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.

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. Not Invincible

The first lesson from yesterday doesn’t have to do with “distractions” or even the absence of Plax.  Rather, we learned again that even excellent teams are capable of sometimes playing very poorly.  In brutal conditions – trust me, I was there – we turned in an awful performance against very good Eagle team that is probably one of the top five in the league right now.  And we got our asses handed to us.  It happens, even to 11-1 teams.

I’m assuming the Giants will bounce back against Dallas, although yesterday’s loss certainly raises the stakes for that one.  Once that happens, everything will be well and good in G-Men nation again.  In that sense, yesterday’s wasn’t a disturbing loss in that it shouldn’t shake our conception of who the 2008 Giants are: With all due respect to the Titans, we still have to be considered the best team in the league.

But the game reminded us that our path to another title isn’t inexorable.  In any playoff game, we can come out sloppy and get knocked off.  It has been a great season, but just being the best team in the league doesn’t guarantee a championship.  Just ask the 2007 New England Patriots.

II. Eli and the Meadowlands Winds

On the other hand, here’s what emerged from Sunday’s game that has me worried going forward:

We know that teams will stack 8 or 9 in the box for the rest of the year, especially after yesterday.  Therefore, the fate of our offense hinges on Eli, which means that we’re one bad Eli performance away from a heartbreaking playoff loss (and, even though the prospect off a post-season loss is not unlikely, anything short of a Super Bowl title will be severely disappointing.)

So it’s all up to Eli, which is fine except for this: Because we have home-field advantage, there is a chance that we’ll catch a windy-as-hell day like we did today.  And if we do, I think we’re in trouble.  Because as good as Eli has become, he is especially vulnerable to the Giants Stadium winds because he doesn’t throw a tight spiral.

Right now, this is just a theory: I hope Eli proves me wrong.  But, offhand, I can think of three super-windy days on which Eli has played poorly:  The Carolina playoff game in 2005, the Redskins home game late last year, and yesterday.

I know his final numbers weren’t all that terrible yesterday, and I know they were hurt by the Hixon and Smith drops.  But… they were also artificially aided by the garbage-time touchdown drive and the near-interception dropped by Asante Samuel.  (As I said to NYGMen commentator Dan, with whom I attended the game, Asante Samuel has a habit of dropping game-clinching interceptions against the Giants.)

So I can picture a scenario where our home-field advantage turns into a disadvantage.  Back in the ‘80s, people used to talk about how Phil Simms was uniquely qualified to be the Giants quarterback because of his tight spiral.  Isn’t it possible the converse is true with Eli?

III. Lack of Plax

Yesterday’s game answered all those who thought we’d be perfectly fine without Plax based on the Seattle and ‘Zona games.  Surely, he will be missed, especially in windy conditions when Eli’s ball takes unpredictable paths.

I have a feeling that most NYGMen readers weren’t on board with the whole “We won’t miss Plax, just like we don’t miss Shockey” thing.  But here’s why that premise is wrong anyway:

Shockey would brattily demand the ball, forcing Gilbride to draw up plays to keep him involved just so he would shut the fuck up (this according to Ralph Vacchiano of the Daily News.)  But Plax, for all his off-field antics – which, in my mind, have crossed the line and demand his removal from the team – was a total team player between the lines.

It’s qualities like these that make parting with Plax – if that is indeed what we do – so fraught with mixed emotions.  It would be easy to say, “The guy was just a complete tool,” and leave it at that.  But that’s just not the case.

IV.  Free Ahmad

Can’t we get this guy on the field already?  Did we forget how good he was in the playoffs?  At this point, we can’t afford not to use him.  Without Plax, we need playmakers.

The Giants have been really great this year on a play-by-play basis, even moreso on offense than defense.  But often – possibly due to the fact that our offensive dominance is based on the running game, which will usually yield fewer points than an explosive passing game – the scoreboard has failed to fully reflect our dominance.  It’s great to pound the rock down teams’ throats, but no team is without the need of big plays.  A guy like Bradshaw can provide some; at this point, it’s criminal to keep him buried on the bench.

I can totally picture a post-season scenario in which we completely outplay the other team, but only have a 10-point lead in the third quarter.  And then they break off a big play, then Eli throws a pick on a high pass that goes off Hixon’s fingers, and then we’re in danger of an awful loss.

We need firepower.  Put in #44.

(Also on this note, can Hixon please get back to returning kicks?  I’m hoping that Colonel Tom is just protecting him from injury and that he’ll be back deep when the playoffs come.  But please, we’re really sitting on too many resources here.  It really might bite us in the ass.)

V.  The Lack of a Pass-Rush

You can live with a big game by Westbrook – he’s an awesome player who capitalized on some missed assignments to break a couple of long gains.  But to me, what’s more worrisome going forward was our total lack of pressure on McNabb.

Despite our good sack totals – we are tied for fourth in the league with 37, and are seventh in FootballOutsiders’ Adjusted Sack Rate – our pass rush has been inconsistent this year.  Without it, our defense is penetrable.

I suppose the overall theme of this post is that while we are good, we’re not so good that there aren’t scenarios under which we can lose.  At 11-1, it might have been easy to forget that.  Yesterday was a reminder.

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.

Allow me a slightly lengthy preface here.

Here at NYGMen, I’ve long relied upon the unique stats created by the smart guys at FootballOutsiders.com, especially their DVOA stat, which breaks down each play and determines its success based on situation and opponent.

DVOA is a better gauge of how good a team is than raw yardage stats, which are often skewed by situation – think about when a team piles on chunks of yards while getting blown out – and opponent – maybe a 90-yard rushing performance against the ’85 Bears is more impressive than a 100-yard game against the 2008 Seahawks.

It is also a better gauge of how good a team is than wins and losses, which are subject to simple luck: what if the tipped pass is caught by a wide receiver, or even falls incomplete, and doesn’t get intercepted and returned for a touchdown?  Looking at teams on a play-by-play basis puts in their proper place these random elements of luck that have a disproportionate impact on the outcome of games.

The value of a stat can be judged by how predictive it is going forward.  As it turns out, DVOA is more predictive of win-loss record going forward than both win-loss record itself and yardage stats.  In other words, a team with a good DVOA but a mediocre win-loss record can generally be expected to have a good win-loss record going forward.  Conversely, a team with a mediocre DVOA but a good win-loss record can expected to be mediocre in the future.

So there you have it: DVOA, the best gauge I know of how good a team will be from a given point forward.  The stat is expressed in terms of a percentage relative to the league average: to give a general benchmark, a team with a 30% DVOA is Super Bowl worthy, a team with a DVOA of 0 is average, and a team with a DVOA of -30% is first-pick-of-the-draft worthy.

Ok, anyway…

This is all prologue to a discussion of how ridiculously good the Giants have been this year.  Their DVOA of 56.7% is by far the best in the league, significantly better than the second-best Ravens (I know, it seems weird, but bear with me on DVOA, please), who stand at 42.5%.

Their offense has been truly phenomenal, sporting a DVOA of 41.1%, more than 10 points better than the second-best Broncos.  Their running game has been the best in the league by far, with a 38.6% DVOA that ranks much better than the second-place Falcons at 26.2%.  Their passing game ranks a very narrow second to Washington’s – of all teams! – by a margin of 43.7% to 43.6%.

The defense has been merely excellent: their DVOA of -12.4%, (which was brought down by getting sliced up by Carson Palmer) ranks 7th in the league.  They have been excellent against both run (-10.2%, which ranks 9th) as well as the pass (-14.0%, which ranks 7th).

And thanks to John Carney and some good returns by Hixon and even R.W. on Sunday, the G-Men are even very good on special teams, boasting a DVOA of 3.2%, which ranks 10th.

The upshot here is that the G-Men have been absurdly good on a play-by-play basis, probably better than you would have thought.  Detractors might point to our soft schedule thus far, but the beauty of DVOA is that it accounts for opponent.  (Although at this point in the season, the strength of opponents is hard to pin down.  Also, the G-Men get a lot of credit in this system for beating the Redskins, but it seemed pretty clear that the Redskins of Week 1 weren’t the same team as they are now.  But I digress…)

How good has this Giants start been?  It is the 7th best start since 1996, the point at which FootballOutsiders has enough data to calculate DVOA.  The top team on this list?  None other than the 2007 New England Patriots, with an absurd 72.4%.

Their offense has been nearly as good from a recent historical perspective: It ranks 8th best through four games.  Strangely, the 1999 Redskins top this list.

I’ll let Aaron Schatz, the genius behind FootballOutsiders, take this one home:

“Yes, that’s right – so far, the Giants have been that good.  They have a better pass defense than they had a year ago, and a much, much better passing game on offense.  Many NFL observers felt Eli Manning would continue to play at the high level he showed in last year’s postseason, with improved confidence moving him into the upper echelon of NFL quarterbacks.  Pro Football Prospectus 2008 said Manning would put up better fantasy numbers this year because of the “third down rebound effect.”  [A FootballOutsiders tenet that says that guys who are significantly worse on third down than they were on first and second – which Eli was last year – will bounce back as their third down performance gets more in line with their early down performance.]  It looks like both of these things have happened.  He’s the clear leader of the team and as we learned this week, he can even play well without Plaxico Burress on the field.  Meanwhile, the Giants offense leads the league on first down and second down and is fifith in third down.  Last year, the Giants offense ranked 12, 17, and 23 on those downs, respectively.”

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.

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.

“I want you to get on your feet, I want you to make some noise, I want you to get ready to stomp somebody out and welcome the New York Giants, Super Bowl Champions.”

 –Michael Strahan

I. Preliminary Thoughts on The Game

You have to be somewhere between pleased and very pleased with Thursday’s game. 

Yes, the offense went into the tank during the second half.  As is often the case, we left ourselves vulnerable to a comeback, which the Redskins, with their West Coast Offense not yet fully installed, happened not to be capable of making.

And for all the good things Eli did, he still did a bunch of bad things that showed he hasn’t turned into Peyton during the off-season.

As they always have, the Giants won ugly on Thursday, a trait that being Super Bowl champions will not change.

But the game provided an encouraging early answer to the biggest question mark going into this year.  Our pass rush was just fine without Osi and Strahan.  If the Tuck/Kiwanuka/McDougle combo is not a significant downgrade from the Osi/Strahan/Tuck combo, we should, at absolute worst, be almost as good as we were last year.

And if we improve in the other ways that all of us are expecting – Eli making The Leap, a healthy and potentially dominant Plax, a much better secondary, a better command of Spags’ defense – we should be significantly better, barring injuries.

More specifics on the game will follow as I pour over the game-tape.  In the meantime, here are some miscellaneous thoughts.

 

II. Strahan’s Pre-Game Thing:

How awesome was that?  And what would I have given to be at the Meadowlands?

A lot has been said about Strahan since he retired, so I’ll only add this:

While his outsized, eccentric personality is somewhat un-Giantlike in the traditional sense, winning the ‘Bowl has made him one of the most beloved G-men of all time.  Good for him.  His big ego and gaudy sack totals – both on display in the record-breaking Favre-sack in 2001 – masked his completeness as a defensive end and as a balls-out, team-oriented player.

(I should note that it was originally reported that he made $75,000 for his appearance, but both Strahan and the Giants denied this.)

In New York, for better or worse, you almost have to win a title to validate your career.  If the G-Men had been knocked out last year against Dallas, I think there’s a chance that Strahan might have lived the rest of his life as an underappreciated all-time great.  Fair or not, immortality almost comes only with the ring.  And now Strahan has it.  Could this have been predicted during his holdout last year?

 

II. Some More Thoughts on the Pre-game Intro:

–Spike Lee needs to stop getting credit as “the quintessential New York sports fan.”  He isn’t.  I’ll give him credit on the Knicks – it’s clear he loves them – but that’s it.  As far as football and baseball, he’s been documented to have worn the jerseys of the Giants, Jets, Mets, and Yankees.

The first rule of being a New York sports fan is rejecting the fallacy that it’s possible to be a “New York fan.”  It isn’t.  Being a sports fan is a monogamous relationship – if you don’t love one team and one team only, you don’t love any team.

–For those of you wondering, the Giants of Super Bowl years past who took part in the pre-game ceremony were: Harry Carson, Stacy Robinson, Karl Nelson, Brad Benson, Billy Ard, Howard Cross, Rodney Hampton, O.J. Anderson, Carl Banks, and Mark Bavaro.  Great job by those guys.

But no L.T.?  No Simms?  Kind of a bad job.

 

III. Giants Fans

Strahan referred to Giants fans as being “by far the best fans in all of sports.”  Frankly, I disagree.

When I was growing up in the ‘80s and ‘90s, it seemed like the Meadowlands was an intimidating place to play.  There were the winds, the tough D, and supportive fans who intimidated other teams with their deep-throated, thunderous New York passion.

But for a while now, and especially during the Coughlin era (pre-Patriots regular season finale last year), it seems Giants fans have become an easily-quieted, early-to-leave, and an overall counterproductive bunch.  Before the December 29^th of last year, the fans took a distant, judging, and antagonistic attitude towards the team. 

And the team realized this.  Let’s be clear: The whole Antonio Pierce-led “Nobody respects us mantra” isn’t directed at the national media, but much more the local media… and the fans.  The “Road Warriors” mentality was borne out of the G-Men feeling unloved in their own home.

Now, a lot of the scorn the Coughlin-era Giants received since the promise of early 2005 has been warranted.  The team had been maddeningly inconsistent, and until last December 29^th, they always could be counted on to fade down the stretch.

Here’s hoping the upshot of last year’s run is a love-affair with this team, rather than an entitlement complex.

According to his blog over at the Bergen Record, Vinny DiTrani says Gibril Wilson may hit the open market next week.

The Giants winning the Super Bowl also addsd to Wilson’s bargaining power. Teams like to bring in guys from successful organizations to bring that winning attitude to the locker room.

And let’s not forget Gibril is a pretty good player.

To me, it will be a big loss, but the Giants have overcome those type of losses last year.