Greg Schiano and Tom Coughlin argue after game

[Milla4Prez63 678]

I don't feel like reading through four pages, so sorry if I'm repeating something that's already been said, but I thought the best commentary on it was from Mike Wilbon, where was the intensity and fight while they were letting Eli and the Giants score 25 points on them in the fourth quarter?

 

That is BS on multiple levels. One, just because our defense got scorched in the 4th doesn't mean we weren't playing with intensity. Our D was playing with a bend but don't break style the whole day and we just cracked too much in the 4th. Our offense didn't do a good enough job killing clock and putting the Giants away in the 2nd half.

 

Also, it isn't like we went in with our ears pinned back and guns blazing on that final play. Our defense made a small push for the ball which resulted in a Giants' lineman falling back and putting Eli on his ass. There wasn't much intensity on that final play, it was the Bucs hoping to catch the Giants off guard to see if they could get the ball. This is a molehill being made into a mountain simply because of Coughlin's reaction. If he had just simply shaken Schiano's hand and went to the locker room, not a single soul would be discussing this.

[oochymp 2,393]

That is BS on multiple levels. One, just because our defense got scorched in the 4th doesn't mean we weren't playing with intensity. Our D was playing with a bend but don't break style the whole day and we just cracked too much in the 4th. Our offense didn't do a good enough job killing clock and putting the Giants away in the 2nd half.

 

Also, it isn't like we went in with our ears pinned back and guns blazing on that final play. Our defense made a small push for the ball which resulted in a Giants' lineman falling back and putting Eli on his ass. There wasn't much intensity on that final play, it was the Bucs hoping to catch the Giants off guard to see if they could get the ball. This is a molehill being made into a mountain simply because of Coughlin's reaction. If he had just simply shaken Schiano's hand and went to the locker room, not a single soul would be discussing this.

I'm not sure I agree with the bolded part, I think someone would still take issue with it even without Coughlin's reaction, it might not be quite as big of a deal, but it would still be a topic in sports talk. Also, while we're talking hypotheticals, imagine what the talk would have been if someone had gotten hurt on that play.

 

As for my previous comment, maybe intensity isn't the right word, but after 59:56 you've allowed more points than you've scored (most of that in the prior 15 minutes) and just threw an interception, what makes you think you can actually pull something that big off in 4 seconds?

 

And to throw out another observation, the more I think about it I see a pretty close parallel to running up the score, which I know is a topic people have different philosophies on, in both scenarios you see a team playing full force when the game is already essentially decided, and I suspect there's a pretty close correlation between people who are completely okay with this and people who don't mind when teams run up the score.

[rzb+ 367]

Since most others have beat this topic to death, back to life, and death again.. I'll ask this..

 

If the Giants did run the ball or, good God, pass it.. would we be talking about how the offense was trying to pad stats or run up the score. With THAT said, what if the Giants faked the kneel and threw a touchdown? Is that bush league? Because technically there is nothing against the rules on that.

 

EDIT: Just realized that oochymp kind of touched into this thought. Great minds..

Edited September 19, 2012 by rzb

[Thanatos 2,847]

Since most others have beat this topic to death, back to life, and death again.. I'll ask this..

 

If the Giants did run the ball or, good God, pass it.. would we be talking about how the offense was trying to pad stats or run up the score. With THAT said, what if the Giants faked the kneel and threw a touchdown? Is that bush league? Because technically there is nothing against the rules on that.

 

EDIT: Just realized that oochymp kind of touched into this thought. Great minds..

 

You can't fake a kneel, it's an illegal play. So technically, there is something against the rules on that.

[rzb+ 367]

You can't fake a kneel, it's an illegal play. So technically, there is something against the rules on that.

So if you set up in victory formation, the QB must kneel?

[Thanatos 2,847]

So if you set up in victory formation, the QB must kneel?

 

No, but if he begins the motion of kneeling, the play is blown dead. You could line up in victory formation, and then snap the ball and throw one deep. That would be a perfectly fine play. Now, it would be stupid, because the Bucs could intercept it, and there's no reason for it, because as long as you kneel the ball down, you win the game. But yes, you could do it, and I wouldn't have a problem with it.

 

I would think its a dumb play just from the perspective of what gives your team the best chance to win, but nothing wrong with it.

[rzb+ 367]

No, but if he begins the motion of kneeling, the play is blown dead. You could line up in victory formation, and then snap the ball and throw one deep. That would be a perfectly fine play. Now, it would be stupid, because the Bucs could intercept it, and there's no reason for it, because as long as you kneel the ball down, you win the game. But yes, you could do it, and I wouldn't have a problem with it.

 

I would think its a dumb play just from the perspective of what gives your team the best chance to win, but nothing wrong with it.

Damn you and your logic.

 

At the same time, it wouldn't have to be a deep pass if the D is looking for a kneel (I guess much like a fake spike). I guess you could say that the Giants were.. trying to catch the Bucs D napping..

[Thanatos 2,847]

Damn you and your logic.

 

At the same time, it wouldn't have to be a deep pass if the D is looking for a kneel (I guess much like a fake spike). I guess you could say that the Giants were.. trying to catch the Bucs D napping..

 

You could, but again, dumb play. The chances of one of the LBs being alert and picking the ball off far outweigh the chance of the D actually forcing a fumble on the kneeldown.

[FartWaffles 1,857]

I have no problem with what Schiano's perspective on why they decided to do that, but he forever now cannot complain about a team running up the score on his defense.

 

If the Saints are beating them by 28+ points with two minutes left in the game and Brees is still slinging it, he has absolutely no right to bitch about it.

[Shotgun 442]

Schiano doesn't seem like the type to bitch about it in the first places. Only whiny ass coaches do that.

[Milla4Prez63 678]

I'm not sure I agree with the bolded part, I think someone would still take issue with it even without Coughlin's reaction, it might not be quite as big of a deal, but it would still be a topic in sports talk. Also, while we're talking hypotheticals, imagine what the talk would have been if someone had gotten hurt on that play.

 

I remember Darnell Dockett trying it against us in like 2007 or 2008. I remember Jeff Garcia nearly lost the ball because of it. But nobody discussed Dockett trying to get the ball back because Gruden didn't cry about it. This is only a story because of Coughlin's reaction.

 

As for my previous comment, maybe intensity isn't the right word, but after 59:56 you've allowed more points than you've scored (most of that in the prior 15 minutes) and just threw an interception, what makes you think you can actually pull something that big off in 4 seconds?

 

Everyone knows the odds are stacked against you, but you have better odds of something happening by trying than standing there. The game ends after 60 minutes, not 59:95. The Bucs have every right to try and swipe at the ball, there is nothing cheap about it. The fact that we are discussing whether it is right for a team to try and swipe at the ball during a kneel down is mind boggling to me. Like Zack said, just because the offense has decided that the game is over and everyone should stop playing, doesn't mean the defense should.

 

Also, teams go for the ball in these situations all the time. Just in this scenario you had the Giants completly not expecting it and one of their linemen fell back and sent Eli on his ass. The Giants took a totally nonchalant approach to it and that is their fault, not ours. They shouldn't go out and run a play and not expect the opponent to play. It isn't like we were playing overly physical and hitting people really hard. We pretty much stopped as soon as it became obvious we weren't getting the ball.

 

And to throw out another observation, the more I think about it I see a pretty close parallel to running up the score, which I know is a topic people have different philosophies on, in both scenarios you see a team playing full force when the game is already essentially decided, and I suspect there's a pretty close correlation between people who are completely okay with this and people who don't mind when teams run up the score.

 

Running up the score is up to the team with a big lead. If you're up 31-0 but want your starters to still play 100%, that is within your rights to do. If you feel like it is a good chance for rest for starters and getting reps for the backups, that works too. Teams can approach the ending of games as they want as long as it is within rules.

[BC 331]

No I think it is cheap. Everything on the Giants defense is falling over each other, and players quite often get injured by having legs trapped and being bent as people fall on each other. Let's be honest there's zero chance they get the ball. None. Nobody fumbles a football while kneeling down.

[Zack_of_Steel+ 3,014]

No I think it is cheap. Everything on the Giants defense is falling over each other, and players quite often get injured by having legs trapped and being bent as people fall on each other. Let's be honest there's zero chance they get the ball. None. Nobody fumbles a football while kneeling down.

 

[BucD+ 648]

@BayCave:

Eli: "They were down and ready and had a feeling they were about to fire off." Soooo why not call a timeout or tell the OL?! #Fail

 

lawl

[WindyCitySports 407]

I know I am coming into this thread late, but I have a few things to add.

 

First of all, I love hard-hitting football. I love my team being in the Black and Blue division, and I love having players on the Bears that aren't afraid to play tough. That is what the game is all about. That being said, I don't have a strong opinion on this one because the victory formation has, in my opinion, always been off limits. It seems like you're being a sore loser if you're going to hit the QB when he is kneeling.

 

The real point I would like to make, though, is Schiano's bullshit statement that he didn't know if that's what they do "in this league." That comes off as really insincere and douchey to me. This is the NFL, the biggest and most successful football league in the world, by far. Is he really going to pretend like he doesn't watch NFL games? Has he just always been above the NFL with his king-like position at Rutgers?

 

Sorry, but regardless of what actually happened in the play, it is hard to take the side of a guy who made a statement like that after the game.

[BenGone 35]

I don't think it was dirty or cheap. It's certainly not illegal. I do think it was very high-school, bush league, amatuer. You have zero chance of getting a fumble on that play. No chance. The kneel-down is a gentleman's play, a representation of class, a showing of respect to the opponent, the game and player safety, and should be respected as such.

 

I keep seeing "If they had forced a fumble, Schiano would look like a genius." That's a big "what if". Here's one: What if Gerald McCoy or Roy Miller suffered a high-ankle sprain on that play? What does Schiano look like now? A f***ing retard. You can play "what if" all day, but we all know damn good and well there is no chance of forcing a fumble there.

 

What Coughlin should have done was call a time-out, said "F*** YOU!", lined back up in V-Form, and told his guys to plow the F*** out of them, like they apparently did the entire 4th quarter.

 

This whole "finishing the game" nonsense is horse shit. If they were really "finishing", NY wouldn't have scored 25 in the 4th quarter. On the surface, it looks to me like they blew an 11 point lead and were just being poor losers about their own ineffectiveness and experiencing first hand what Eli can do to you in the 4th quarter. It sucks and it pisses you off, but you have to take it like men.

 

I understand both sides of the coin; this is just my opinion on the subject.

[Zack_of_Steel+ 3,014]

Someone on another board brought this up.

 

-The OL is in foot-to-foot splits. Why?

-There's an upback on either side of the QB to protect him after he kneels. Why?

-There's a fast, good tackler 20 yards behind the QB. Why?

 

Answers:

-The job of the OL and upbacks is to protect the QB and not let him get hit.

-The man lined up behind the QB is there in case the QB gets hit and fumbles or fumbles the snap. His job is to stop the other team from scoring.

 

By design of the formation, coaches show that they expect the opposition to play hard. The formation is not designed to be a gentleman's play, it's designed for maximum ball security. The fact that some (most, today) view it as a "gentleman's play" is moot. Like I said in my initial post, why, if you're only up one score, are you able to decide for the other team that the game is over? Coming out to kneel in this situation and expecting the opposition to stand there and let it happen is disrespectful. Getting upset about it after the fact is even more disrespectful.

 

Now, if they were up by more than one score, then we could talk about "bush league" and "immature". However, as was seen just last year, a kneel is not a guarantee. Anything can happen on any given down, as was seen in the Chargers/Chiefs video I posted.

[oochymp 2,393]

After watching this video, I think it should be pointed out that this is a completely different scenario. While watching the play the first thing I thought was 'that doesn't look like a victory formation' and sure enough it wasn't. That play came at 1:09 of the fourth quarter of a tied game, that much you can tell from the video. I looked at the play by play from that game (Link) and after that play the Chiefs ran three plays followed by a spike, then threw an interception with six seconds left. At that point the Chargers took a knee (where I doubt there was any contention) and went to OT, which is when the Chiefs won the game. That play was not a kneel down, the Chargers were running a play in a tied game. So please explain how that's analogous to a team taking a knee where the QB is focused on nothing but getting a clean handoff. If that's the example everybody has been pointing to of when a kneel down was fumbled, you're gonna have to look a little harder.

 

That said, Zack, you did bring up some interesting points in your most recent post, but really that just outlines the futility of trying to make something big happen when the opponent is in the victory formation.

[Omerta+ 1,206]

How was this dirty. They get payed to play 60 minutes of football. Tampa played 60 NYG played 59:55. So now opposing teams get to decide when the game is over ? Then what is the point of the clock ? Ohhhh right it is to tell you when the game is over. From the initial to the final tick hitting someone within the confines of the rules is to be expected.

 

Coughlin just got mad because it caught him off guard. He may have two SB;s but he does not get to decide when games are over by trotting his QB out there and say take a knee.

 

AS Zack pointed out the V formation is designed to SPECIFICALLY stop them from scoring in the waning moments. So then you can not be surprised when you run a designed play just to keep the ball from them that they are going to try and come get it.

 

As to what Schiano said. I agree with him. Yeah he was being condescending but they were asking questions that were trying to test his character and coaching philosophy. Turn about is fair play, if they are going to ask an idiotic question that had every intention of incriminating him then I think the fucktard journalist got the answer he deserved.

 

And for those who think the game can end before 00:00 you should think about the fine line between greatness and "bush" I guess in this case. When D Jax returned the punt people hailed that as greatness. Why ? Because he did not just fair catch it and call it good he ran that shit back and achieved a victory form his team. If it happens in this case then whoever caused and returned the ball lives in the annals of NFL glory.

[56AceInDaPlace 110]

Zacks first post pretty much hits on point. Why should a team just let u kneel and win the game? If a fumble CAN happen then play for it. It was a good surprise, just didnt work. Just because everyone doesnt do it doesnt make it cheap. The minority number of something doesnt make it bad or unwilling. 1 million people CAN be wrong, so the whole not everybody does it argument is a bad way to go across it. I actually want my team to do that every week if its a one score game, i always wondered why nobody tried it before.

[56AceInDaPlace 110]

 

And for those who think the game can end before 00:00 you should think about the fine line between greatness and "bush" I guess in this case. When D Jax returned the punt people hailed that as greatness. Why ? Because he did not just fair catch it and call it good he ran that shit back and achieved a victory form his team. If it happens in this case then whoever caused and returned the ball lives in the annals of NFL glory.

 

People will argue its not the same but really it is. Just not the same play.

[Zack_of_Steel+ 3,014]

After watching this video, I think it should be pointed out that this is a completely different scenario.

 

Honestly, I didn't watch the video. I went looking for the game that many members here had brought up and took their word for it that it was a kneel down. That being said, however, this just further proves that anything can happen while trying to run out the clock, victory formation or not. The Chargers were prepared for the Chiefs' attack, yet still lost the ball. The fact teams take for granted the fact that they'll be able to knee with no opposition supports the notion that blasting through an unprepared team on a kneel could have desirable results.

 

That said, Zack, you did bring up some interesting points in your most recent post, but really that just outlines the futility of trying to make something big happen when the opponent is in the victory formation.

 

There's nothing futile about it. At all. If teams used the kneel in the way it was intended and actually tried to defend themselves, yes, it would be extremely hard to cause a fumble. That was clearly not the case here and the fact that they were off guard only lends credence to the idea that a "miracle" might have happened.

 

The game of football is about parity. Any given Sunday. One play can change the game. This defeatist view that it is futile to try and force a fumble on a kneel when you're down by a score and there's time on the clock is ridiculous. Too many miracle plays are sitting in the annals of NFL Films and you should understand that better than anyone (Music City Miracle?).

 

If we're willing to give up when there's an actual chance to win, where do we stop? When a team is down 56-0 in the 4th quarter and their hopes of winning have evaporated and winning has become a futile effort, should they stand around and let the game end? Should they forfeit and walk off the field?

Edited September 19, 2012 by Zack_of_Steel

[Piggly Wiggly 960]

Apparently, some Giants players are still crying over this... and they have a fucking game tomorrow night.

 

Troll job well done, Schiano.

[BucD+ 648]

Phil Simms said that he heard that the Bucs' players told the Giants players that they were coming.

 

But Zack's post that he got from another board is great. Never thought about all that. Good stuff.

[oochymp 2,393]

That being said, however, this just further proves that anything can happen while trying to run out the clock, victory formation or not. The Chargers were prepared for the Chiefs' attack, yet still lost the ball.

first of all, fail for posting a video without watching it anyway, as I said before, when a team is running a play the QB and center are thinking about what's happening after the snap, that's what leads to fumbled snaps is loss of concentration and it's why there are bad snaps over the course of games. In a victory formation play, all the QB and center have to worry about is getting the snap off cleanly, that's why there's never a fumble on a kneel down, and even if there is a bad snap, as you observed there's ten Giants around the ball who can fall on it.

 

There's nothing futile about it. At all. If teams used the kneel in the way it was intended and actually tried to defend themselves, yes, it would be extremely hard to cause a fumble. That was clearly not the case here and the fact that they were off guard only lends credence to the idea that a "miracle" might have happened.

 

The game of football is about parity. Any given Sunday. One play can change the game. This defeatist view that it is futile to try and force a fumble on a kneel when you're down by a score and there's time on the clock is ridiculous. Too many miracle plays are sitting in the annuls of NFL Films and you should understand that better than anyone (Music City Miracle?).

I agree, but the time for that is before you throw an interception with four seconds left, or before Eli Manning and the Giants score 25 points on you, not when there's four seconds left and the Giants are just taking a knee.<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">

 

If we're willing to give up when there's an actual chance to win, where do we stop? When a team is down 56-0 in the 4th quarter and their hopes of winning have evaporated and winning has become a futile effort, should they stand around and let the game end? Should they forfeit and walk of the field?

This might actually be the best point I've seen in support of Schiano. While I won't speak for everyone, I certainly would never advocate a mercy rule in the NFL, that would just be insulting to the players and the fans. But I do think there comes a point where you at least take your foot off the gas, whether that means pulling starters in the fourth or more conservative play calling or letting your opponent take a knee.

 

I'll point, for example, to the Titans/Patriots 2009 game, which ended 59-0. There's a reason the Patriots scored only 14 of their points in the second half (seven of those on a TD from the backup QB) and none in the fourth quarter, there's a reason both teams played their backup QBs in the fourth quarter, there's a reason only 8 passes were thrown in the fourth quarter (you can call it ten if you want to include one scramble by Hoyer and one dropped shotgun snap by Young) the coaches recognized that the game was over and adjusted their strategies accordingly. For anyone who can't make this connection immediately (which is probably nobody on this board, but oh well) that game was between Bill Bellichick and Jeff Fisher, two of the most respected coaches in the league, so there's that.

 

But, I will also say that if what BJGE just posted is accurate, I think that's more of an embarrassment than anything that happened on the field.