Aug

13

2008

Ever since the Giants went on their magical run to win Super Bowl 42, everyone from Giant fans to “expert” analysts have remarked about how “Eli Manning turned the corner” in his development, raising the level of his play to lead his team at just the right time as the Giants faced tough competition in the 2007 playoffs.  But did he really change?  Here is my perspective on Eli Manning’s performance from last year and how it might project into this year.

The Giants opened last season with a shootout against Dallas.  The final score was Giants 35, Cowboys 45.  Eli finished the game completing 35 of 45 attempts for 312 yards, 4 TD and 1 INT.  By all accounts, it was a very strong game for Eli and the offense.  Although he did throw 1 INT, most will agree that it was a very positive performance.  However, following that opening day game, Eli’s performances became, statistically speaking, fairly mediocre.  He had a series of games where his QB rating averaged in the mid-60’s, with a better game here and there (against the Jets and Eagles).  And then he also had the “disaster” game against Minnesota.  And of course, his worst performances of the year came against Miami and the 2nd Washington game.

So what really happened?  Let’s take the easy ones first; the bad weather games in Miami and Washington should be thrown out when looking at Eli’s effectiveness at QB.  A monsoon and hurricane-like winds will make any QB suffer.  Pundits will say “well Cleo Lemon was better for Miami in the monsoon”, and “Todd Collins (who hadn’t played in an NFL games in a couple of seasons) did better in the hurricane wind”.  In both cases, it’s my opinion that any QB’s “success” and “failures” in those conditions were at least as much because of chance as anything else.  And it’s not all on the QB; receivers had trouble running on the fields and holding onto a slippery ball.  Todd Collins was 8 for 25; not exacty a praise-worthy performance.

But even beyond the obvious weather-related issues, what was happening in the offense that led to such a perception of mediocre QB performance?  In my opinion, it wasn’t all on the quarterback.  A passing game consists of a QB passing the ball and a receiver catching the ball.  In the case of the Giants, the team led the league in drops, with 42 passes being dropped (the NFL definition of a “drop” is when a receiver does not catch a pass that could have been caught by a receiver with “reasonable effort").  The league average for team drops last year was 21.  So the Giants had *double* the number of drops than most teams in the league.  Per the NFL formula for determining QB ratings, if the Giants had only dropped 21 passes (50% of what they actually dropped), Eli’s season QB rating would have been 80.0 (instead of the 73.9 he had).  Take away the two bad weather games, and it would have been even higher, moving Eli into the top half of QB’s ranked by ratings.  This all assumes no changes in his yards per attempt, or his number of TDs.

When the Giants faced the Patriots in week 17, he had a terrific game, completing 22 of 32 passes for 251 yards, 4 TDs and 1 INT.  Very similar to how he opened the season against the Cowboys.  Offensive Coordinator Kevin Gilbride mentioned in the weeks after that game that the offensive gameplan that day was very similar to the one they opened the season with.  So from the team’s perspective, Eli was playing the way he opened the season with.  Why couldn’t they do that all season?  Perhaps they weren’t mentally prepared to the same level that a season opener against Dallas motivates them...or going against a 15-0 perfect Patriots team motivates them.  The receivers certainly stopped dropping passes around that time.  Another factor was Steve Smith, who was lost for most of the season in week 2.  In the playoffs, Steve Smith caught 14 passes in 4 playoff games, plus another 3 in week 17 against the Patriots.  And guess what?  He caught 3 passes in the season opener against the Cowboys.  When Steve Smith went down with his shoulder blade injury, Sinorice Moss stepped into the #3 WR role, and he caught 21 passes in 14 games, including 4 games with zero receptions.  The fact that Smith became such a frequent target for Eli once he came back says to me that Moss wasn’t getting the job done as the #3, and that Eli was then looking to force the ball to one of his other receivers.  And we all know...forcing the ball increases the chances of an INT.

Once the Giants got into the playoffs, they faced teams with much more aggressive defenses than they had during the regular season.  Both Gilbride and Eli commented on changing up their offensive philosophy against Tampa in the wild card game.  Because Tampa had a ferocious pass rush, the Giants would shorten up their passing game, using more 3-step drops and crossing/hot routes for the receivers.  These kinds of plays generally limit the number of options that QBs and receivers have to read.  The combination of fewer reads, shorter routes, a good #3 receiver, and playoff-level preparation resulted in a very efficient performance by the Giants’ passing game.  Once the team saw that success, they decided to keep that general gameplan for the Cowboys and Packers, who also had similar aggressive-styled defenses like Tampa.  Eli and the offense kept executing it “well enough”, and the victories started adding up.

Now looking at the Super Bowl, it was more of the same.  Giants opened the game with a 16-play, 63 yard drive that featured short/medium range passes and a strong running game.  The second drive for the Giants went 46 yards, but ended on an INT because of a bobbled pass by Smith.  In fact, if you look at all of the Giants’ drives in that game, the yards per play was low, but the Giants put together drives of 80 and 83 yards using short/medium range passes and a strong running game.

So did Eli “turn the corner”?  I’m not convinced that he did.  And I’m not convinced that he needs to.  In my opinion, Eli has been fairly consistent when the players around him are consistent.  When the receivers don’t drop passes.  When the #3 receiver is open.  When the weather isn’t horrid.  When the playcalling is balanced.  Does this mean that I think Eli will only play well when things are “perfect”?  No, not at all...but I do think that the rest of the team has to execute at a reasonable and consistent level for any QB to be successful.  Does this mean that I think Eli is “perfect” and that his play is beyond criticism?  Again, no not at all...he has many things he needs to improve, including some accuracy on his touch passes as well as his deep ball.  But for me, his play didn’t change all that much during the playoffs last season...he executed the gameplan at about the same level that I think he did for most of last season.  The differences that made the end-results better were better/more consistent performance by his teammates, more appropriate playcalling, and better weather.

What does this mean for the 2008 season?  It means that if the offense is going to be successful, then all the players on offense need to be consistent.  It’s easy to point the finger at the QB, but IMHO, Eli has been better and more consistent than I think he gets credit for.


Categories: Players Players

6 Comments »

Comments merged with the forum topic: Did Eli “turn the corner”?

I don’t think he “turned the corner” necessariliy, but he did prove to me that he is a MONEY QB.  With 2 minutes left and down 6 I can’t think of a QB I’d want more than Eli.  Not right now anyway.

The guy has ice water in his veins.


TheFilmGiant - 08/14/08 6:28 pm

I don’t think he “turned the corner” necessariliy, but he did prove to me that he is a MONEY QB.  With 2 minutes left and down 6 I can’t think of a QB I’d want more than Eli.  Not right now anyway.

The guy has ice water in his veins.

We’ve known that about him ever since the 2005 season… some people called it “slumping shoulders” and others called it “looking like his dog died"…

tongue laugh


Rhetoric and excuses are fine but it’s too easy to massage what’s apparent. Until you’re sure your D is 1 of the best in the league like Dilfer’s was, you have to at least project consistent and above avg ball control & game mgmt. Eli simply didn’t show that until the last 5 games of the year, incl. playoffs.

He threw an INT in his 1st six games, then the debacle in London. You can only blame weather for the last one. He only reached 59% compl rate in 2 of the first 7 games--or “below avg” over 70% of the time.

His reg season of 23-20 in TDs-to-Ints was way below avg—especially when you note that his 14-game streak from Gm 2 thru Gm 15 was 15 Tds to 18 Ints. That’s consistently inconsistent. Efficiency rtg ? 6 of 16 reg. season games at 85.0 or better (38%), vs 75% of his playoff games.
He threw an INT in 12 of 16 reg. games vs. 1 of 4 playoffs.

If that isn’t turning the corner, then I’m on a flight to the moon where circling and coming back is the only option! Stats below, in bunches

Opp----W/LResult---Pct----Yds--TD-Int--Rtg---Fum/Lost
Dal-----L--35-45---68.3---312---4/1---113.1--0/0

GBay----L--13-35---55.2---211---1/1----75.5--1/0
Wash----W--24-17---58.3---232---1/2----63.7--1/1
PHL-----W--16-3----53.8---135---1/1----65.4--0/0
NYJ-----W--35-24---52.0---186---2/1----86.4--0/0
Atl-----W--31-10---69.2---303---2/2----87.9--1/1
SF------W--33-15---58.1---146---2/1----78.2--0/0

*MIA----W--13-10---36.4----59---0/0---44.9---1/1
Dal-----L--20-31---67.6---236---1/2---72.7---1/0
Detr----W--16-10---71.8---283---1/0--100.7---0/0
Minn----L--17-41---42.9---273---1/4---33.8---0/0
Chi-----W--21-16---59.3---195---1/2---63.0---1/1

PHL-----W--16-13---54.8---219---1/0---88.0---0-0
Wash----L--10-22---34.6---184---1/0---52.1---1-1
*Buff---W--38-21---46.7---111---0/2---32.2---5-2
N.E.----L--35-38---68.8---251---4/1--118.6---1-0
RegSeas------------56.2--------23/20--74.0--13-7

Opp-------Result----Pct---Yds---TD/Int--Rate-Fum/Lost
TB------W--24-14---74.1---185---2/0---117.1---0/0
Dal-----W--21-17---66.7---163---2-0---132.4---0/0
GBay----W--23-20---52.5---251---0-0----72.0---0/0
N.E.----W--17-14---55.9---255---2-1----87.3---2/0


In the week leading up to the Super Bowl, Trent Dilfer did an analysis of all 20 of Eli’s INTs during the regular season.  He came to the conclusion that only 6 of them were due to poor throws and poor decisions; the remaining 14 were the result of a receiver cutting the wrong way, or a pass being tipped, or some other cause.  You can call them “excuses” all you’d like, but the fact of the matter is that a passing game involves a QB *and* the receivers, as well as a game-plan by the coaches.  The statistical performance of the QB is one symptom of the effectiveness of the overall passing game, but it does not paint the entire picture.  IMO, the improved performance in the passing game in the last 5 games of last year were primarily the result of the receivers stepping up their game.

In the last 5 games last year, receivers dropped fewer passes, receiving routes were generally shorter because of the playcalling, and according to some reports, the options on many of the routes were simplified (making the game easier for the receivers).  The fact that Steve Smith caught so many balls as the #3 WR in the span of 5 games when he returned from injury is a sure sign that the guys who took his place during the season (Tyree, Moss) weren’t getting the job done.


I didn’t suggest there were no other factors in Eli’s improvement and agree with those you cited as helping. This still doesn’t prove that Manning didn’t step it up and turn the corner. He needed to settle down and throw more accurately on a consistent basis and clearly did that toward the end. He even turned the corner on his former inability to play well in freezing temps

p.s. The day I take a QB’s defense of another QB as 100% objective is the day I receive my first paycheck commensurate with the position (i.e, not gonna happen) smile


DennyDiehl - 08/25/08 3:42 am

I didn’t suggest there were no other factors in Eli’s improvement and agree with those you cited as helping. This still doesn’t prove that Manning didn’t step it up and turn the corner. He needed to settle down and throw more accurately on a consistent basis and clearly did that toward the end. He even turned the corner on his former inability to play well in freezing temps

It’s easier to throw more accurately when the routes are shorter and there is confidence that the receivers will be where they are supposed to be.  The play-calling made the routes shorter and reduced the options on those routes (and therefore increasing the chances that the receivers would be where they were supposed to be).

As far as the weather thing goes, Eli’s problems (like all QBs) had more to do with wind and rain than it did with temperature.  Asides from the Vikings game, Eli’s worst games were those played in a monsoon (in London against Miami) and in near-hurricane winds (against Washington with Gilbride calling 53 passing plays in 30+ mph winds)…



You must be logged in to comment.