By now, some of you might be a little tired of my reliance on FootballOutsiders, and my constant proselytizing about the site.  But one of their more interesting tenets concerns teams’ performance on third down, and how teams that are strong on first and second down, but weak on third down, will improve the following year, and vice versa.

From the FO website (in the Football Outsiders basics section, a must read):

“Teams get fewer opportunities on third down, so third-down performance is more volatile – but it’s also a bigger part of a team’s overall performance than first or second down, because the result is usually either very good (four more downs) or very bad (losing the ball to the other team with a punt).  Over time, a team will play as well in those situations as it does in other situations, which will bring the overall offense or defense in line with the offense and defense on first and second down.”

So let’s look at the Giants.  First the offense, which put up a DVOAs of 19.0% on first down, 20.5% on second down, and 37.5% on third and fourth downs.  To put adjectives to those numbers, we were very good on first and second downs, but we were fucking awesome on third down.  This year, it’s more likely that we’ll be merely very good on third down, so expect some regression there.

On defense, we were very good on first down (-17.8%), below average on second down (5.0%), and pretty bad on third and downs (-9.4%).  So we should expect some improvement on defense, even aside from our improvement in personnel.

For us Giant fans, the critical importance of third and fourth down should be fresh in our minds.  In our playoff loss to the Eagles, we went 4 for 16 in these situations, while the Eagles went 7 for 14.

I’m all for “starting up front,” and I know about how much our D-Line wore down towards the end of last year, but it initially seemed strange to me that the Giants spent so much money on two defensive tackles this offseason (Canty, Bernard) when they had three perfectly good ones on the roster (Robbins, Cofield, and Alford).

But then it was revealed that Robbins had microfracture knee surgery this offseason. The 32-year old – whose contract is up at the end of the year – is not guaranteed to be back by training camp, according to the latest reports. A source close to the team – who I ran into at last night’s Mets game – told me definitively that Robbins’ best days are over. You read it here first: Don’t be surprised if Big Fred gets cut.

(Cofield also had a knee operation. While there has been some speculation that it was microfracture surgery, the source told me that it was just a “complex scope,” and that Cofield – who said he was playing on one leg by the end of last year – should be fine for camp.)

Given the news about Robbins, the large contracts we gave Canty ($17 million guaranteed) and Bernard ($5 million guaranteed) make a lot more sense. Right now, Canty will probably replace Robbins as the “three-technique” tackle on first and second down, while moving out to left end on passing situations. Bernard will push Cofield at nose tackle on first and second down, and will probably be part of our pass-rush package on third down and in passing situations. He’s known as a powerful “pocket pusher,” so we can fantasize about him collapsing the pocket up the middle while Osi, Kiwanuka, and Tuck do their respective things.

Let’s take stock of our D-line depth for a moment. This is a non-exhaustive list, but it shows how oozing with talent we are, Big Fred or not: At the three-technique, we have Canty and Alford. At the nose, we have Cofield and Bernard. At ends, we have Osi, Kiwanuka, and Tuck. And then there’s Clint Sintim, the pass-rushing outside linebacker who will see the field on pass situations as well. That’s a pretty sick assemblage, and one that should stay fresh, thereby reducing chance of injury.

One might reasonably ask why we have invested so much in the duo of Bernard and Kiwanuka, who we refused to part with in any package for Braylon Edwards. This might seem like a steep price for two guys who aren’t technically “starters.”

But whether you like the moves or not, Jerry’s rationale comes down to something that defensive coordinator Bill Sheridan said recently, that the third down and nickel package will be on the field 50 to 55 percent of the time, which, one can assume, will be the highest-leverage situations.

When looked at this way, saying Bernard and Kiwanuka “are not even starters” misses the point. Even characterizing them as “half-starters” doesn’t quite capture their value. What the G-Men seem to have done here is recognize the unique value of third down passing situations.

And when considering the Giants’ “collapse” last year, third down defense against the pass is a good place to start. Through the Ravens game (Weeks 1-11) our pass defense DVOA on third down was -6.8%. After that, not including the playoff game, it was 33.8%. (Remember, a negative DVOA is good for defense.) Looking at more conventional stats, we went from giving up an average of 4.91 yards per play through Week 11 to 5.66 after that.

The trend was just as ugly overall against the pass, not just on third down. Through Week 11, our defensive DVOA against the pass was -15.7%. From then on, not including the Eagles game, it was 22.1%. Conventional stats tell the same tale: the Giants had 14 interceptions during the first ten games, but two during the last six.

(By the way, credit for all these stats and many of these points, goes to FootballOutsiders.com. I really recommend that people familiarize themselves with their stats – they’re really the only football stats I’ve found that make much sense.)

So how much of this had to do with our drop-off in pass rush, no doubt a function of our defensive line injuries (Tuck, Robbins, Cofield all banged up)?

Our sack numbers down the stretch were significantly worse than before Week 12.  By no means was our weakened pass rush the only factor in our decline against the pass, but it was definitely a factor.

Through Weeks 1-11, our Adjusted Sack Rate was 8.1%, which would have placed 5th in the league over a full season. After Week 12, it was 6.1 percent, which would have placed around 17th, or roughly middle of the pack. Essentially, we went from a very good pass rush to an average one. All the conventional wisdom about Plaxico notwithstanding, the decline of our pass rush was a big reason we were not the same team by season’s end as we were at the beginning. Credit Jerry for recognizing that and addressing it.

Thank God the Cardinals beat these guys. If not for some late heroics from Warner, Fitzgerald, and Hightower, it’s likely the Eagles would have won the whole thing and seized the upper hand from us only one year removed from The Awesomest Thing Ever.

But as painful as that playoff loss was for us, Philly’s loss the next week had to be worse for them: We still had our ring; they had just blown a late lead and a shot at the Super Bowl, and once again saw their quarterback not get it done in a big spot.

The bad news is that they’ll be back, possibly better than ever. Obviously, we feel like we’ve improved ourselves this offseason, and will be better in than the banged-up, our-of-sorts bunch we were at the end of ’08. But two facts remain:

1) The Eagles were better than us by the end of last year. In fact, their cumulative DVOA of 31.7% ranked 1st overall, a smidgen better than our 29.4%, which ranked 3rd. But their weighted DVOA – which accounts for trends as the season progresses, and doesn’t even include the playoffs – wound up at 30.5%, comfortably better than our 23.8%. I suppose we can take solace in the superiority of our record – 12-5 vs. 11-7-1 — but they can point to beating us in our last two games, in our place.

and 2) They had a tremendous offseason, with the possible caveat of Westbrook’s health (more on that later).

First, let’s do a quick overview of this team’s strength’s and weaknesses, using Football Outsiders’ DVOA stats.

Their offense was pretty good, posting a 9.3% DVOA that ranked 12th in football. Because of Westbrook’s off-year, their passing game (12.2%) was better than their running game (5.4%). (By comparison, our offense was awesome: Our offensive DVOA was 23.7%, which ranked 5th)

The Eagles’ defense was elite: Its DVOA of -20.7 ranked 3rd in the league. It was almost equally good against the pass (-22.1%) as the run (-19.1%). (Our defensive DVOA was -4.8%, which ranked 8th.)

Philly’s defense finished with DVOAs of -3.7% in 2007 and -6.4% in 2006, and because defense is known to be more inconsistent from year to year than offense, will likely see some regression to the mean. But keep in mind that the key players on that defense – Asante Samuel (28), Sheldon Brown (30), Mike Patterson (25), Broderick Bunkley (25), Trent Cole (26), Stewart Bradley (25), Chris Gocong (25), and Akeem Jordan – are all in their prime.

Much media attention will focus on the loss of Brian Dawkins, but the 35-year-old is far from the player he once was, according to Bill Barnwell of Football Outsiders, who wrote:

“Dawkins had little left in the tank and won’t be missed, with Quinton Demps competing with new acquisitions Sean Jones and Rashad Baker as the likely replacement.”

But while we’ll expect some regression from their defense, we can also expect an equal amount of improvement from their offense.

As the cliché goes, it will all start up front. Given that the only relative weakness of their team was their rushing attack, it is not surprising that Philly’s offseason moves focused on improving their offensive line: They picked up Pro Bowl tackle Jason Peters (2007, 2008), will see the return of Pro Bowl guard Shawn Andrews (2006, 2007), who will move to right tackle alongside his newly acquired brother, Stacy Andrews (no Pro Bowls, but he’s good).

All three acquisitions represent improvements at their respective spots. Peter will replace Tra Thomas, a longtime stalwart, but one whom the Eagles made no effort to retain this offseason. Stacey Andrews will play right guard, replacing the two backups who replaced brother Shawn, who got injured and missed all but two games last year. Shawn will slide over to replace Jon Runyan, another longtime stalwart who broke down towards the end of the year, necessitating off-season microfracture knee surgery.

Last year, Philly’s O-Line represented a moderate strength: Their Adjusted Sack Rate – a pretty self-explanatory Football Outsiders stat – ranked 6th in the league at 4.3%, no doubt a reflection of McNabb’s rediscovered elusiveness resulting from his return to health and weight loss. But their run blocking, as measured by Adjusted Line Yards, ranked only 16th at 4.20 yards. They particularly struggled in short-yardage situations, a flaw that cost them a game against the Bears and snuffed out a potential comeback against the G-Men in the teams’ first meeting. Their 55% percent success rate in “Power” situations – defined by FO as goalline runs or runs on 3rd or 4th down with two or fewer yards to go — ranked 31st in the league.

They particularly struggled on runs to the left side of the line, according to FO stats: On runs off the left end, their ALY was 3.54 (25th); off left tackle, their ALY was 3.20 (30th). Was this Thomas’ fault, and will replacing him with Peters necessarily help? I don’t know, but the point is that there’s a very good chance that the Eagles’ acquisitions have turned this slightly above-average unit into a big-time strength.

This would obviously improve the Eagles running game, which stumbled last year. After posting a 16.1% DVOA in 2007, the running game slipped to 5.4% last year, still above-average, but a far-cry from the levels that the line and Westbrook had established in years past.

His game-breaking screen-pass scamper against Minnesota notwithstanding, last year was Westbrook’s worst as a full-time back: Battling an ankle injury that caused him to miss two games, he averaged 4.0 yards per carry, down from 4.8 in 2007 and 5.1 in 2006, while his personal DVOA tumbled to 6.9 from 19.9 in ’07 and 23.9 in ’06.

He had his knee scoped at the beginning of this off-season, then recently went under the knife for his ankle problems. Though he is expected to be 100 percent by mid-August, Westbrook’s future is an open question. Will he be as good as new after the surgery? Or is Westbrook, who turns 30 in September, officially on the downside?

Either way, it’s hard to expect the Eagles running game not to improve. Even if Westbrook is not fully healthy, he should be no worse than he was last year. And while Correll Buckhalter did yeoman work last year (11.0% DVOA, 4.9 YPC), Eagles fans are excited about second-round draft pick LeSean McCoy, billed as a good short-yardage runner and a good receiving running back.

But make no mistake: As every NFC East fan knows, as Westbrook goes, so go the Eagles. His health will go a long way toward determining Philly’s destiny, as well as ours.

The same statement can apply to Donovan McNabb. McNabb is a divisive athlete: Some people insist he’s a huge bitch, while others rail against those who insist he’s a huge bitch. I happen to think both cases have merits, but let’s focus on some objective stats.

McNabb’s DVOA (15.6%) ranked 12th in the league, but his DYAR, a more cumulative Football Outsiders stat as distinguished from the “rate” stat of DVOA, ranked 7th. Whichever stat you look at, he’s basically a top-third quarterback. And but for two straight horrific games – the Bengals tie (Huh? That’s even possible?) and the Ravens game in which he was benched — he would have had a top five in DVOA. (But if my aunt had balls, she’d be my uncle, McNabb detractors would reply.)

Even leaving aside the matter of clutchness, McNabb’s health is a perpetually open question. We are, after all, talking about a guy who sustained season-ending injuries in 2005 and 2006, and missed two games in 2007. What are the chances he’ll play a full season?

If he and Westbrook are healthy, however, this could be a dangerous offense, especially because they’ve accumulated some talent at wide receiver.

DeSean Jackson was better than I had realized last year: he had 912 yards on 62 catches and can be expected to do nothing but improve, although his 52% catch rate tempers enthusiasm slightly. Kevin Curtis, a talented deep threat, will return after an injury-marred 2008 in which he played only nine games. He will be pushed by Jeremy Maclin, for whom the Eagles traded up to draft with the 20th pick. Jason Avant, Hank Baskett, and Reggie Brown are all adequate in the best sense of the word, (as distinguished from a throwaway compliment to prove my point that the Eagles have good receivers).

Tight End Brent Celek posted a 21.9% DVOA and a 71% catch percentage, emerging as significantly better than LJ Smith. Celek completes the picture of an offense without any real weaknesses if guys stay healthy.

Looking at the offense as a whole, it seems likely that both the running and passing games should improve. Even if the defense takes a step back, if the offense goes from “pretty good” to “very good,” this team can match its statistical awesomeness of last year. There’s always the small matter of converting a high DVOA into a high win total – something the Eagles have struggled with in recent years – but there’s no way around the fact that the Eagles should be a real contender.

Giants fans:

First, I want to apologize for – or at least explain – the sporadic nature of posts the past couple of years.

Beginning in July of 2007, I was working a super time-consuming job as a reporter for a local newspaper. The job required me to write full-length 10 articles per week, a heavy workload led to my dropping the blog altogether in 2007, and then petering out towards the end of 2008.

But last week, I quit my job, so I should have plenty of time for sharing my obsessiveness about the G-Men with all you fellow die-hards. So get psyched for another season, and stay tuned for more posts!

-Greg

Brad Van Pelt was before my time of G-Men fandom, but his premature death deserves attention on this blog nonetheless.  Football fans and commentators have short memories, so it’s always easy to forget the guys who starred during the lean years.

But Van Pelt had some distinguishing characteristics that cemented his place in Giants lore, two of which are highlighted by Bruce Weber in the Times obit, who wrote:

“He was especially recognizable on the field for two reasons: His rangy physique, unusual for a linebacker, and his uniform number, 10.  League rules usually reserved such low numbers for kickers and members of the backfield, but because he was listed as the Giants’ backup kicker when he was a rookie, the league allowed him to wear it for his entire tenure with the team.”

I would add one more attribute to this list: Van Pelt’s flowing blonde locks and captain-of-the-football-team good looks, which leant the G-Men a little pizzazz during a dreary era. 

Hey Giants fans.  Sorry I’ve been AWOL.  I froze my ass off at the Carolina game and have since been swamped with the day job and tending to the holidays.

But I’m coming back soon.  Check for more content starting this weekend.  In the meantime, here’s a little piece I wrote for the New York Times Fifth Down Blog about R.W. McQuarters’ charity.  (You probably already knew this, but R.W. is the man.)

I. Jacobs Will Almost Definitely Play

It really, really looks like dude will play – he even practiced yesterday on a limited basis.

To their credit, the G-Men have been super-cautious about this: Last week, Jacobs begged the trainers and coaches to let him play, but they insisted he rest, which was smart.  When Plax injured his hammy, he pushed it in a relatively meaningless game against Arizona, aggravating the injury.  Good to see the G-Men are learning from their mistakes.

Maybe if we win this game, we should consider resting Jacobs against the Vikings.  Consider how worn-down he looked in last year’s playoffs, when he averaged 3.2 yards per carry compared to Bradshaw’s 4.3 (which doesn’t include the touchdown-that-wasn’t in the Green Bay game, thanks to a ticky-tack hold on Chris Snee).  This brings up the question of whether we should rest guys against the Vikings if we win on Sunday, but I suppose we’ll cross that bridge if and when we come to it.

Jacobs had some pretty cool quotes in yesterday’s Star-Ledger.  Check these out:

“I don’t want to [have to] plead [to play] this week.  There’s kind of no choice.  I want to go.  Whoever I have to talk to to get this verdict, that’s what I’m going to do.”

And:

“We are the head honchos of the conference.  This game means a lot to our team, so I want to be out there to have a better chance for our team to win.”

“Head honchos” – gotta love it.  After Sunday, the G-Men will officially be the Big Cheese of the NFC.

II.  Getting Healthier

Via Mike Garafolo, Robbins, Ward, Hixon, and Moss all practiced today.  Yesterday, Jacobs, McKenzie, and Tuck practiced.  We’re getting healthier and we’re gonna fly around in the snow on Sunday night.

III.  Another Reason Not to Panic

As Ralph Vacciano pointed out in his live chat, a horrid performance in Week 15 does not a postseason run preclude.  Last year, we lost to the Redskins, 22-10 in a thoroughly listless, depressing games in recent memory.  This game saw the future Super Bowl MVP set a record for most incomplete passes in a game in a heinous 18 for 52 performance that made us wish Todd Collins was our quarterback.

So let’s see what happens on Sunday.  I’m expecting good things.

IV. Carney and Feagles

Most of the talk about the Pro Bowl has centered around Eli and Peyton becoming the first brother duo to make the Pro Bowl.  But I happen to think that Carney and Feagles become the two oldest dudes to make the Pro Bowl (44 and 42, respectively) is the cooler answer to a trivia question.

V. Great Move Locking Up Webster

Everyone knows that Webster has been good this year, but perhaps people don’t fully appreciate just how awesome: Although my fandom goes back only to around Mark Collins, I would venture to say his play this year is the best by a Giant cornerback I’ve ever seen.  Evidently, a light-bulb went on with this guy, and he was finally able to convert his incredible athleticism – he is quick, balanced, extremely long, and extremely coordinated – into results.

This outstanding article by Mike Garafolo backs up these claims with some statistics.

“Through 13 games, Webster has three interceptions and unofficially 22 passes defensed.  Webster also been the closest defender on 62 passes by opposing quarterbacks, — only 20 of which have been completed for a total of 238 yards and one touchdown.

“Add those numbers up, and opposing quarterbacks have posted just a 30.2 passer rating when throwing Webster’s way.”

So yeah… Webster is awesome and well-deserving of his five-year, $43.5 million contract.  Plus, he’s also only 26, so he’s a good bet to be good throughout the deal.  The following quote by Jerry Reese makes me feel even better:

“Corey has been an outstanding person and player in his short career for the Giants.  We are very happy to get this deal done.”

Outstanding person?  Sure, it’s a quote from a press release, but Reese didn’t have to say that.  If it’s true, it’s nice to know that Webster’s a character guy who can be a team leader in the future.

It sucks that Webster didn’t make the Pro Bowl, but in Asante Samuel, Antoine Winfield, and Charles Woodson, he was beaten out by some very deserving guys.  At first I was a little skeptical of Woodson, given the Packers overall defense.  But it turns out they have an excellent pass defense, so there you go.  Still, there should be Pro Bowl’s in Corey’s future.

I should mention that I had a one-on-one encounter with Webster the Saturday before he inked his deal.

I was at the Meadowlands watching the New Jersey high school football championships, having finagled a field pass through my friend.  (And yes, this was my first time on the field.  And yes, it was ridiculously awesome.)

I was standing near the tunnel – the one the G-Men come out of – when I spotted Webster coming out of the locker room and heading for the parking lot.  And although it looked like he was about to call someone on his cell, I went ahead and shouted, “Corey!” as I hustled toward him.

He was a little startled, but I extended a pound toward him and told him I was a big fan and he was having a great year.  That loosened him up, and he said something to the effect of, “Aright, man!” in a good-natured way, and we pound-hugged.

As we peeled away, I said to him, “You’re gonna get paid, you know.”

“I hope so,” he replied with a chuckle.  “That’s the plan.”

I should have posted this yesterday, but this is the third of these pieces I’ve put together for the New York Times’ Fifth Down Blog.  Unless the Cowboys run the table and win the Super Bowl, which would render last night’s game a huge turning point, last night wouldn’t have made the list.

I.  Gilbride

After last night, the blogosphere is alight with angry Giants fans wondering what has happened to our vaunted offense over the past two weeks.

Andrew Furman, the proprietor of the excellent Giants blog UltimateNYG.com, points the finger squarely at Gilbride, who has long been the target of his wrath.  I think Furman has been a little tough on Gilbride in the past, but in this case, I agree with everything he says.

To appreciate the argument in its full indignant force, definitely check out his post.  In a nutshell, Furman’s argument goes thusly: Gilbride continued to call for deep drops and patterns that took way too long to develop, essentially letting Eli take the beating he did.   Instead, Furman says we should have gone with a diet “quick slants, 3 step drops, slip screens, draws, TE dumpoff checkdowns above the line of scrimmage.  Instead, we got long 7-step drops, and… shocking… 8 sacks.”

In his general takedown of Gilbride, he makes the point that the Giants have been outcoached for two straight weeks.  In the Philly game, both teams had to adjust to the wind.  Philly did, the G-Men didn’t.  In the Cowboys game, both teams had to adjust to their opponent’s ferocious pass rush.  The Cowboys did, the Giants didn’t.

So good job as always, Andy!

II. Lack of Plax

The problems with the game plan notwithstanding, it’s becoming pretty clear how much we will miss Plax – we’re really not the same team without him.  Plax is so talented that he can bail us out of a misbegotten play or gameplan with his long arms, strength, and ability to catch balls in traffic. 

The thing about Plax is that even if he’s covered, he’s still a viable option.  But if, say, Hixon is covered, Eli has to go to his next progression.  This takes time, and this becomes a significant problem if he’s under pressure, as evidenced by last night.

So I posit that beyond the offensive line’s brutal performance and Gilbride’s poor play-calling, the lack of Plax played a big role in the beating Eli took.  Going forward, this is something we have to adjust to. 

But can we?  Is it that easy?  Or was losing Plax a bigger blow than we even realized?  Yes, the Seahawks, Cardinals, and Redskins games went fine without him, but at this point, those games seem less instructive about what will happen going forward than the past two games.

So I’m worried, and I’m also very pissed.  If our offense doesn’t recover from this, we are likely in for a very disappointing ending to what had been our most promising season in ages.  And we’ll have Plaxico Burress and his stupidity to blame.

III.  Lack of Jacobs/Free Ahmad (Again)

The running game struggled yesterday, but I frankly don’t think things would have been any different if Jacobs was getting the carries that went to Ward.  Simply put, there weren’t any holes, and while Jacobs is great at charging through holes with a head of steam and running downhill for big gains, he’s not so good at creating for himself.  With the penetration the Cowboys defenders got last night, Jacobs wouldn’t have done any better.

But you know who might have?  Ahmad Bradshaw, who continues to be stashed on the bench and criminally underutilized.  When we were running for 200 yards and blowing teams out, Coughlin and Gilbride apologists offered the “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” rationale for why Bradshaw was on the bench.  But after two pathetic offensive showings, it’s safe to say that this shit is broke, and it’s time to deviate from what we’ve been doing.

I’ve made this point before, but if your offense is struggling to score points, you need playmakers.  Ahmad is a game-breaker – maybe he could have broken off a 40-yard play last night that would have jump-started our offense.  But no.  For some reason, we stayed with Ward and continued to bang our heads against the wall while our offense repeatedly failed.

IV.  Hixon Needs to Return Kicks and Punts (Again)

This is related to the point I made above: If you’re struggling to score points, the need for big plays is more acute.  Having Moss (who is a terrible return-man) and ‘Dubs returning kicks and punts, respectively, takes away one of our best opportunities for big plays in Hixon’s returns.

It almost as if Coughlin doesn’t see the return game as a chance to do something positive, but rather as a liability where things can go wrong, whether fumbles or injuries.  Ever since he chose the sure-handed but slow Chad Morton over Willie Ponder in 2005, it seems like we’ve never gotten as much out of the return game as we can.

Hixon is clearly our best returner.  It’s a shame the small chance of his getting hurt has to cost us so much in the return game.  The situation is symptomatic of the philosophy that keeps Ahmad buried on the bench: It seems like there’s this assumption that everything is fine, that all parts of the Giants machine are exactly where they need to be.  But things aren’t fine; it’s time for Tom to start maximizing the roster’s resources.

That said, there’s a chance that Hixon hasn’t been returning kicks/punts because of his foot/ankle injury.  If that’s the case, fine, that’s very reasonable.  But come playoff time, he better be back there.  We can’t afford to have him not be.

V. Eli

I know there have been mitigating circumstances the past two games, and I know he hasn’t played terribly.  But look: After we lost Plax and teams officially started ganging up to stop the run, we knew our fate would hinge on Eli.  At this point, you’d have to say things aren’t going too well in that regard.

Forget the play-calling and the pass rush for a second.  Haven’t Eli’s throws been off?  A little high, maybe?  I think his mechanics are a little out of whack.  He needs to play better.

VI.  Problems on Third Down

Just came across this statistic via Trent Dilfer on ESPN (he is an excellent analyst, in my opinion): Before the last two games, we were converting at a 45 percent clip on third down.  Against the Cowboys and Eagles, we were 6 for 26, or 23 percent.

This is bad, but it’s actually encouraging going forward.  Basically, it means our offense will improve because that low conversion rate has to be considered something of an aberration.  Granted, we’ve been bad on first and second downs the past two games, but I’m pretty sure we haven’t been that bad.  Our poor performance on third down, therefore, is a bit of an outlier and one that will even out in the future.  So while our offense has been very bad over the past two games, it hasn’t been as bad as it’s looked.

VII. Tackling

Two big and inexcusable plays from last night: 1) Michael Johnson letting Witten slip out of his arms on the game-clinching first down; and 2) Antonio Pierce going high on Witten, catching a stiff-arm, and letting Witten rumble down to the 1 on the Cowboys’ second touchdown drive.

A big play in the Eagles game: Kenny Phillips taking a horrific angle and missing LJ Smith on a third-and-long, which eventually led to a touchdown.

We need to tighten things up.

We’ll get to the game later on, but first, some historical perspective:

As much as we all suspended judgment after the Eagles game, it’s now time to face the facts: During the past two games, a Giants Super Bowl title has gone from probable to possible. Yes, I know, calling a Super Bowl ring “probable” is a little illogical. But let’s just say that going into last week’s game, we would have been absolutely crushed if the Giants continued their success only to come up short in the playoffs. That outcome, a nightmarish worst-case scenario eight days ago, doesn’t seem unlikely now.

As evidenced by last year, championships are determined by which team is playing its best when the playoffs come. After Week 15, with only two games to reverse the trend, it’s safe to say the Giants are not playing as well as some other teams. The Panthers are kicking some serious ass. The Cowboys and Eagles just beat us soundly. The Vikings have started to peak, and the Falcons are no cakewalk.

So we’ve fallen from the lofty perch we’ve occupied all season. The dream-like run in which wins came easy is over. We are now immersed in the same desperate struggle as every other team.

That’s the bad news. The good news is that Tom Coughlin’s Giants are uniquely equipped to weather this situation. Perhaps during that 11-1 start we forgot that this is the Giants we’re talking about, a franchise whose identity is tied to a belief that anything worthwhile does not come easy. It didn’t come easy last year, and it didn’t come easy in 1990, the most apt historical comparison if you want to be optimistic.

That year, a 10-0 start gave way to a 3-3 finish, with losses to the Eagles, 49ers, and Bills and thoroughly uninspiring wins against the mediocre Vikings, the lowly Cardinals, and the pathetic Patriots. We were written off, dropped by the experts from the ranks of the elite, but we kept grinding, eventually winning a championship that, like, 2007, owed itself to the team’s mental fortitude. Indeed, at their best, the Giants don’t dazzle, they grind.

Tom Coughlin’s Giants are a proud bearer of this standard of resilience. So while it may not look like it now, this is where we want to be. We don’t want to be above the fray, entering the playoffs with a dazzling 15-1 record. We want to be in the fight. Because there isn’t a team I like more in a fight than the G-Men.