 in no particular order would be

Giants
Green Bay
New England
Pittsburgh

Kruunch
12-21-2012, 12:38 PM
As a whole, few organizations are run better than the Giants are. They are a class organization, but there are a few I would consider to be run just as well just as long. My top 4 in no particular order would be

Giants
Green Bay
New England
Pittsburgh


Dunno if I agree about Green Bay. While I like the franchise, they seem to be more inconsistent than the Giants at times (over the past decade). Although, from a production standpoint, they almost mirror the Giants exactly.