Thank god we lost to the Browns. Perfect time of the year to have a loss and it was against an AFC team.

He was probable/questionable last week right up to Sunday, when he was declared out. No big news on him since then, so I assume he'll be in (with limited time, probably) next week.

While the Giants running game wasn't quite the same without him, the team did prove they can win when they aren't putting up 200 or even 100 yards on the ground, so I'm not too terribly worried about it.

I think this was proved @ Pitt fwiw.

Well...okay. Still, the Cardinals are a much more likely playoff opponent than the Steelers are, so last week's game was a bit more relevant.

I love how despite our difficult schedule, we are currently sitting with one loss.

Knock on wood!

Not really following what that has to do with the whole "Eli proved he can win when the running game isn't awesome" discussion, but it isn't really worth arguing over.

My point is just that Eli's performance didn't personally show me anything new or give me any big assurances. I think he has shown he is capable of these things over the past 15 games.

Giants are now the only team that's +100 or better with point differential.

Bump for Plaxico shootaments.

yeah plax isn't the caliber player i want on my team

or a million other related puns

Would be pretty cool if we went and won a SB w/o Plax now. Ditch Barber, Shockey, Plax, lose Osi, Strahan...and go back to back?

One can dream, right?

We've definitely got a shot.

Yuk yuk.

losing plax (at this point) isnt a huge deal... if we lost pierce because of this situation... that would hurt.

An understanding of the legal system demonstrates that the risk of losing Pierce this season is unlikely. As demonstrated by Burress's appearance today, where he was given a court date of March, nothing is going to happen to Pierce anytime soon vis-a-vis a conviction (assuming he was to be charged with something in the first place); and as heard on Francesa's show today, Pierce vehemently denies any wrongdoing. So unless the NFL is going to suspend him based upon a mere tenuous allegation -- and I doubt that they would do so -- I don't believe there's much risk that Pierce misses any time because of this. I highly doubt the Giants would sit him down. He has been a good citizen and his involvement here sounds, at worst, very shaky.

Losing the guy they went to with the SB on the line - because he was the biggest mismatch on the field - isn't big? One play can be the difference between W and L so I don't see it that way at all. How good is Steve Smith looking? Stats pretty good but he can't be the same matchup problem as Plax, is he?

I just don't think you can be losing key playmakers and be cavalier about it. "Oh we got plenty more," or something like that. I saw they had nicked up Jacobs in in waning minutes with game over this week. For what friggin' reason? Don't want another piece to fall. I know they have great backup RB's but if they lose Plax and Jacobs they aren't winning it.

Love Coughlin and his team but am having major trouble seeing him with fairy tale run of multiple SB's after all the bitter struggles that so characterized him. That's just to good to be true. He's so much like Bo Schembechler in that regard that the one title was like manna from heaven. Two in a row?? Now signs of implosion from within. I'm worried. Anxiety attack. Where's my medicine.

I think you are grasping for straws Cinch. A month ago you were sure of the impending collpase, saying 12-4 at best. Then the team has put together an incredible stretch against @ Pitt, Dallas, @ Philly, Baltimore, @ AZ, and @Washinton. All 6 teams are playoff caliber with winning records, the only exception being the fact that Dallas was without Romo. The team is without question the class of the league right now, with or without Burress.

Burress led the team in receiving once during that stretch, and it was with 34 yards. His highest output outside of that game was 47 yards. Burress has not performed this year, and whenever he has been out the team has not missed a beat whatsoever.

But you can continue to predict their impending downfall, hoping to be proven correct. And while they easily could not repeat, it won't be because of your doom and gloom scenarios, it will be because it is very hard to win and no team is a +50% favorite to do it.

Plax is our only legit deep threat, and losing him makes it easier to defend us. Our red zone offense has also not been as good as it should, and losing him makes that a bigger problem. The fact that his production trailed off in the second half of his playing time this season is really just a function of his coverage, which makes everyone else better. I would not downplay the effect of losing him at all. We are still the best team in the league, just by a smaller margin.

yeah i am sorry but people who think losing plax has no effect are delusional. hixon is a nice player but he is not plaxico burress.

I'm not saying it has no effect, I'm saying it doesn't have close to the effect that Cinch is claiming.

Obviously it has effect and obviously the Giants are a better team with a healthy and behaving Plax... but let's face it: they've played extremely well without him this year and the drop-off (comparing the non-plax 2008 giants to the previously-plax 2008 giants) isn't huge, since he wasn't really contributing that much in the last few weeks (the toughest part of the schedule) anyways.

Would you say it was reasonable to think they would lose a few games while playing ten straight against teams with winning records? That's hardly doom and gloom.

My only points about Burress are that one play not made can get you beat in the playoffs and I don't like the distraction from a self-destructing player.

I'm picking: Steelers 17 - Giants 13. Put it next to pick of Bama going undefeated into the SEC CG against Gators, whereby a photo of a legendary Greek poet, Mr. Homer, was posted regarding me, even though I'm not even a Bama fan. I mean what other reason could there be for such an irrational pick?

lol you didn't predict them just losing a few games, you predicted a collapse. Revisionist history ftw. You said they would go 12-4 at best when they were like 8 or 9-1, and pretty much implied they weren't that good and were going to come crashing back to earth.

fwiw

Yes, I implied strongly that they weren't "that good" with "that good" explicitly being going 25-1 over a stretch of games. BTW, this is an advanced concept but in my book they "won" the NEng game at end of regular season last year. Because when you get the absolutely perfect result in a game, that's a victory in a deeper sense than W or L. Watch out for the flip side of that if they play Steelers in SB.

Why is going 4-3 or even 3-4 against all winning teams a collapse? It ain't in my book. Picking them out of playoffs early was an overreaction anticipating flip side of this torrid streak, but like I said before, if they really are a 25-1 football team then this isn't a torrid streak.

Starting out 8-1, and then going 4-3 at best with a quick exit from the playoffs is a collapse, yeah. Sorry your hunch isn't looking to good though at the moment.

Don't worry though, they will most likely lose another regular season game, so you circle the wagons when that happens.

If you would like to prop bet on the Giants throw out some terms then.

I mean only HOF QB's can win multiple Super Bowls and Eli certainly isn't that now is he? It's shocking enough that they luckboxed 15 out of 16 wins somehow (especially crazy when you consider the quality of teams they have beaten), surely this super luck streak will run out soon and they will come back down to average where they belong.