Can Arizona’s D stop the Giant’s offense? That is what I've asked myself and is the reason I'm either gonna lay off or maybe go with the giants. NY does slightly better rushing than passing (10th in the league in rush ypg, about 132 yards per game [tikis avg is about 100 per game]) - and Zona's rush defense is their weakness (25th in the league allowing 127 yds per game on the ground).
Zona has the 4th worst offense (yds/game) so against the depleted giants D (which was somewhat soft at times to begin with) you could argue that zona will be able to put up a few points more than their average (just under 19 ppg) to maybe around the mid to even high 20s (25 maybe? just a guess) but the question is - what can/will the giants put up?
Certainly more than their average of 21.5 vs a bottom of the barrel rush D - and certainly more than the average of 20.6 that Arizona gives up on a weekly basis (which excluding a 3-6 loss to Atlanta [in which Atlanta had 194 yds rushing], and a 34-10 win over New Orleans that average jumps to nearly 25)...
But how much more? Just a thought... Without a doubt its a matter of opinion - but keep in mind what the giants have done:
34 pts, 170 yds rushing AT minny
26 pts, 125 yds rushing AT Dallas
27 pts, 116 yds rushing vs Cleveland (top 10 in terms of yds allowed per game)
21 pts vs Washington (not particularly weak on D [1st in yds per game allowed])
20 pts vs Chicago (also in the top 10 in terms of least yards allowed)
The average of these is just under 26 pts
To be fair there were 3 games in which the giants scored less than this (two on the road):
-at Philly 17 (tiki barber was stopped for the most part except for one 72 yard run),
-at GB 14,
- and vs Detroit 13 (??).
On the whole the Giants have consistently been able to put up an average of 3 TDs worth of points each week and it’s an undisputable fact that Arizona’s rush D is the 5th worst in yds allowed per game… Don’t know for sure if I can draw the conclusion that Arizona’s weak rush D will be the deciding factor here (and therefore justify a bet on the Giants) but I can say with confidence that it’s unlikely that Arizona’s offense will do as well as it did in their best performance of the year (34-10 win over NO) because of the fact that the Giants (unlike the Saints) can be reasonably expected to put up more than 10 pts and in the process will be spending time off the clock (that the Saints didnt) which is what Zona will need in order to get Emmitts motor chugging...
Sorry to babble on – I just wanted to hear myself talk. Take it for what its worth and good luck!
Zona has the 4th worst offense (yds/game) so against the depleted giants D (which was somewhat soft at times to begin with) you could argue that zona will be able to put up a few points more than their average (just under 19 ppg) to maybe around the mid to even high 20s (25 maybe? just a guess) but the question is - what can/will the giants put up?
Certainly more than their average of 21.5 vs a bottom of the barrel rush D - and certainly more than the average of 20.6 that Arizona gives up on a weekly basis (which excluding a 3-6 loss to Atlanta [in which Atlanta had 194 yds rushing], and a 34-10 win over New Orleans that average jumps to nearly 25)...
But how much more? Just a thought... Without a doubt its a matter of opinion - but keep in mind what the giants have done:
34 pts, 170 yds rushing AT minny
26 pts, 125 yds rushing AT Dallas
27 pts, 116 yds rushing vs Cleveland (top 10 in terms of yds allowed per game)
21 pts vs Washington (not particularly weak on D [1st in yds per game allowed])
20 pts vs Chicago (also in the top 10 in terms of least yards allowed)
The average of these is just under 26 pts
To be fair there were 3 games in which the giants scored less than this (two on the road):
-at Philly 17 (tiki barber was stopped for the most part except for one 72 yard run),
-at GB 14,
- and vs Detroit 13 (??).
On the whole the Giants have consistently been able to put up an average of 3 TDs worth of points each week and it’s an undisputable fact that Arizona’s rush D is the 5th worst in yds allowed per game… Don’t know for sure if I can draw the conclusion that Arizona’s weak rush D will be the deciding factor here (and therefore justify a bet on the Giants) but I can say with confidence that it’s unlikely that Arizona’s offense will do as well as it did in their best performance of the year (34-10 win over NO) because of the fact that the Giants (unlike the Saints) can be reasonably expected to put up more than 10 pts and in the process will be spending time off the clock (that the Saints didnt) which is what Zona will need in order to get Emmitts motor chugging...
Sorry to babble on – I just wanted to hear myself talk. Take it for what its worth and good luck!
One thing the giants have against them is the game is at Arizona. When your used to playing in NY. Arizona can be a tough place to play. Its very hot and very dry. It very hard to play in. For example Ari. is 2-1 this year at home and the loss was to New England. They beat Seattle at home.
Last year they won 4 games. They were all at home. They beat GB and Minn last year at home and lost by 3 to Car (super bowl runners up) and STL in overtime.
Last year they won 4 games. They were all at home. They beat GB and Minn last year at home and lost by 3 to Car (super bowl runners up) and STL in overtime.
Cowboys are only horrible when they kill themselves with turnovers or stupid penalties
they arent that bad on paper.
Regaring the arizona Seattle game -
the weather forecast for Tempe Sunday is 65 degrees and rainy so I dont know where you heard it was going to be very hot and dry...
It won't be over 75 at all this week or next.
What are the chances that a game will be decided by 3 FGs of 50+? Its just not something you can count on either way. I gotta believe that in the same situation against seattle again that at least one of them would be missed - and missing one from that far is just giving away good field position. IF they missed two (which is also very likely from that distance) the game could have been a blow out the other way. Sure I give them some credit for hitting them and doing what it took to win the game but that will eventually come back to haunt them if they keep trying two per game from 55 yards away - especially if thats all they have offensively.
they arent that bad on paper.
Regaring the arizona Seattle game -
the weather forecast for Tempe Sunday is 65 degrees and rainy so I dont know where you heard it was going to be very hot and dry...
It won't be over 75 at all this week or next.
What are the chances that a game will be decided by 3 FGs of 50+? Its just not something you can count on either way. I gotta believe that in the same situation against seattle again that at least one of them would be missed - and missing one from that far is just giving away good field position. IF they missed two (which is also very likely from that distance) the game could have been a blow out the other way. Sure I give them some credit for hitting them and doing what it took to win the game but that will eventually come back to haunt them if they keep trying two per game from 55 yards away - especially if thats all they have offensively.
very valid points guys, but i really don't care what happened last year ( az SHOULD'VE lost to the vikes, by the way) the year before, or the last ten years. this game is a tale of two teams going in opposite directions -- d.green (hate him!!!)has the cards believing they can win; has them playing hard; mcnown is very confident, and fitzgerald is the real deal! the giants have all kinds of problems -- barber is the one bright spot, but he thrives under the system that warner provides (a la m. faulk). then, there is the bad news -- warner's confidence is shot, and the pressure is mounting as lil manning is literally breathing down his neck; strahan is hurt -- the def has been a little soft, but the real problem here is ther off, and coughlin (another moron coach).
Their offense may be a problem but its hard to just ignore the fact that their offensive strength (running the ball) is also the defensive weakness of Arizona.
Personally - I dont care at all about what happened last year - and frankly its completely irrelevant.
What is relevant is the performances of Arizona this year as compared to those of the Giants.
#1
Offensively the Giants have been able to rush the ball - and in all of their wins that was a critical factor. Maybe they are anemic in the air and maybe you dont like thier offense overall but its a fact that they are in the top 10 in terms of rushing yds.
#2
Offensively the Cards are not doing very well - And in reality they only have one win that is worth looking at - in which they relied on 3 FGs of OVER 50 yds over Seattle. This win was not a result of a balanced offensive performace. Consistency is a problem.
#3
Thats ok Because the Giants D is soft to begin with and is now missing some key players. So we can agree - its possible that Arizona can put up some points and the weakness on the giants is their D.
#4
BUT - Arizona's D is just as soft if not more so regardless of the giants injuries. Add the fact that their weakness is the strength of the Giants Offense and its really really hard to argue that in a shootout the giants would not have the advantage because of this.
Arguing the confidence factor is certainly valid - it may well be that Warner is poised to collapse under the pressure and it may also be that Mcnown is brimming with confidence - but again the facts are hard to ignore:
Warner
QBRating: 84.6
Yds Per Game: 216.8
Mcnown
QBRating: 77.4
Yds Per Game: 175.2
GL
Personally - I dont care at all about what happened last year - and frankly its completely irrelevant.
What is relevant is the performances of Arizona this year as compared to those of the Giants.
#1
Offensively the Giants have been able to rush the ball - and in all of their wins that was a critical factor. Maybe they are anemic in the air and maybe you dont like thier offense overall but its a fact that they are in the top 10 in terms of rushing yds.
#2
Offensively the Cards are not doing very well - And in reality they only have one win that is worth looking at - in which they relied on 3 FGs of OVER 50 yds over Seattle. This win was not a result of a balanced offensive performace. Consistency is a problem.
#3
Thats ok Because the Giants D is soft to begin with and is now missing some key players. So we can agree - its possible that Arizona can put up some points and the weakness on the giants is their D.
#4
BUT - Arizona's D is just as soft if not more so regardless of the giants injuries. Add the fact that their weakness is the strength of the Giants Offense and its really really hard to argue that in a shootout the giants would not have the advantage because of this.
Arguing the confidence factor is certainly valid - it may well be that Warner is poised to collapse under the pressure and it may also be that Mcnown is brimming with confidence - but again the facts are hard to ignore:
Warner
QBRating: 84.6
Yds Per Game: 216.8
Mcnown
QBRating: 77.4
Yds Per Game: 175.2
GL
I agree with Hansen here.
The relative QB numbers might be examined in terms of momentum, which would at least have the QBs close.
NYG were expected to win about 6...some O-line improvement, some defensive chemistry, Warner fading critics...all worked for awhile. O'Hara was O-line leader this year despite just getting there. His absence was felt last week and he's out again. Losing Strahan and Washington means NO pass rush and a marginal secondary will be exposed. Warner's fumbilitis returning. A team imploding and headed toward expectations...MIGHT win seven instead of that six.
AZ expected to win 5...except for a strange result in Buffalo - a return and cashed in opps. for Bills (nonetheless giving up less than 250 in yards) - they've been right there. Continuity, decent health, hunger...all working for them. They might finish with 7 wins. Denny Green great home coach.
AZ should be close to 3 point fav., IMO.
The relative QB numbers might be examined in terms of momentum, which would at least have the QBs close.
NYG were expected to win about 6...some O-line improvement, some defensive chemistry, Warner fading critics...all worked for awhile. O'Hara was O-line leader this year despite just getting there. His absence was felt last week and he's out again. Losing Strahan and Washington means NO pass rush and a marginal secondary will be exposed. Warner's fumbilitis returning. A team imploding and headed toward expectations...MIGHT win seven instead of that six.
AZ expected to win 5...except for a strange result in Buffalo - a return and cashed in opps. for Bills (nonetheless giving up less than 250 in yards) - they've been right there. Continuity, decent health, hunger...all working for them. They might finish with 7 wins. Denny Green great home coach.
AZ should be close to 3 point fav., IMO.
"The relative QB numbers might be examined in terms of momentum, which would at least have the QBs close."
They might be close but there is no question that overall the offense of the Giants (when functioning properly) far exceeds the capability of Arizona's offense.
If your contention is that the Giants aren't going to be able to function offensively up to their capability then that is the point on which our opinions head in different directions.
Certainly fumbilitis is something that the giants are very familiar with and it could come back at any time (see tiki last year) but personally I am not confident enough to depend on that solely as a reasoning betting against a team.
Regarding O'Hara's absence last week - also keep in mind that chicago is the 9th best defense overall (in terms of yds allowed per game) - Arizona doesnt have that luxury (they are 19th) so capitalizing on his abscence will certainly be at least somewhat more of a challenge.
I agree that its very likely that the giants weak secondary will be exposed - however the Arizona secondary isnt much better, in fact they are worse (statistically). So with the injuries now that NY has its probably reasonable to say that they will average out to about the same level that Arizona is at.
That leaves the meat of the matter to the offenses and again - there is no question that overall the offense of the Giants (when functioning properly) far exceeds the capability of Arizona's offense. You may be right in that this just isnt the week for the Giants offense but - agreeing that all else is equal - I'm betting that the giants offense is better equipt talent wise to out play the Zona offense.
GL
They might be close but there is no question that overall the offense of the Giants (when functioning properly) far exceeds the capability of Arizona's offense.
If your contention is that the Giants aren't going to be able to function offensively up to their capability then that is the point on which our opinions head in different directions.
Certainly fumbilitis is something that the giants are very familiar with and it could come back at any time (see tiki last year) but personally I am not confident enough to depend on that solely as a reasoning betting against a team.
Regarding O'Hara's absence last week - also keep in mind that chicago is the 9th best defense overall (in terms of yds allowed per game) - Arizona doesnt have that luxury (they are 19th) so capitalizing on his abscence will certainly be at least somewhat more of a challenge.
I agree that its very likely that the giants weak secondary will be exposed - however the Arizona secondary isnt much better, in fact they are worse (statistically). So with the injuries now that NY has its probably reasonable to say that they will average out to about the same level that Arizona is at.
That leaves the meat of the matter to the offenses and again - there is no question that overall the offense of the Giants (when functioning properly) far exceeds the capability of Arizona's offense. You may be right in that this just isnt the week for the Giants offense but - agreeing that all else is equal - I'm betting that the giants offense is better equipt talent wise to out play the Zona offense.
GL
A wise old capper once told me to always listen to a coach comment on his team. Forget the players, they always say crap like "guarantee" and "lock" and it usually backfires on them. The coach on the other hand has a true pulse of whats going on.
He pointed out to me when a coach would berate his team especially after a win, that would mean to him he feels they haven't reached their potential and should expect better things from them. Conversely, stay away the from the team when the coach says they played well....this means to him they leveled off and that is the best you will get from them.
Sounds crazy? I thought so too until I started taking notice of coaches comments and his teams play the following week. You would be surprised.
On that note this is what Coach Green said after last weeks win.
Followed up by:
We will see, but I wouldn't bet against him.
He pointed out to me when a coach would berate his team especially after a win, that would mean to him he feels they haven't reached their potential and should expect better things from them. Conversely, stay away the from the team when the coach says they played well....this means to him they leveled off and that is the best you will get from them.
Sounds crazy? I thought so too until I started taking notice of coaches comments and his teams play the following week. You would be surprised.
On that note this is what Coach Green said after last weeks win.
Followed up by:
We will see, but I wouldn't bet against him.
I can see why you say that Jay. I guess you had to read the whole article to understand what I was taking from his comments. But the fact is, rarely do you ever hear coaches make such bold predictions as Coach Green did. And as mentioned earlier, I believe a coach has the true pulse where a team is heading.
Excellent point
Although I hope he said more of the second thing than the first
he is probably a great coach but its tough to deny that their talent level
(and their resulting performance thus far)
is well below that of the giants
(on offense anyway. These two defenses are like the Minny and Indy game. In that rare case it wasnt the team with the better defense that came out the winner - although the team with the better defense (minny) did cover the spread at any rate).
Its impossible to know how good (or bad) the giants defense will be without their DEs so cap that correctly and you'll probably cap the winner of the game... Or you could try flipping a coin and probably have the same accuracy. However, assuming these defenses play equally bad, its hard not to give the giants offense the upper hand IMO.
GL
Although I hope he said more of the second thing than the first
he is probably a great coach but its tough to deny that their talent level
(and their resulting performance thus far)
is well below that of the giants
(on offense anyway. These two defenses are like the Minny and Indy game. In that rare case it wasnt the team with the better defense that came out the winner - although the team with the better defense (minny) did cover the spread at any rate).
Its impossible to know how good (or bad) the giants defense will be without their DEs so cap that correctly and you'll probably cap the winner of the game... Or you could try flipping a coin and probably have the same accuracy. However, assuming these defenses play equally bad, its hard not to give the giants offense the upper hand IMO.
GL
