Response to a friend:
My commentary on the game appeared on sportstruths.com the night of the game. The details are there, but I’ll say this here. When the Packers were down 14-0 to Seattle, a friend called to talk about it, and I said, I’m not worried. I knew there would be no problem. 5 minutes into the Giant game, I said the Packers were in trouble. Now, why did I know 5 minutes into the Seattle game they were fine, and 5 minutes into the Giant game they were in trouble? Simple–gameplans.
The details of the gameplans are on sportstruths, but I’ll respond to your running comment here. Regarding the Packers running, running is what caused the Packers to be up 10-6 at half instead of 21-6, which would have made it very difficult on the Giants. I recap the first half offensively for the Packers on sportstruths. Now, to the Giants running. The Giants averaged 3.4 yards/carry, so it’s not like they dominated in the running game. However, during the first quarter, I made the statement that the Packers’ defensive scheme would allow the Giants to have long possessions resulting in a tired Packer defense, which would allow the Giants to run at the end of the game. That’s what happened, and I said it in the first quarter. It wasn’t the runs that hurt the Packers early, it was the passes against the press coverage (details on sportstruths). Those passes allowed long drives, which allowed later runs. Again, only 3.4 yards/carry. The Giants moved the ball in the first half due to passes, not runs. Those passes were high-percentage passes against DBs that couldn’t react because they started one yard from the receiver.
The Packers would have had no problem passing in the bad weather if they threw slants and high-percentage passes (as on the first two plays) instead of the 20- to 30-yard passes they did throw. Again, details on sportstruths.
It appeared that the Giants dominated the game, but it was solely due to the Packers’ ridiculous gameplans. They played into the Giants’ hands and never adjusted, when 5 minutes into the game, I’m screaming for adjustments. Had Harris and Woodson backed off only 2 yards, the Giants would have been shut out. Had the Packers thrown high-percentage passes, they would have scored a lot.
Normally I make comments on games and I’m the only one saying these things. I’m very happy that in this case, I’ve heard commentary on different radio stations slamming the Packers’ defensive scheme. No one gets the offensive part of it, but at least they see the defense. How many times are you going to get beat for the same reason until you change? When McCarthy was publicly called on the carpet for this, his response was it worked in game 2 when they played the Giants! Okay, fine, start with the successful scheme and continue it if it keeps working. However, if the Giants were prepared for it, as Manning said they were after the game, then you have to adjust. It’s like managers who keep bringing in their closer because he’s been their closer all year, even though he hasn’t gotten anybody out in 2 weeks.
I’ve said the last few years that eventually some team will figure out how easy it is to beat press coverage. Again, it took coaches years to figure this out (and Coughlin might be the only one), while I’ve been saying it for years.
By the way, I heard that Ditka made the comment last week that the bears would not have been able to play their 46 against the Patriots if they were playing them this year because the Patriots would have spread their defense out. Again, I said from about 1983 on how easy that defense was to beat, and everyone laughed. Not only were there about 10 articles around 1987 saying no one played it anymore, including Buddy Ryan, because teams figured out quick, short passes could beat it, but now even Ditka is saying there are offensive schemes that would beat it. Please tell me why it takes years to figure out how to beat a defense? I’m not saying the bears’ defense would have been horrible had teams attacked it properly, but I am saying that they would have had to make major adjustments, and although they still would have been good, they would have been far less dominating.