Crayton could be out for the year

stiletto

Well-Known Member
Messages
11,499
Reaction score
15,070
I think Price could be a weapon as a third receiver, he is a pretty dangerous guy but we have to keep in mind it might take him a couple weeks to get used to playing again much less with a new team. I think if Glenn stays healthy Price will be playing big for us come week 10/11...
 

Sitting Bull

Active Member
Messages
1,432
Reaction score
1
stiletto said:
I think Price could be a weapon as a third receiver, he is a pretty dangerous guy but we have to keep in mind it might take him a couple weeks to get used to playing again much less with a new team. I think if Glenn stays healthy Price will be playing big for us come week 10/11...

I hope Crayton is getting ready to come back by week 10/11...
 

Paniolo22

Hawaiian Cowboy
Messages
3,936
Reaction score
355
JDSmith said:
I disagree. I think we played for the FG on both of our final drives in regulation. We never even threw to the endzone. We lined up for a 4th and inches and then backed off, because Parcells didn't believe in our guys on either side of the ball. That wouldn't have been as galling if we hadn't gone for such stupid 4th downs in other games this season, even to the point of lining up for a 'fake' punt and then standing there with Crayton under center for 10 seconds or so just so that the D could be absolutely positive we weren't really punting before going for it. We also went with a 3 man rush when the Giants were as desperate as any team could be, and when it was obvious that Eli had struggled all game with our pressure. Sorry, I don't think execution was the problem at the end. I think coaching as if a 7 pt lead is secure with 4 minutes to play was the problem. You would have thought after the final 4 minutes of the Washington game that Parcells would learn that you go for the jugular, just like he did in the Eagles game all day long.
Do you think the reason they were conservative had anything to do with the 4 turnovers we had already suffered?
 

JDSmith

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,273
Reaction score
5,680
Paniolo22 said:
Do you think the reason they were conservative had anything to do with the 4 turnovers we had already suffered?

Honestly, no. We turned the ball over doing routine things. When you can't snap the ball, or your WR fumbles without being stripped, you can't prevent those things with play calling. It's not as if Bledsoe was under tremendous pressure from the Giants and that was forcing turnovers. He got stripped once, and had one interception partially due to pressure up the middle, but both of those came on long pass attempts and if you were trying to pass from the 15 yard line you could easily get the pass off - the Giants simply weren't generating enough pressure to stop that. Even when Bledsoe got stripped he had to stand there with the ball around his waste for quite a while before the defender made a diving swipe at it. So I don't see much correlation between the turnovers and the conservative calls at the end. Especially on the 4th and inches. Unless Parcells believed we couldn't snap the ball correctly, which might be a legit concern at this point.
 
Top