I think we have the talent on offense even without Nicks. The issue to me is not using everyone properly or lack of changing game plans and offensive strategies.
I think we have the talent on offense even without Nicks. The issue to me is not using everyone properly or lack of changing game plans and offensive strategies.
He utilizes a variation of the 'Run and Shoot' offense, the original conception was designed for a 4 wide set and increase running abilities, his base is normally a Two wide set with the occasional Three, and a one dimensional run game,
he is not a high level Coach, and this Superbowl argument is tiresome, the offense didn't Win the Superbowl or get them into it, the defense got hot and they rode it,
he forces players into his concept which regardless if they won twenty Superbowl's it's an Egotistical way of looking at things, a complex offense for the sake of boasting complexity in the league, you have to be able to adapt to the players and incorporate their strengths and skill sets
Last edited by RoanokeFan; 01-04-2013 at 03:26 PM.
Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience!
1. The only similarity to the Run and Shoot is sight adjustment routes which EVERYBODY runs. In other words, we do NOT run a variation of the Run and Shoot.
2. Since KG has been our OC, we have had the most prolonged period of offensive success I can remember as a Giants fan. Our offense is more dynamic than it has ever been.
I'm not a huge KG fan because he is (in my view) far too rigid in his philosophy, but there is no doubt that he has been a successful OC for us.
reverbnation.com/yummytheunderdog
Why discount the SB argument? Isn't that the pinnicle of success and what we are trying to acheive? I'd rather win SBs with Gilbride than have the best offense and not win the big one, ala the Patriots.
messenger of the gods