BuckyG;2236322 said:
Main things I saw were (1) Eli Manning doesn't look much better than he did most of last year, even with a dominating run game and a healthy Plaxico Burress--anyone expecting greatness from this guy is going to be disappointed; (2) front seven of the Skins is physically overmatched--any team that can hammer the ball will kill them; (3) Jason Campbell is pretty bad. Giants look like a solid, physical team; and with the fourth pick in the 2009 NFL draft, the Washington Commanders choose . . .
Best part of the game is that an NFL East rival already has a division loss one game into the season.
Eli looked good the first quarter plus then returned to form. If he wants to be great and lead his team back to a SB then he needs to be that first quarter QB and not the other one.
The Giants did lean on them until they started blitzing including run blitzes. I can't tell how good the Giants are vs how mediocre the Skins are. I suspect the Skins are a little light in the rear and I suspect they are depth poor. But I wouldn't discount the Giants OL and their RBs which are better suited to hammer than we are actually. Not much but enough to matter.
And I agree with the Skins being challenged at the QB position. I think Campbell can be better but he's not the QB I'd put in that offense. I have seen Campbell play a lot better. But my overall impression of him is nearly what yours is although I don't think he's a mature QB yet.
One things for sure. The Skins did not have a game plan that worked for them the entire first quarter. Maybe Zorn and his coordinators fixed that although maybe the Giants played down to the level of competition and just didn't capitalize. Probably a little of bothl. I'm not knowledgable to say more than they got themselves back into the game and kept it close enough to win.
They aren't going to win a lot of games scoring less than 10 points a game and having that anemic an offense. They will do well giving up less than 17pts/g.
Too early to predict either's demise or fall into obscurity but 100% fact is one has a loss and the other a mediocre win. They will lose their share not scoring more than 16 pts a game, missing scoring opportunities or deflating the worth of drives, and letting teams get back into the game.
Wonder what they're saying on ES.
Good post BTW.