Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

Anybody still think Coughlin was stupid for playing his starters


detlef
 Share

Recommended Posts

There was no shortage of people amazed that he played to win a "meaningless game". Seems like it may have meant more than you know. I loved the idea and thought they really had nothing to lose. It's not like they'd been playing so great up til then that they were expected to do anything in January. Nearly beating the Pats in week 17 showed his team that they could beat these guys. If they could beat the Pats, why not all the teams standing in the way?

 

That should really be a lesson to coaches who mail in the last weeks of the season afraid of injuries. People act as if it's a foregone conclusion that your best players are going to get hurt if you play them. They also forget how much of a mental and emotional aspect there is to the game...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great point ... gotta believe their psyche headed into the superbowl was much stronger having been ahead in week 17 and coming within 3 of victory ... had they rested and gone into the SB having been pasted by 38, it might have been different ...

 

Coughlin coached well this year :wacko:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IIRC, Dallas played their uninjured starters for the 1st 3 quarters that game.

 

Yeah I know ... the difference is that their hearts really weren't in the game and they were simply going through the motions (much like most of December). The Dallas starters may have been on the field but they did not look prepared for the game and I suspect that they did not prepare for the game that week in practice the way they would have had the game meant something to them. The starters looked like they knew they were on a short leash and might have been more interested in getting to their bench time unhurt than actually executing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I know ... the difference is that their hearts really weren't in the game and they were simply going through the motions (much like most of December). The Dallas starters may have been on the field but they did not look prepared for the game and I suspect that they did not prepare for the game that week in practice the way they would have had the game meant something to them. The starters looked like they knew they were on a short leash and might have been more interested in getting to their bench time unhurt than actually executing.

can't argue with this

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand detlef's point, but I don't see the downside to playing the starters for only the first half. The entire point is to keep them in their routine and to keep them up with the speed of the game. They should be able to achieve that with two full quarters of play.

 

I can't speak for the other teams, but the Colts lost last month because they were getting physically-overpowered on the line of scrimmage. Playing their starting O- and D-lines for all of Week 17 wouldn't have helped.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand detlef's point, but I don't see the downside to playing the starters for only the first half. The entire point is to keep them in their routine and to keep them up with the speed of the game. They should be able to achieve that with two full quarters of play.

 

I can't speak for the other teams, but the Colts lost last month because they were getting physically-overpowered on the line of scrimmage. Playing their starting O- and D-lines for all of Week 17 wouldn't have helped.

it was all about creating MOMENTUM going into the playoffs, IMO(and i said that back then too)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand detlef's point, but I don't see the downside to playing the starters for only the first half. The entire point is to keep them in their routine and to keep them up with the speed of the game. They should be able to achieve that with two full quarters of play.

 

I can't speak for the other teams, but the Colts lost last month because they were getting physically-overpowered on the line of scrimmage. Playing their starting O- and D-lines for all of Week 17 wouldn't have helped.

That all assumes that you feel like you're locked and loaded to make a run. What about the Giants said, "SB contender" before week 17. They'd look good for a stretch and then look like crap. Everyone doubted Manning and their WRs had the drops. This was not a team that simply needed to "keep in their routine". Their routine was playing good one week and then looking like crap the next.

 

Thus, they had absolutely nothing to lose. Let's say Manning got hurt. So, up until week 17, that Manning was nobody you would think could put the team on his shoulders and win it all. Maybe he's good enough to go into TB and win, but then they'd get their ass handed to them in Dallas. What good is that?

 

I'm not saying that every team should just go balls out in week 17 if they've wrapped up a play-off spot. Assuming, of course, that you've been playing great ball down the stretch. However, look at Dallas. They looked like crap down the stretch. Why the hell should they have been content to "keep their guys in their routine"? Their routine was barely beating two really lousy teams in Detroit and Carolina. Why do you want that status quo?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep. . .looks like we're out of the Cowher sweepsteaks. . . :wacko:

 

 

Giant fans unite ..Coughlin just won a super bowl as the head coach and he has to get a chunk of the credit ...he seems to have found the right attitude to coach this team and they responded

 

Cowher is a great coach but for now we should take our chances with Coughlin as he has earned the extension

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it was all about creating MOMENTUM going into the playoffs, IMO(and i said that back then too)

 

Momentum certainly helps, but I think it has more to do with keeping the players in a routine and keeping them up with the speed of the game. Didn't the Pats rest some of their players in the second halves of Week 17 in '03 and '04?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That all assumes that you feel like you're locked and loaded to make a run. What about the Giants said, "SB contender" before week 17. They'd look good for a stretch and then look like crap. Everyone doubted Manning and their WRs had the drops. This was not a team that simply needed to "keep in their routine". Their routine was playing good one week and then looking like crap the next.

 

Thus, they had absolutely nothing to lose. Let's say Manning got hurt. So, up until week 17, that Manning was nobody you would think could put the team on his shoulders and win it all. Maybe he's good enough to go into TB and win, but then they'd get their ass handed to them in Dallas. What good is that?

 

I'm not saying that every team should just go balls out in week 17 if they've wrapped up a play-off spot. Assuming, of course, that you've been playing great ball down the stretch. However, look at Dallas. They looked like crap down the stretch. Why the hell should they have been content to "keep their guys in their routine"? Their routine was barely beating two really lousy teams in Detroit and Carolina. Why do you want that status quo?

 

No, I completely agree that it was the right thing to do in the Giants' situation. But I wouldn't necessarily use that approach with other teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Giant fans unite ..Coughlin just won a super bowl as the head coach and he has to get a chunk of the credit ...he seems to have found the right attitude to coach this team and they responded

 

Cowher is a great coach but for now we should take our chances with Coughlin as he has earned the extension

 

*sigh*. . . ok, I guess I'm on the Coughlin bandwagon :lookslonginglyatcowhersgranitechin:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Giant fans unite ..Coughlin just won a super bowl as the head coach and he has to get a chunk of the credit ...he seems to have found the right attitude to coach this team and they responded

 

Cowher is a great coach but for now we should take our chances with Coughlin as he has earned the extension

It's hard to argue with success. He's earned another contract without a doubt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That move by Coughlin was THE critical move in this NFL season. There is absolutely no doubt about it. It gave his team confidence that carried them through the playoffs. And that game planted a seed of doubt in the Patriots.

 

And it also comes down to the Patriots getting every teams best shot for the last couple of months at least. That is why I never thought a team could go undefeated. They have been other team's "Superbowl" for the last half of the season. And all the pressure was on the Pats. The Giants knew they could win this game, because they almost beat them the first time. It was absolutely key to this run and I expect that to become more the norm.

 

The fact that those two teams were scheduled in week 17 probably changed the destiny of both teams, and Coughlin's decision allowed it to happen. I wanted Coughlin to do it. He did it. He ended up with a ring. Nothing but respect here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information