PDA

View Full Version : Would you rather have a SB win this year or Spags next year as DC?



DragonSoul
12-28-2011, 05:29 PM
If we win a SB I doubt Fewell will be let go.

I rather win the SB then have Sags next year, as you never know what can/will/might happen.

If the team doesn't play well on defense vs Dallas or if we make it to the playoffs and they stink or just skate by, then i want Fewell gone.

Only way I would even remotely consider Fewell again is if the Defense really shows marked improvement in the playoffs, and/or we win a SB with a solid defense.

Otherwise Spags needs to be the man. Playoff run or not.

MattMeyerBud
12-28-2011, 05:31 PM
superbowl. IF somebody told you mid 2007 u can win the superbowl this year but then have garbage years for the next 3 years, would you take it?

I would

If your telling me if i'd rather have a DC or 2nd ring in 5 years - its a no brainer

Tommy_Ribs
12-28-2011, 05:32 PM
You take the SB - Obviously.

Then you go from there, but if you can win a SB you take it every time.

TheReal_LT
12-28-2011, 05:33 PM
without a doubt the Super Bowl

FBomb
12-28-2011, 05:34 PM
hmmmm........gee, that's a tough one.[;)]</P>


</P>

Firenugget
12-28-2011, 05:34 PM
lol silly question.

JJC7301
12-28-2011, 05:35 PM
A SB, of course. Which would mean that Fewell actually did a good job and we wouldn't even be talking about Spags. But this isn't going to happen, so lets get Spags.

MikeIsaGiant
12-28-2011, 05:35 PM
To win a SB it takes a good team to win it?

So why would we let go of Perry?

This is hypothetical of course.

MikeIsaGiant
12-28-2011, 05:35 PM
To win a SB it takes a good team to win it?

So why would we let go of Perry?

This is hypothetical of course.

DemandedAce
12-28-2011, 05:36 PM
Superbowl easily. I liked Spags a LOT, but I want fresh faces for the players. I like the DC from Cincy a lot and if TC "retires" we should look into him as the HC and DC combined, look what he has done for their defense.

Zimmer is my choice, but Superbowl above all else. I love Gruden too but sources say he's a highly unlikely candidate anywhere this offseason.

Seducer
12-28-2011, 05:36 PM
damn straight you take the SB.</P>


I would take Spagnuolo in a second but all the talk on this board would have one believe that its guaranteed success and it wouldn't be. The idea of chasing the some magic we had in 2007 is nice to think about but may not be realistic. Whats wrong with finding the next good young DC? 2007 is not the only formula for winning a SB. </P>

DragonSoul
12-28-2011, 05:37 PM
Agreed, but you always know there are a few in the bunch.

The obvious argument would be for the latter is...
Well with a great DC, and these type of defensive players plus our offense, we could possibly win a few...

But as mentioned above, you never know what might/could happen each year. GB is no sure lock for a SB this year. Mainly because of their defense, and partially because I do not think they have been as battle tested as some teams.

MikeIsaGiant
12-28-2011, 05:53 PM
I'd even take NFC champions with a loss in the SB this year over Spags as DC next year.

DragonSoul
12-28-2011, 06:15 PM
I'd even take NFC champions with a loss in the SB this year over Spags as DC next year.If the defense made the right strides up to the SB I would agree. If not then I would rather have Spags.

BurnerNYG
12-28-2011, 06:44 PM
I would rather win a Superbowl. What kind of question is that? That's like a chick asking you would you rather have sex or stay in the house and watch Shrek.

EJ Blue
12-28-2011, 06:49 PM
Are you effing kidding me?! We're in the business of winning Superbowls, that's the ultimate goal. If Fewell is on board when we do it then so be it. I don't understand how you can dislike someone so much, who you don't even know, to the point where you'd rather not win a Superbowl with them. That's stupid and ridiculous.

DragonSoul
12-28-2011, 06:53 PM
Are you effing kidding me?! We're in the business of winning Superbowls, that's the ultimate goal. If Fewell is on board when we do it then so be it. I don't understand how you can dislike someone so much, who you don't even know, to the point where you'd rather not win a Superbowl with them. That's stupid and ridiculous.
You not reading the thread and making a comment is ridiculous.

bg79
12-28-2011, 06:55 PM
I am bucking the trend on this one. Sports is an entertainment product and watching the Giants defense under Fewell is NOT entertaining me at all, in fact it just plain makes me angry. Winning the Superbowl would give me entertainment for a few more games but leave me with the frustration of having to watch that awful defense for the next few seasons since that would obviously buy Fewell additional years. Not winning the superbowl and getting a defensive coordinator who is more in line with what Giants defense should be would provide me with more entertainment in the long run and most likely a better team as well and could lead to superbowls (plural) in the future.

To me, I'd like to treat this like taking off a bandaid. Just tear it off real fast and get it over with. Anything not firing Fewell at the end of this season is simply delaying the inevitable and this team will never be as good as they can be with him running the D.

Roosevelt
12-28-2011, 07:02 PM
hmmmm........gee, that's a tough one.[;)]</p>


</p>

lol. What's wrong with you DS!

Roosevelt
12-28-2011, 07:05 PM
Agreed, but you always know there are a few in the bunch.

The obvious argument would be for the latter is...
Well with a great DC, and these type of defensive players plus our offense, we could possibly win a few...

But as mentioned above, you never know what might/could happen each year. GB is no sure lock for a SB this year. Mainly because of their defense, and partially because I do not think they have been as battle tested as some teams.

There is absolutely nothing to consider here.

Roosevelt
12-28-2011, 07:06 PM
I am bucking the trend on this one. Sports is an entertainment product and watching the Giants defense under Fewell is NOT entertaining me at all, in fact it just plain makes me angry. Winning the Superbowl would give me entertainment for a few more games but leave me with the frustration of having to watch that awful defense for the next few seasons since that would obviously buy Fewell additional years. Not winning the superbowl and getting a defensive coordinator who is more in line with what Giants defense should be would provide me with more entertainment in the long run and most likely a better team as well and could lead to superbowls (plural) in the future.

To me, I'd like to treat this like taking off a bandaid. Just tear it off real fast and get it over with. Anything not firing Fewell at the end of this season is simply delaying the inevitable and this team will never be as good as they can be with him running the D.


How about if we get healthy on D?

jomo
12-28-2011, 07:09 PM
Super Bowl? Waiter, bring the check please!

TheEnigma
12-28-2011, 07:12 PM
Whether you like Fewell or not, you have to take the SB simply based on the beginning of the year odds of winning it all. Every team enters the season with a meager 3.125% of ending out as the Superbowl Champion. So on average, your team should have at least a Superbowl victory every 32 years. The last one we earned was in 2007. I don't want to wait that long for another one.

Just another perspective.

RoanokeFan
12-28-2011, 07:16 PM
<font color="#FF0000">You take the Super Bowl and immediately call for the entire coaching staff and Reese to be fired!
</font>

Buckeroo
12-28-2011, 07:47 PM
if you even have to ask this questuion then you are not a fan of the Giants.</P>


Dont even understand why you started this thread......</P>


</P>

GameTime
12-28-2011, 08:02 PM
if you even have to ask this questuion then you are not a fan of the Giants.</p>


Dont even understand why you started this thread......</p>


</p>

Catchy name, Buckeroo

NYG4lifeNYK
12-28-2011, 08:04 PM
Is this rhetorical? [:)]


come on bud.. *slaps you* ahaha

GameTime
12-28-2011, 08:04 PM
if you even have to ask this questuion then you are not a fan of the Giants.</P>


Dont even understand why you started this thread......</P>


</P>




Catchy name, Buckeroo
</P>


now you are just messing with me.....LOL</P>


good one....</P>

Buckeroo
12-28-2011, 08:11 PM
if you even have to ask this questuion then you are not a fan of the Giants.</P>


Dont even understand why you started this thread......</P>


</P>




Catchy name, Buckeroo
</P>


now you are just messing with me.....LOL</P>


good one....</P>


</P>


oops...lol</P>

bg79
12-28-2011, 08:39 PM
I am bucking the trend on this one. Sports is an entertainment product and watching the Giants defense under Fewell is NOT entertaining me at all, in fact it just plain makes me angry. Winning the Superbowl would give me entertainment for a few more games but leave me with the frustration of having to watch that awful defense for the next few seasons since that would obviously buy Fewell additional years. Not winning the superbowl and getting a defensive coordinator who is more in line with what Giants defense should be would provide me with more entertainment in the long run and most likely a better team as well and could lead to superbowls (plural) in the future.

To me, I'd like to treat this like taking off a bandaid. Just tear it off real fast and get it over with. Anything not firing Fewell at the end of this season is simply delaying the inevitable and this team will never be as good as they can be with him running the D.


How about if we get healthy on D?


Thats not going to change the 3rd and longs with only 3 rushers and a soft zone coverage. It's his style that doesnt mesh with this team and that won't change regardless of who's healthy. You're going to see a zone based read and react defense no matter what the personnel is. If it takes missing yet another playoffs or losing early in the playoffs to rid ourselves of him and get the kind of guy who likes to bring pressure on the QB then I'll be fine with that because that means my Giants will be a better team next year and the many years after that as well.

Between Sheridan and these last two years of Fewell, I just can't stand it anymore and a Superbowl victory this year wont change the fact that I'll want to slam my head against the wall all next year and perhaps longer because im watching the infamous 3 man rush on 3rd and 19.

Big Blue 418
12-28-2011, 08:45 PM
I don't care if we gave 120 points in the playoffs if we won unless you go into the future and know we end up with a dynasty with multiple titles because Spags returns

DragonSoul
12-28-2011, 08:57 PM
<font color="#FF0000">You take the Super Bowl and immediately call for the entire coaching staff and Reese to be fired!
</font>it really didn't need RED lol, maybe Blue instead.

FlyingTruck
12-28-2011, 08:59 PM
SB win. Besides I still want to see what our defense can do with our IR guys back and healthy next season.

Roosevelt
12-28-2011, 09:02 PM
I am bucking the trend on this one. Sports is an entertainment product and watching the Giants defense under Fewell is NOT entertaining me at all, in fact it just plain makes me angry. Winning the Superbowl would give me entertainment for a few more games but leave me with the frustration of having to watch that awful defense for the next few seasons since that would obviously buy Fewell additional years. Not winning the superbowl and getting a defensive coordinator who is more in line with what Giants defense should be would provide me with more entertainment in the long run and most likely a better team as well and could lead to superbowls (plural) in the future.

To me, I'd like to treat this like taking off a bandaid. Just tear it off real fast and get it over with. Anything not firing Fewell at the end of this season is simply delaying the inevitable and this team will never be as good as they can be with him running the D.


How about if we get healthy on D?


Thats not going to change the 3rd and longs with only 3 rushers and a soft zone coverage. It's his style that doesnt mesh with this team and that won't change regardless of who's healthy. You're going to see a zone based read and react defense no matter what the personnel is. If it takes missing yet another playoffs or losing early in the playoffs to rid ourselves of him and get the kind of guy who likes to bring pressure on the QB then I'll be fine with that because that means my Giants will be a better team next year and the many years after that as well.

Between Sheridan and these last two years of Fewell, I just can't stand it anymore and a Superbowl victory this year wont change the fact that I'll want to slam my head against the wall all next year and perhaps longer because im watching the infamous 3 man rush on 3rd and 19.


I hear ya, but you have to take a Lombardi trophy whenever you can get it.

Besides, if we won the SB on the back of Eli like we won most of our games, then I could see us replacing Perry regardless.

bg79
12-29-2011, 10:56 AM
I think the whole Lombardi trophy is a tad overblown here. I said it before, this is an entertainment product and we watch it because we enjoy it. The 2007 superbowl win does not in any way aid in my watching experience from this season and having to endure Perry Fewell's read and react defense. So any superbowl win this season in this particular scenario will only provide for a short term enjoyment factor and quickly fade as it becomes old news and we're left with the week to week reality that our DC flat out sucks.

SIMMS5611
12-29-2011, 11:10 AM
It's ALL ABOUT winning the Lombardi Trophy. That sells move TV time, sells more jerseys, sells more tickets to the games. If the Giants snuck in every year at 9-7, &amp; won "lucky" playoff games, yet constantly won Super Bowls, ownership wouldn't care if Ray Handley was our head coach, &amp; Jeffery Dahmer was our DC, &amp; Hannibal Lecter was our OC.</P>


If you're constantly 11-5, yet miss the playoffs all the time, that coaching staff would get rebooted.</P>

Tony Bruno
12-29-2011, 11:12 AM
Being the selfish Giants fans I am........... BOTH!!! ;-)

bigblue58
12-29-2011, 11:14 AM
If Fewell manages to turn the Defense around enough to win the SB, then we wouldn't need to have Spagnuolo back!

UK-Giantsfan
12-29-2011, 11:14 AM
if we get to the NFC Champ game .....and have the same coaching staff next year ......i would even take that ...without doubt

( ...and Spags should have done more with the Rams ......he has gone back a step in his career progression ......what makes us believe he would do any better with this team than Perry ? )

OrangeGiant
12-29-2011, 11:26 AM
Wouldn't winning the SB this yearsilence any talk about cleaning house with the coaching staff? This team isn't winning the SB unless the defense plays like a Giants defense is expected to play, so I'd say PF and the defense got their **** together if we win it all. If this team wins the SB and people are still calling for PF's head......

daynemustgo
12-29-2011, 11:27 AM
sb..duhhh

bg79
12-29-2011, 11:45 AM
if we get to the NFC Champ game .....and have the same coaching staff next year ......i would even take that ...without doubt

( ...and Spags should have done more with the Rams ......he has gone back a step in his career progression ......what makes us believe he would do any better with this team than Perry ? )

His style meshes much better with the personnel that we have, plus it meshes better with what I perceive Giants defense to be.

It doesnt even need to be Spags back here, I'd like anyone who coaches a similar style.

Roosevelt
12-29-2011, 12:05 PM
I think the whole Lombardi trophy is a tad overblown here. I said it before, this is an entertainment product and we watch it because we enjoy it. The 2007 superbowl win does not in any way aid in my watching experience from this season and having to endure Perry Fewell's read and react defense. So any superbowl win this season in this particular scenario will only provide for a short term enjoyment factor and quickly fade as it becomes old news and we're left with the week to week reality that our DC flat out sucks.


So in other words, you would have loved being a Vikings fan back in the 70's and a Bills fan in the 90's. Those teams gave their fans a lot to cheer for but never won the championship.

Think about it.

I'll take the trophy.

yatitle
12-29-2011, 12:18 PM
I think the whole Lombardi trophy is a tad overblown here. I said it before, this is an entertainment product and we watch it because we enjoy it. The 2007 superbowl win does not in any way aid in my watching experience from this season and having to endure Perry Fewell's read and react defense. So any superbowl win this season in this particular scenario will only provide for a short term enjoyment factor and quickly fade as it becomes old news and we're left with the week to week reality that our DC flat out sucks.


So in other words, you would have loved being a Vikings fan back in the 70's and a Bills fan in the 90's. Those teams gave their fans a lot to cheer for but never won the championship.

Think about it.

I'll take the trophy.


Totally agree Rosie. Bill Simmons wrote a great piece a while back describing how a championship shoould buy a franchise/regime a 5 year grace period where no matter what happens they should receive the benefit of doubt for delivering a championship.

bg79
12-29-2011, 12:26 PM
I think the whole Lombardi trophy is a tad overblown here. I said it before, this is an entertainment product and we watch it because we enjoy it. The 2007 superbowl win does not in any way aid in my watching experience from this season and having to endure Perry Fewell's read and react defense. So any superbowl win this season in this particular scenario will only provide for a short term enjoyment factor and quickly fade as it becomes old news and we're left with the week to week reality that our DC flat out sucks.


So in other words, you would have loved being a Vikings fan back in the 70's and a Bills fan in the 90's. Those teams gave their fans a lot to cheer for but never won the championship.

Think about it.

I'll take the trophy.


The bills were a very very good team and consistently in the championship picture during that period of time. I really don't see that as a bad thing, the fact that they didnt win at that time shouldnt cloud a fantastic team that provided Buffalo fans with something they havent seen in a long time, a team that is actually good. For Hockey I have been a Penguins fan since the early 90's and I don't regret that time at all they spent in the mid to late 90's as a club consistently in the playoff picture and playing an extremely entertaining style of play simply because they didnt win a cup during that stretch.

After the end of the season the trophy basically becomes meaningless as it's all about the next season that matters and this all becomes the past. I guess for me it's a personality thing. It seems like those who want the trophy this year at all costs are the type that if they came into a large sum of money they'd go to the car dealership and a strip club and blow it all away in one day. I'd probably live the same way I do right now and simply invest the sum of money. I am a fan of this team for the long haul, I want to enjoy them over an extended period of time, not just for the next month.

BigBlue1971
12-29-2011, 12:43 PM
I think the whole Lombardi trophy is a tad overblown here. I said it before, this is an entertainment product and we watch it because we enjoy it. The 2007 superbowl win does not in any way aid in my watching experience from this season and having to endure Perry Fewell's read and react defense. So any superbowl win this season in this particular scenario will only provide for a short term enjoyment factor and quickly fade as it becomes old news and we're left with the week to week reality that our DC flat out sucks.


So in other words, you would have loved being a Vikings fan back in the 70's and a Bills fan in the 90's. Those teams gave their fans a lot to cheer for but never won the championship.

Think about it.

I'll take the trophy.
</P>


</P>


this!</P>


besides, a sb win is permanent enjoyment for me. its not short term, its forever.</P>

pjam84
12-29-2011, 01:06 PM
this might be the dumbest question i've read on these boards in quite some time. even dumber would be if someone would choose to have spags back over another super bowl.

barran21
12-29-2011, 01:20 PM
SB... if Fewell can get them to play at a high level then why do we need Spags, as much as people hate on Fewell(myself Included) don't forget this is an injured defense he's working with, remember last season we were a top 10 defense, Fewell didn't get worst his players did...

Buckeroo
12-29-2011, 01:26 PM
<FONT color=#000080 size=4>I think the whole Lombardi trophy is a tad overblown here</FONT>. I said it before, this is an entertainment product and we watch it because we enjoy it. The 2007 superbowl win does not in any way aid in my watching experience from this season and having to endure Perry Fewell's read and react defense. So any superbowl win this season in this particular scenario will only provide for a short term enjoyment factor and quickly fade as it becomes old news and we're left with the week to week reality that our DC flat out sucks.
</P>


sorry Bro....dumbest thing I ever heard from a football fan. Being a fan of a team is SO much more than entertainment for me. If it was just entertainment I wouldn't have a teamI even rooted for. </P>


Die hard fans feel the losses and are euphoric with the big wins. I am embarassed when they suck and I am pumped when they are great.</P>


SB wins are NOT short term. Go ask Marino what he thinks....</P>


see my sig and thats what a fan is.....to me anyway....</P>

SweetZombieJesus
12-29-2011, 01:40 PM
A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.

Now, about the Lombardi Trophy being overblown? You've got to be kidding me. You play the game to win championships.

I doubt the coaches are shouting at training camp, "Let's get out there and be entertaining".

MattMeyerBud
12-29-2011, 01:43 PM
<font color="#000080" size="4">I think the whole Lombardi trophy is a tad overblown here</font>. I said it before, this is an entertainment product and we watch it because we enjoy it. The 2007 superbowl win does not in any way aid in my watching experience from this season and having to endure Perry Fewell's read and react defense. So any superbowl win this season in this particular scenario will only provide for a short term enjoyment factor and quickly fade as it becomes old news and we're left with the week to week reality that our DC flat out sucks.
</p>


sorry Bro....dumbest thing I ever heard from a football fan. Being a fan of a team is SO much more than entertainment for me. If it was just entertainment I wouldn't have a teamI even rooted for. </p>


Die hard fans feel the losses and are euphoric with the big wins. I am embarassed when they suck and I am pumped when they are great.</p>


SB wins are NOT short term. Go ask Marino what he thinks....</p>


see my sig and thats what a fan is.....to me anyway....</p>

really... i mean if u want entertainment then this season must of been great for you because every game was intense. I mean they all came down to the 4th quarter.

I would much rather have a season of dominating everybody and getting the ring.

daynemustgo
12-29-2011, 01:52 PM
<font color="#000080" size="4">I think the whole Lombardi trophy is a tad overblown here</font>.* I said it before, this is an entertainment product and we watch it because we enjoy it.* The 2007 superbowl win does not in any way aid in my watching experience from this season and having to endure Perry Fewell's read and react defense.* So any superbowl win this season in this particular scenario will only provide for a short term enjoyment factor and quickly fade as it becomes old news and we're left with the week to week reality that our DC flat out sucks.
</p>


sorry Bro....dumbest thing I ever heard from a football fan. Being a fan of a team is SO much more than entertainment for me. If it was just entertainment I wouldn't have a team*I even rooted for. </p>


Die hard fans feel the losses and are euphoric with the big wins. I am embarassed when they suck and I am pumped when they are great.</p>


SB wins are NOT short term. Go ask Marino what he thinks....</p>


see my sig and thats what a fan is.....to me anyway....</p>

really... i mean if u want entertainment then this season must of been great for you because every game was intense. I mean they all came down to the 4th quarter.

I would much rather have a season of dominating everybody and getting the ring.


I would prefer them winning 56-0 every week and my biggest problem being keeping my eyes open in the second half...that's just me though.

burier
12-29-2011, 01:58 PM
I like Spags and all but you must have some serious man love for the guy if you'd trade a SB so he can...coordinate

Considering that the whole point is to win the Superbowl I feel this question answers itself.

TroyArcher
12-29-2011, 02:30 PM
Are you kidding?

jhamburg
12-29-2011, 03:34 PM
Threads like this are the perfect illustration of the attitude around here that winning the super bowl every few years is a reasonable expectation. This is not the Yankees, we are up against a salary cap and there are 32 teams in this league. I love this team as much as anyone but we aren't as special as you guys think. If we can win one more super bowl in the Eli years, consider us lucky.

sc_markt
12-29-2011, 06:03 PM
If we win a SB I doubt Fewell will be let go.

I rather win the SB then have Sags next year, as you never know what can/will/might happen.

If the team doesn't play well on defense vs Dallas or if we make it to the playoffs and they stink or just skate by, then i want Fewell gone.

Only way I would even remotely consider Fewell again is if the Defense really shows marked improvement in the playoffs, and/or we win a SB with a solid defense.

Otherwise Spags needs to be the man. Playoff run or not.

There is no way our defense under Fewell is of the caliber to get us to the superbow (I'd like to be wrong...). In reality, I'd rather have Spags back because I think we'd probably go to the SB a few times with him as the head D coach. If not, at least we'd have (for the most part) a much better D than what we have now.