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.

This one is on the Times’ Fifth Down Blog again. Obviously, lots to talk about with Plax, but let’s just win this game and let more details emerge before we concern ourselves with that.

There’s lots more discuss about the Ravens game, but I’ve frankly been swamped/fucked with my day job, so I’ll get to it later.

But a special NYGMen shoutout goes to R.W. McQuarters, James Butler, Kevin Dockery, and Robert Henderson, who I had the pleasure of meeting and chatting with last night at a party.  Going into the night, I feared it would be a sleazy, uninviting club scene where the players would be dicks with no interest in talking to someone like me.  It wasn’t like that at all.  All of these guys were down-to-earth, jovial dudes just looking to have a good time.  They, along with everyone else at the party, did just that.

So those guys are awesome, and provide yet another reason to root for the New York Football GGGGMennnnnn!!!!

Right now, they see a wounded dog in the division, and they didn’t like the way the Cowboys came into this season basically anointing themselves Super Bowl Champions before the season began.  And, you know, they’re smelling blood and they’re gonna give it everything they’ve got.

–Troy Aikman

**

Wow, that was an awful Cowboys team we played today, and makes you wonder if things will be all that different when Romo comes back.  Aikman and Buck made this point a lot during the game, but quarterback play was only part of the problem.  What about stopping the run (we averaged 5.9 yards per carry), running the ball themselves (3.4 yards per carry), or protecting whoever is playing quarterback (4 sacks and tons of pressure)?

In the rubbing it in department, behold and enjoy the following G-Men quotes:

Plaxico Burress: “I mean, they had a star on their helmets so it was a Cowboy game to me.”

Justin Tuck: “They still had us outnumbered 10 Pro Bowlers to none, so I don’t see where all the sympathy is coming from.”

And even some words of wisdom from our favorite Cowboy shit-talking choke-artist, Patrick Crayton:  “In games like this against teams like this, if you don’t bring your A-game, you will get your ass whooped like we got our ass whooped tonight.”

It’s too early to write the Cowboys off, but making the playoffs would require quite the ill run.  It’s possible, and if they make that run, watch out come playoff time.  But they really have no room for error as they pursue the Wild Card.  At 5-4, they’re not catching us for the division.

Good God, that team is a mess.

**

But we’re not.  The 2008 New York Giants: Another week, another statement.

Ah, where to begin here?  Obviously the D, which allowed only one touchdown and 183 total yards, forced 4 turnovers, and was so dominant that even a downright bad performance by Eli didn’t get in the way of a blowout.

All three defensive units were nearly flawless.  We’ll start with the linebackers, who haven’t gotten much love this year.  Danny Clark made a team-high nine tackles and was generally all over the place, shooting gaps and making plays in space.  Is this guy rounding into Kawika Mitchell, redux? 

Chase Blackburn filled in for Brian Kehl – whose toe injury forced him to miss practice this week but isn’t serious – and did an admirable job.  This guy’s such a good player – even when Wilkinson comes back, wouldn’t you rather see Blackburn splitting those weakside snaps instead?  He needs to be on the field.

And Antonio Pierce made two big plays.  The first was when he stripped T.O. deep in our territory after Eli’s weird fumble.  The second was on the Cowboys second series, when he ran stride-for-stride with Jason Whitten down the seam and forced a perfect throw from Johnson that didn’t come.  Tony P has been assailed for his notoriously poor coverage of that seam route, so it’s only right to give credit where it’s due here.

Moving over to the D-line, Tuck was a force.  Coming into the season, we knew he was good, but it was still a question whether he would blossom into a truly elite player.  Eight games and six sacks in, that question is close to being definitely answered.

Tuck had the 2.5 sacks yesterday, but the guy I noticed the most, on a play-by-play basis, was Kiwanuka.  ‘Nuke was way too quick for Flozell Adams, and after being named the Defensive Player of the Week last week, he had his second excellent game in a row.  He only had one sack, but he routinely beat Flozell to the edge and forced Johnson/Bollinger to step up and get flustered.

It appears ‘Nuke is fully recovered from both the high-ankle injury from Week 1 and the leg injury from last year and is ready to explode into a full-fledged pass-rushing force.  I still think he plays too high and can be undisciplined against the run.  But he can straight-up abuse left tackles with below-average quickness, like Pittsburgh’s Max Starks and Flozell the Hotel.

As for the interior guys, I actually didn’t notice that much, but holding Marion Barber to 2.8 yards per carry speaks for itself.

Praise for the secondary begins with Corey Webster – or as Chris Berman calls him, The Dictionary – and his two picks.  The great thing about Webster’s first pick – the one he brought back to the Dallas 27 – was that it came right after that sideline circus-catch by Roy Williams.  Webster covered Williams very well on that play, but a perfect throw and a semi-miraculous catch beat him.  Such is the nature of playing cornerback or defense in any sport: If the offense executes perfectly, they’ll do what they want to do.  But the offense doesn’t always execute perfectly, which was apparent on the next play when Johnson badly overthrew T.O. and the ball sailed right to Webster, who provided great coverage for the second play in a row.  If you have a short memory and do your job play after play, you’re gonna get good results.  That’s how you play cornerback.

Let’s also use this opportunity to praise Webster’s season in general and how far he has come.  His improvement has been well-documented, but it bears repeating: he has evolved from a complete bust into a truly excellent player, though it will take a while for his reputation to catch up to the quality of his play (another Super Bowl ring will help, though).  I never thought I’d say this, but has Corey Webster become a guy you don’t want to challenge?  (And yes, he got beat by T.O. on that short touchdown.  But he had no help in the middle of the field because we brought a blitz.  Tough assignment.)

Then there’s Aaron Ross, who I didn’t notice in pass coverage (good thing) but who I did notice in run support (also a good thing).  Ross had 5 tackles including 3 solos – I continue to be impressed with the angles he takes and how surely he wraps up guys, usually by going low.  And for all those people who panicked so much after the Cleveland and San Francisco games?  I think you were overreacting.

Terrell Thomas started at nickelback and played well, making a big play when he separated T.O. from the ball on 3rd down on the Cowboys eventual scoring drive (The ‘Boys converted the 4th down on the next play.  Oh, and that touchdown drive was illegitimate anyway – that personal foul on Tuck for driving Bollinger into the ground was bullshit.).  Apparently the G-Men are very high on Thomas, and after today, we can see why.

After Thomas was injured on that play – I don’t know the status of that one – Sam Madison came in and provided excellent coverage of Roy Williams on an endzone fade.  At that moment, the following thought crossed my head: Holy shit we’re deep!

That goes for the safety position too, where James Butler headlined the action with his second athletic pick in two weeks.  Butler sprained his knee during the game, but he’s confident he will play in Philly next week.  James Butler… I think us fans are coming around.

Kenny Phillips and Michael Johnson chipped in with five tackles apiece, and another forgotten veteran, Sammy Knight, made five stops also, all of them solo.  Yep, we’re mad deep…

**

Offensively there was a lot to like too.

Obviously the running game, which ran for a clean 200 yards on 34 carries.  As always, the O-Line was the big star here.  Aikman – who, as loyal NYGMen commenter Dan pointed out, has gotten to know the Giants very, very well over the past few years – heaped his usual praise on the fatties up front.  At this point, there’s not too much more to say about them, other than to say definitively that they’re the best in the league.

I’ll once again avail myself of FootballOutsiders stats to prove my point: The G-Men rank third in adjusted line yards (run blocking) and second in adjusted sack rate.  No other team ranks nearly so well across the board.

As for the running backs, Jacobs bounced back from a rough game last week to average 6.9 yards per carry, including two Tiki-esque zig-zag runs in the second half.  He ran over guys and he juked guys out of their cleats.  He was terrific.

Derrick Ward was his usual super-competent self, a performance that included a number of key first downs.  Ward might be one of the most underrated players in football: how confident do you feel with the ball in his hands?

And Ahmad Bradshaw, stashed in the doghouse though he might be, turned in an impressive performance in his brief outing nonetheless.  That guy seems to rip off an awesome run every game.  (Here comes the weekly ritual: We need to get this guy more touches – it’s criminal how underutilized this resource is.)

As for the receivers, there’s Boss and his soft hands, Smith and his nose for the first-down marker, along with Amani and his solid awesomeness.  No receiver stuck out, but there was nothing to complain about.

Except maybe Plax, who dropped those two passes (including a touchdown), and had that miscommunication with Eli on Jenkins’ pick-six.  But while it wasn’t a good game for Plax, I can’t kill the guy. 

For one, the pick-six looked like it was Eli’s fault, at least judging by the body-language during the sideline conversation that was caught on camera.  On the play, Jenkins jumped the route, which probably called for Plax to break it off and run a streak.  Plax saw that, but Eli didn’t.  And wouldn’t that throw probably have been picked even if Plax ran did what Eli thought he was going to?

Secondly, Plax’s great blocking was on display during two key runs – Jacobs’ 31-yard run and Ward’s 17-yard touchdown run – on the touchdown drive that put us up 35-14.  (The awesome thing about that drive was that we answered the Cowboys’ scoring drive right then and there.)

So lay off Plax.  It was a rough game in a tumultuous season, but there’s much less to worry about than many people will have you believe.  He finally showed contrition this week and we’re 7-1 with an awesome passing game.  There’s no crisis.

**

So far, it has been almost all praise.  But now we get to Eli, who was pretty bad, no question about it.  To rehash, he went 16 for 27 (59%, not terrible) for a season-low 147 yards, averaging a sub-par, but also not awful, 5.4 yards per attempt (his career average is 6.4, and his 2008 average is 7.1).  The damaging things were his three turnovers, including an inexplicable fumble and the pick-six by Jenkins.

Today was Eli’s second truly bad game this year, the first being the Cleveland game.  But doesn’t it seem like there’s a difference between these games and the bad games he had in the past, when he looked completely shook out there?  In his bad games this year, he has looked a little reckless.  But I’m sure most Giants fans would prefer Eli to have a bad game due to this overconfidence rather than the underconfidence that characterized his bad games in the past.

A mitigating circumstance in all this was the Cowboys’ solid pass rush, which was really the only facet in which they were remotely successful.  And look at it this way: How ridiculous is it that we beat the shit out of the Cowboys when Eli had a bad game?

**

Other negatives were the kickoffs and the kickoff return game.  On the kickoffs, Carney’s boots have reached a critical point.  The problem is that we shouldn’t part with him as a field goal kicker – a kicker having an automatic season must be respected.

So it looks like we’re gonna have to carry two kickers.  Yes, this seems absurd considering Tynes’ kicks are no great shakes, but it’s honestly the best thing we can do.  Let’s just not dress Rueben Droughns and be done with it.

And on kickoff returns, doesn’t it always seem like the wedge doesn’t get up-field enough for Bradshaw, which causes Ahmad to slow down and tip-toe into it?  This has been going on all year – it prevents Bradshaw from exploding through a hole for a big return.  There aren’t many areas in which this team to improve, but it shouldn’t be too hard to get a lot better in these facets.

The credit for the inspiration behind this entry belongs to Dales, a commenter on FootballOutsiders.com, who looked up the catch-rates of the Giants receivers (the percentage of balls a receiver catches when he is the intended target).  Dales, wherever and whoever you are, thank you.  You’re the man.

Smith: 84% (31 passes)

Hixon: 80% (15 passes)

Moss: 71% (7 passes)

Plax: 56% (45 passes)

Toomer: 53% (38 passes)

Now, these figures shouldn’t be read as a ranking of the best receivers on the team.  Smith’s percentage is bound to be high because he’s targeted mostly on short, over-the-middle routes. Plax and Toomer, on the other hand are targeted more downfield, which will naturally yield a lower percentage.  And because they work more toward the sideline, they are naturally farther away from the quarterback, which will lead to a lower percentage.  And in Hixon’s case, 15 passes in his direction is too small a sample to really conclude anything, although it is promising.  But the conclusion here is obvious: Steve Smith catches everything thrown his way.

In FootballOutsiders’ individual DVOA statistic, which takes catch-rate into account and adjusts traditional stats based on situation – like whether the catch gets a first down – Smith ranks 21st in the entire NFL.  (Plax, at 27th, is no slouch either.)

Giants fans know that Smith is good, but we may not realize exactly how good.  I think some of us tend to think of Smith as the proverbial (and backhanded) “nice player.”  But what he really is is one of the best possession receivers in the game.  The fans should realize this, but more importantly, so should the coaching staff so they can find ways to get this guy more involved.

The amazing thing about Smith is that he was only active for four regular season games last year before exploding onto the scene in the playoffs.  Even including those playoff games, he’s played in only 14 NFL games.  Yet his best attribute is his savviness, his understanding of how to find creases in zones and get open.  And of course, his hands, which are borne out by the 84% statistic.

But don’t sell Smith’s athleticism short.  No, he’s not a speed-burner, but he’s a perfect underneath receiver because he’s able to reach top-speed quickly.  Also, his body-control is elite: think of the catch he made in the Super Bowl that preceded the Plax TD, when he tiptoed along the sideline while picking up the first down right in front of Brandon Meriweather’s face.  He also has good ups: think of the 22-yard catch he made to get us going on the final drive of the first half of the Dallas playoff game, without which there is no miraculous playoff run.

So we have a gem in Steve Smith.  This means I was dead wrong in my initial disappointment that Carolina took Dwayne Jarrett a few picks before we selected.  It also means that the Giants should make a point of getting this guy the ball.

**

Dales also compiled the catch-rates of the running backs:

Ward: 81% (16 catches)

Hedgecock: 60% (5 passes)

Jacobs: 44% (9 passes)

(Bradshaw didn’t show up on the stats, meaning that he hasn’t been targeted the minimum 5 times.)

This tells us what we already knew: Ward is a very good receiver, and Jacobs can’t catch.

But I don’t want to end on that note, because Jacobs has been absolutely amazing this year, causing me to temper my long-held skepticism about him.  That topic is for another entry, though.

Some of the coverage of the Plax’s comments today has been pretty misleading, and, I believe, kind of misses the point.

ESPN’s article, which has occupied the site’s top spot all evening, led with: “An unapologetic Plaxico Burress rejoined the New York Giants on Monday, noting he didn’t lose any sleep after he Super Bowl champions suspended him for a game.”

The beat writers are a little more even-handed, knowing that Plax being Plax isn’t nearly as bad as Manny being Manny or T.O. being T.O.

Sure, Plax’s attitude during the interview was defiant, and he definitely said some ridiculous things.  But if you read the whole transcript – you can read it in four parts here – it’s clear that although he stopped short of apologizing, he knows what he did was unacceptable.

To wit:

–“Maybe I could’ve put a call in.”

–“I definitely let them down.”

–“They made the decision for the best of the team and I have a lot of respect for that.  They made the decision to suspend me for a week, which I was cool with.  We all agreed to it and moved on.”

–“Will I make the same decision?  Yes.  Will I handle the situation a little better?  Yes, I’ll put in a phone call”

So going forward, Plax gets it, or at least he gets it enough.  His defiant attitude during the interview was probably the result of feeling cornered by the media.  Plax is the proverbial “Proud Man,” and like many people, probably has a hard time distinguishing between an apology and a ritual of humiliation.  That’s a frustrating quality, but hardly a reason to write the guy off as a bad teammate.

Now, I don’t mean to excuse Plax’s actions or comments.  There was certainly a lot in that interview to make you angry.

His repeated insistence that he would do it again – or as he put it: “It’s like I told them, if I have a decision to make about my family or son and things like that, I wouldn’t change anything about it” – was pretty infuriating.

But do you think he really meant that?  It doesn’t jibe with the “apologies” above.  Rather, this struck me as a misguided tactic to get the media off his back by playing the family card.  But the problem, obviously, wasn’t his choosing his family over football.  It was that he didn’t call.  He knows that, but maybe he naively believed this tactic could make him a sympathetic character.  It backfired, and he wound up making himself look worse.

Also, it was weird when he said he only watched “a little bit of [the game].  I watched the first half.”  If an athlete losing $100 grand and shrugging his shoulders doesn’t infuriate the average fan, this might.  Didn’t watch the game?  For Heaven’s sake, many of us have watched it twice already!

But here’s the deal here: We can choose to get bent out of shape about what he said, or we can accept that this situation, while imperfect, doesn’t present an imminent threat to team morale.  It doesn’t even present a gathering threat.

As Ralph Vacchiano wrote in his live chat with readers last week, “I don’t think Burress and Coughlin have ever really gotten along.  They’ve peacefully coexisted more than anything else.”

Or as Plax himself said today, “We hit and miss sometimes and things like that.”

It’s a manageable situation, this Plax being Plax.  But you know what else was Plax being Plax?  Gutting out last season on a shredded ankle, adding a separated shoulder in Green Bay and then a torn knee before the Super Bowl.

So let’s move on and start thinking about Cleveland.

NYGMen was contacted this week by Michael Steffes, creator and lead writer of the Seahawks blog, Seahawkaddicts.com.  The following is Steffes’ take on Sunday’s game.

Hello Giants fans, my name is Michael Steffes and I am the creator and lead writer for a fairly popular Seahawks fan blog called Seahawk Addicts.  Greg and I have agreed to trade some analysis about our respective teams this week in order to give our readers some greater insight into this matchup.  

But before I get into my analysis of this year’s incarnation of the Seahawks, I wanted to talk to you all about a controversy that was stirred up this week.  Many of you may have heard or read about a different Seahawks site that posted a despicable attempt at smack talk.  I am not going to go into the specifics of what was said (if you are unfamiliar with what I speak, it’s for the better), but it was nauseating.  What I wanted to say on this subject was that every Seahawks fan I know, including all of the readers of our site, were universally disgusted with what this one fan said.  It was appalling.  Every fanbase has its idiots, but this person represents the smallest minority of Seahawks fans.   So from all of us true Seahawk fans, we apologize to anyone who was hurt by those comments.

Now, let’s move on to the 2008 Seahawks.  Currently the Hawks have a record of 1-2, which represents less than the standard they have set over recent years.  However, I caution you that this team is actually better than the team that was fielded in ’06 and ‘07, they’ve just been the struck with terrible luck.  The team has been playing this year without their top 5 WRs.  Never have I seen the injury bug decimate one position like this before–imagine the Giants with Sinorice Moss as their top wideout and you can see what we have been suffering through. 

Despite this, the team should probably be 2-1, but they lost in overtime to the SF 49ers in a game where they just couldn’t catch a break from either the officials or the football gods.  There were two interceptions on tipped balls and a Seahawk interception in the end zone was negated by a call the officials debated for several minutes.   Sometimes it just isn’t your day.

Because of their losing record, the Seahawks will come in as a desperate team.  They have a very hard stretch of games following this one (GB, Tampa, @SF, Philly).  They need to even their record, but this will be a hard task.  Historically, they are terrible after the bye with a record of 2-6 under Holmgren.  Also, they are notorious for struggling on the East Coast at 10 AM.  The good news is that the bye week has allowed them to get back two of their top wideouts, Deion Branch and Bobby Engram.  Starting RT Sean Locklear is also back.  Ray Willis played well in Locklear’s absence, but he isn’t the pass protector that Locklear is, and the Hawks will need his skills if they hope to contain Justin Tuck.  How much the returning receivers can help remains to be seen, but expectations are low since it will likely take a game or two for them to get back into top form. 

One thing that is new about the Hawks this year is their running game, which currently ranks 3^rd in the NFL.  As Giants fans you have seen a lot of Julius Jones over the years and probably weren’t too impressed.  However, he seems to have a new lease on life with the Seahawks and has willed himself to some big games in weeks two and three.  He is breaking tackles and moving the chains, which is a pleasant change of scenery for Seahawks fans.  Shaun Alexander stopped running hard after winning the MVP in 2005, and as a result often left the Hawks in 2^nd and 3^rd and long situations.  Jones’ best contribution may be keeping the Hawks on schedule, even when the big gains aren’t there.  The team also added TJ Duckett, who is 100% so far this year in short yardage situations.  The Hawks were one of the worst teams in the league over the last two years at converting on short yardage.  They lost a couple of games simply because they couldn’t manage to gain a yard when they most needed it.  The running game faces its biggest test so far this year in the Giants’ run defense.  As Hawk fans, we are using this game as a measuring stick for how far the ground game has really come.

Defensively, the Seahawks have great personnel.  However, they really haven’t put it all together yet.  The front seven has been very good this year.  You probably know the fancy Pro Bowl names like Julian Peterson, Lofa Tatupu, and Patrick Kerney, but the two players that really drive the run defense are fourth year linebacker Leroy Hill and second year defensive tackle Brandon Mebane.  Both are budding stars whose names you are likely to hear often on Sunday.  They have handled some good backs so far this year, and while the Giants are great at running the football, I expect that the Hawks will keep their running game in check.

This leaves the secondary.  A week ago I would have told you that Burress was going to destroy the Hawks, as they typically have a lot of trouble with big, physical wide receivers.  However, now that he is suspended, the Hawks match up much better.  This same group allowed the fewest TD passes in the league last year, and typically does well against smaller, quicker receivers.  The real weakness of this group seems to be 3rd and long.  For some reason they allow far too many 3^rd and long conversions.  Part of this is because of some predictable tendencies in defensive coordinator John Marshall’s play calling.  When he blitzes he often sends seven guys, but when he isn’t blitzing he prefers a soft two-deep coverage which allows receivers too much space.  When Marshall’s play calling is hot this defense can’t be stopped, but when he is off this defense disappoints.  I expect the Seahawks’ defense to focus on stopping the run to try to make the Giants’ receivers beat them.  Unfortunately for the Seahawks, it is not out of the question that Toomer and company will manage does just that, especially if the Hawks can’t get pressure on Eli Manning, something they will need if they hope to win.  The Seahawks pass rush tends to be non-existent on the road.  However, if they are getting to Manning I believe they have a shot at winning this game.

Overall, I expect to see a defensive struggle, simply because Eli is missing Plax, the Hawks are good against the run, and the Seattle offense will need time for the returning players at wide receiver to get up to speed.   I am not bold enough to predict a Seahawks victory at 10am PST on the East Coast against the defending Super Bowl Champs, but I do think the Hawks desperation to get a win will make it a good game.  I wish I could be more optimistic about the Hawks chances, but I have seen them fall flat in too many similar games. I am taking the Giants 20-17.  My thanks to Greg for giving me the opportunity to share with  all of you, and may the best team win this Sunday (and both stay healthy in the process!).  

So much for the post-Super Bowl honeymoon and the hunky-doryness engendered by the 3-0 start: As FOXSports originally reported, Plax has been suspended for two weeks for “insubordination.”  Apparently, he missed practice/meetings on both Monday and Tuesday, and didn’t respond to phone calls asking where in the world he was.

This means that Plax is suspended from all team activities until October 6^th, without pay, meaning that he will miss the Seahawks game.  Even when he gets back, you have to wonder if he’ll be at his best after being away from football for two weeks.  Just a bad situation…

Obviously, this is an extreme punishment from Tom, but one he felt he had to lay down.  Tom always talks about the principles of team, and in this instance, he put his money where his mouth is.  If a guy like Calvin Boothe or Dave Tollefson pulled what Plax did, we wouldn’t have objected to Tom making an example of them with something much harsher.  Say what you want about Tom, he showed he is a man of principle.  Especially considering Plax is only missing one game and our depth at the position, I have no problem with this – it will be good for this team in the long run.

Obviously, a brutal job by Plax to go AWOL.  Running a football team is like running a football play: every last man must be accountable for being in the right place.  If one man is not where he’s supposed to be, it threatens to screw up the whole operation.  This type of stunt – just falling off the face of the fucking Earth for two work days – gets you fired from many real jobs, so it’s hard to feel too sorry for Plax here.

The unanswered question here is: What in the world was going on with Plax?  Maybe this will come out, but for now, speculation seems silly.

Plax has been celebrated, and deservedly so, for how much he’s changed in the past couple years.  He heroically played all last year on a torn ankle, and played the Super Bowl with a seriously messed up knee.  As I just read in Ralph Vacchiano’s book about Eli, Plax acknowledged that his public arm-flailing displays after not being thrown to were bad for Eli and the team, so he approached Eli, apologized, and said he’s cut it out.  And obviously this summer, he got himself a new contract – and a very reasonable one, at that – with no holdout and virtually no public griping.  Combine that with his excellent downfield blocking and his obsessive note-taking during team meetings, and it seemed like Plax had evolved into the ideal teammate.

But now this.  Hopefully, this is nothing more than a temporary backslide, a moment of immaturity that he will duly apologize for and move on from.  From what I read, his progress as a professional has been real.  He screwed up pretty badly here, but it shouldn’t undermine everything he’s done up to this point.  Hopefully he takes his punishment like a man, moves on, and resumes being the good teammate he has been.

At worst, however, this sours his relationship with Coughlin and the team and evolves into a season-long – or worse, contract-long – distraction.

Correction: There wasn’t any activity on Tuesday, so Plax only missed meetings on Monday.

Update: Plax’s agent, Drew Rosenhaus, said Plax was attending to a family emergency, but didn’t provide specifics.  He said that while Plax is contrite, he’s appealing the suspension.

In Plax’s absence, Domenik Hixon will start as the X receiver.

“Well I think you expect that we’re gonna play well when the pressure’s on, and we’re gonna find a way to win the game.  And we did that today, although it was a difficult game.”

–Tom Coughlin

We’ll get into specifics later in the week, but for now, here are some general thoughts on today’s game:

It wasn’t the sharpest performance, but how can you not be very happy? Sure, the Bengals were a bad team in the previous two games, and having slipped to 0-3, there’s a good chance they’ll be a bad team from this point forward.  But make no mistake: they were a very good team today, led by a quarterback and an offense that didn’t look far removed from 2005, when they were one of the decade’s best.  As Coughlin and a lot of the players have said, give credit to the Bengals for playing an excellent game and putting our defense on its heels.

Last week, I wrote: “Two games into the season, the Super Bowl Champs couldn’t be more encouraging.”  Does this statement hold true three games into the season?  It’s an interesting question.

On one hand, for the first time this year, we didn’t play that well.  (Digression: Some have said we didn’t play that well in the first two games, but they’re wrong.  We did.  Even though the score was a little too close to comfort at points during both of those games, we dominated on a play-by-play basis.  Footballoutsiders.com, which calculates play-by-play stats based on situation and opponent, put us in the top spot in their advanced rankings this past week.  This is cold, scientific stuff, not some ex-jock bloviator being like, “They’re the champions, and until they’re not, they’re number one in my book.”)

Back to the point.  We didn’t play that well today for the first time all season.  I suppose if we had blown the Bengals out, that would’ve been a little more encouraging than gutting out a game we could have very easily lost.

But…  doesn’t this hard-fought win answer questions that weren’t addressed during our two dominant performances to start the year?  Pardon the cliche, but wasn’t there something “character building” about this game that is both a building block and a source of optimism going forward? After today, don’t you have a really good feeling about this team?

Going into the bye, we are where we wanted to be: 3-0 and healthy (though I’m not sure what happened to Aaron Ross’ shoulder…).  If anything, the struggle today will keep us grounded during the bye week as we prepare for the second half of our easy six-game opening stretch.  At this point, you’d have to say that a 6-0 start is likely, and anything less would be a disappointment.

**

Is there anyone out there who isn’t thankful Eli Manning is our quarterback?  At the 4:39 mark, was anyone not utterly confident Eli would take us down for the go-ahead touchdown?

Giants fans, do not take this feeling for granted.  Though it may be too early to call Eli Manning a “great quarterback” – the Super Bowl notwithstanding, there isn’t quite enough evidence yet to support this claim – there’s no doubt that he’s a clutch quarterback, a quality somewhat distinct from greatness.  By the end of the year, NYGMen predicts we will be able to count Eli as one of the game’s great, clutch quarterbacks.

I happen to be reading Ralph Vacchiano’s book, Eli Manning: The Making of a Quarterback, which I plan to review/discuss some time in the near future.  The book’s intro is written by Ernie Accorsi, who was famously smitten with Eli ever since laying eyes on him as a junior at Ole Miss in a game against Auburn.

The roots of Accorsi’s infatuation with Eli date back to 1970, his first year as the PR coordinator for the Baltimore Colts.  It was then that Accorsi first encountered John Unitas, the Platonic ideal for a quarterback whose form Accorsi has been trying to capture ever since.

Accorsi tells the story of noticing in Colts training camp in 1970 that Unitas has lost velocity on his ball, attributable to an elbow surgery two years before and old age.

“I turned to Milt [Davis, a Colts scout] and said, ‘Milt, he can’t throw like he used to.  Can we win with him throwing like that?’

“Milt, quite fatherly, turned to this brash rookie employee, put his hand on my shoulder and said: “Ernie, listen to me.  You evaluate the great quarterbacks on one element alone: Can they take their team down the field, with the championship on the line, and into the end zone?  That’s how you evaluate a great quarterback.

That, Unitas could still do.  We won the Super Bowl that season.”

And so Accorsi paid a King’s ransom for Eli Manning.  And three years later… “17-14 is the final score.  One touchdown, we are world champs.  Believe it, it will happen.”

(No, I’m not forgetting about the Asante Samuel and Brandon Meriwether near-picks on the final drive.  But you have to admit, Ernie was right: there’s something about Eli.)

**

So this was the trap game, it turns out.  It didn’t take the form of a flat performance against a bad opponent as we had feared heading into last week.  Instead, it was a flawed performance against a desperate and dangerous team.

**

I would be remiss if I didn’t acknowledge how easily we could have lost this game.  Sure, there are plenty coulda-woulda-shouldas we Giants fans could break out, but the Bengals clock management at the end of regulation was egregious.  If you’re a Bengals fan, you’re very, very pissed: your team just squandered its last, best shot to save its season.

You saw it, but to rehash: With 32 seconds left and a timeout remaining, the Bengals had just completed a 9-yard pass to Houshmenzadeh, giving them 3^rd and 1 at the NYG 14.  But they took 20 seconds before snapping the ball for the next play, which became an 11-yard pass to Antonio Chatman.  This gave them first and goal at the 3, but left them with only 4 seconds.  They had no choice but to bring in Graham to kick the field goal.

So in the span of 32 seconds, with a timeout to burn, the Bengals ran just two plays.  Based on how they were moving the ball on that drive, is there anyone out there who thinks they wouldn’t have won the game if they had run a third play during that time?  Shit, they could have easily run four plays.

**

Today’s game added to the mounting pile of evidence that Brandon Jacobs is the third best running back on the team.

Yes, I know the Bengals game-planned against the run, which makes Jacobs’ 14 carries for 35 yards (2.5 YPC) a little misleading.  And of course Ward’s draw-plays were more conducive to success, which makes his 80 yards on 9 carries (8.9 YPC) a little misleading too.  As Jacobs-apologists would have you believe, it was Jacobs’ bulldozing his way to a succession of 2.5 yard-runs that “softened” up the defense for Ward.  (As for his latest dropped past… well, that’s beyond even their excuses.)

But my question is this: Is there anything that can happen on the field that can change the coaching staff’s preconceived notion that Jacobs is our best back deserving of the vast plurality of carries? 

Alas, probably not, and the egregious misallocation of resources will continue.  Today, Jacobs got 56% of the carries.  Ward got 36%.  Bradshaw got 8%.

This week – during which we nearly lost, and all three of our division rivals won impressively – proved it: We cannot rest on our Super Bowl laurels.  We need to improve this team if we want to beat out the tough-ass teams in our division.  Earth, Wind and Fire in its current proportions is not a “winning formula,” as the coaches and many in the media might think, but rather something that might preclude us from being as good as we need to be to defend our crown.

With the love-fest surrounding our Earth, Wind, and Fire running back trio, now seems a good time to get on the record with this statement: Jacobs gets way too many carries, Bradshaw gets way too few, and this state of affairs is holding this team back.  And with the hyper-competitive state of the NFC East, we can’t afford not to maximize our potential.

In the Rams game, Jacobs got 15 carries (54%), Ward got 8 (29%), and Bradshaw got 5 (18%).  In last year’s playoffs, Jacobs got 56% of the carries to Bradshaw’s 44%, despite the fact that Bradshaw averaged 4.3 yards per carry to Jacobs’ 3.2.

Clearly Bradshaw is the better back, but Jacobs gets more carries, a situation that represents nothing less than an underutilization of resources.  I see no reason for why this is so, but apparently some people do.  Here are some common rationales for why Jacobs get so many more carries than the other two, and why I disagree.

 

Jacobs wears down/softens up the defense, so the defensive fronts Bradshaw and Ward see are diminished versions of what Jacobs sees.

On the surface, it makes sense that being forced to tackle a huge back like Jacobs would wear down a defense.  But what actually wears a defense down is being forced to stay on the field for a long time, absorbing blocks from offensive linemen bigger than Jacobs and running sideline-to-sideline wind sprints to catch a guy like Bradshaw.  The way to wear down a defense is not to punish the one or two defenders who happen to tackle the running back, but rather to accumulate first downs and keep drives going.  Therefore, the carries should go to the guy that gives us the best chance of getting first downs, and that guy is Bradshaw.

Despite Bradshaw’s markedly superior yards per carry average, you will still hear people proclaim that Jacobs, in fact, is the guy that gives us the best chance at sustaining drives.  This theory accepts the conventional wisdom that while Bradshaw is an exciting home-run hitter, Jacobs is the better between-the-tackles runner who uses his physicality to grind out the extra yards and put us in manageable situations.

But this isn’t true.  For as big as Jacobs is, and for all his impressive displays of masculinity (the Woodson play against Green Bay, the Landry play in the season opener), he doesn’t drive the pile because of his high center of gravity.  Ward, with his outstanding lower-body strength, is probably better for this purpose, and Bradshaw, though some typecast him as a scatback, isn’t too shabby in this department himself.  Just ask Ty Warren.

Also, Jacobs’ lack of short-area quickness precludes him from being the short-yardage runner often say he is.  Case in point was his 4^th down carry on the last drive of the Super Bowl, when he got chopped down at the legs – a frequent phenomenon – and sort of happened to fall forward a few inches past the first down marker.

Lastly, there is a distinction between a guy who is hard to tackle, and a guy who tackling is a painful experience.  Sure, Jacobs is as bruising as they come, but unless it’s in the open field with a full head of steam, it doesn’t seem particularly difficult for NFL defenders to get the guy to the ground.  And if it’s the open field we’re talking about, I’ll take Ahmad or Ward any day.

 

We don’t want to overuse Bradshaw because he might get hurt.  Jacobs, as the bigger back, is better equipped to carry the load.

There’s some legitimacy to the fear about wearing Bradshaw down.  I’m don’t want to overstate the case here: yes, they should all split caries so that all three of them can be fresh and healthy.

But why do we assume that Bradshaw is this delicate flower who can’t be overused?  The guy was a featured back for two years at Marshall, racking up 214 and 249 carries his last two years.  Maybe it’s Jacobs who we should worry about overusing.  Last year, he missed five games with various injuries and definitely seemed to lose a half-step in the playoffs, which rendered him pretty ineffective.  Bradshaw, while small, is instinctive and maneuverable enough to avoid big hits.  Big Brandon’s penchant for relishing contact, on the other hand, leaves him exposed to hits, perpetually prone to the kind of nagging injuries that sidelined him for stretches last year.

 

Jacobs averaged 5 yards a carry last year and is averaging 5.8 yards a carry this year.  What’s wrong with that?  If it ain’t broke, why fix it?

Indeed, it’s hard to complain about the Giants running game.  But it can be better, and if we’re serious about contending for another Super Bowl, it needs to be better. 

Perhaps the stubborn insistence on giving Jacobs the majority of the carries comes down to the fact that he looks like a featured back, especially a feature back for the New York Football Giants.  He’s big, he’s physical, he’s tough, and we’re the G-Men.  Of course he’s our back. 

But he’s not our best back.  Jacobs is fine, but we have a good one in Ward and a potentially great one in Bradshaw.  (We haven’t even discussed pass-catching, by the way, but it’s clear that Bradshaw is a good receiver, Ward is at least a competent receiver, and Jacobs is a pretty horrendous receiver – by the time he corrals the ball, six defenders seem always to have descended on him already.)

We must not let our rigidity about these roles get in the way of improving this team.  I’m not advocating for Ahmad to get 25 carries a game, but a more equitable distribution of the carries seems reasonable.  How about 11 for Jacobs, 8 for Ward, and 11 for Ahmad?  Can we start with that?  Can we get our best back in the game?