Category Archives: giants

Been there, and been done in like that

If you are old enough—and I certainly am—you might recall a New York Giants’ loss strikingly similar to this season’s 0-40 opening-night shellacking administered by the Dallas Cowboys. Worse, even. Fifty years ago, the Giants were bludgeoned by the then-Oakland Raiders, 42-0.

It could be said that the Giants’ current co-tenants in their New Jersey stadium, the Jets (who likewise have fancied themselves a post-season contender), were not the only team to immediately reveal a certain Achilles heel.

An aside here from the Book of Ecclesiastes (not that there is anything spiritual about the business of professional football): “The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.”

Well, OK, some things are new, or at least a variation on the theme. In ’73, the Giants’ president was Wellington Mara; since his death in 2005, his son John has been the boss, though both at times have been criticized by so-called loyal fans for being too loyal to long-time Giants associates.

In ’73, the Giants entered that Raiders game amid an inferno of a season and had long before abandoned all hope; they were 1-5-1 on the way to 2-11-1. By contrast, the 2023 Giants, before crashing and burning against the Cowboys, were talking about playing deep into January. And, after their comeuppance, insisted they have time to effectively deal with their damaged psyche.

Another significant difference: In 1973, the Raiders still made California their home and the National Football League still marketed its devout campaign against sports betting; now, of course, the Raiders are based in Las Vegas, the world’s gambling capital, and the league gleefully partners with several sportsbook operations.

There is overwhelming evidence that the practice of prognostication is essentially doomed and a pretty good example of addiction. Unless, that is, there is no money involved. Back in the antediluvian days of 1973, Wellington Mara would engage in weekly sessions with his sons, John and Chris, picking winners of the upcoming games. Just for fun, though they would employ those Vegas betting odds. Going into Oakland for the Nov. 4 game, Wellington—either having lost faith in his ’73 team or simply having begun to smarten up about its chances—liked the Raiders minus 11 points. (He wound up having 31 points to spare.)

The Giants coach then was Alex Webster, a former star back for the team and a fellow much admired by Wellington Mara. And Webster—in the room for that guessing game among the Maras—reportedly laughed in a good-natured way at Wellington’s prediction. Not taking it personally, apparently.

During that season’s slog, Mara had made it clear on several occasions that he would not fire Webster and Webster confirmed that he and the boss had “an agreement that I will step down myself if I feel I’m not doing the job.” (Whether he was pushed of jumped, Webster in fact was gone at the end of the season.)

After the Raiders had stomped the Giants the way California winegrowers dealt with grapes, Raider coach John Madden—remember, this was 50 years ago—was stunned by how easy it had been. “They must be a better team than that,” Madden said then. “We really could have scored many more points.”

Unlike the reaction of 2023 Giants players, with their circle-the-wagon assurances that they are capable of avoiding being 0-40 clobberees again, the ’73 Giants players’ 0-42 loss merely intensified a building dyspeptic, churlish in-house mood. Tight end Bob Tucker, who failed to catch a pass for the first time in 47 consecutive games, called his teammates “a bunch of quitters.” Defensive tackle Carter Campbell lamented that “people were laughing at us.” Assistant coach Jim Garrett declared that “there is a distinct need for leadership on this team, to say the least.”

Garrett, of course, would have his own leadership questioned years later when, as head coach of Columbia University in 1985, he called his players “drug-addicted losers.” (He wound up resigning at the end of that season before he could be fired.)

All right. The sun will come up tomorrow. Will there be anything new on the horizon for this New York team?

To the Giants, the Opposite of Miraculous

Apparently it is not possible to have a televised New York Giants-Philadelphia Eagles game without a brief reference to the Giants’ Great Stumblebum Play of 1978. There it was again during this regular-season’s finale between the old rivals.

TV continues to call it “the Miracle of the Meadowlands”—an event contrary to all laws of nature that unfolded 41 years ago at the Giants home in the Jersey wetlands.

I call it Moby Fumble (Thar the Giants Blow it!). And the Big Oops. From the Giants’ standpoint—and I was then the team’s beat writer for Newsday—it was the manifestation of the imperfect human condition. On steroids. Not merely because of the turnover itself—that happens, no?—but the fact that the blunder was facilitated by a thoroughly illogical plan at the most inopportune time.

The Giants were leading, 17-12, and had the ball, third-down-and-two at their 29-yard line. The clock was running; 20 seconds to go. The Eagles were out of timeouts. All the Giants had to do was have quarterback Joe Pisarcik take the center snap and fall on the ball. And the game would be over.

To almost all of the 78,000 spectators already headed for the parking lot—and to all but of few of us reporters who refrained from joining our colleagues’ rush to the lockerrooms—the game was over.

Except Pisarcik was ordered to run “Pro 65 Up,” a play requiring the execution of a little spin move and a hand-off to running back Larry Csonka. They muffed the exchange, then watched helplessly as the ball hopped into the arms of Eagles defensive back Herman Edwards—a passer-by, really—who was free to run 29 yards the other way, untouched, for the winning score.

It was The Most Incredible Play Call (and Fumble). The offensive coordinator who called the play, Bob Gibson, was fired the next day. The following week, leading in the final seconds of the first half against Buffalo, the Giants introduced what has become known around football as “the Victory Formation”—wherein a team positions three players tightly around the quarterback, circling the wagons for a static hike-and-kneel-down motion.

“That’s out Philly play,” Pisarcik snorted after the Buffalo game, exasperated that Gibson hadn’t thought of such an obvious precaution against the Eagles. “Ha. It wasn’t put in last week. We call the play ‘a day late and a dollar….’”

That the Giants proceeded to be blown out in the second half by Buffalo was just more evidence of how that The Play Call (and Fumble) Seen ‘Round the NFL was metastasizing. The team’s GM, former All-Pro Andy Robustelli, resigned at season’s end. Head coach John McVay was not retained.

What may have been seen as a miracle for the Eagles was, to me, the Archduke’s Assassination (ask a World War I historian), the trigger to a toxic domino effect that re-ordered the entire Giants organization from top to bottom.

Whatever the perspective, it is good for the TV executives to continue recalling such a consequential instance. And for a sort of replay: On Dec. 29, the Giants were within three points of the Eagles early in the fourth quarter when, on second down from his 27, Giants quarterback Daniel Jones botched a low shotgun snap, recovered, then lost the handle again.

It was something of a minor miracle (yes, in the Meadowlands) that the Eagles’ Fletcher Cox found himself in the right place to cover the ball at the Giants’ 2. Arguably the game’s turning point, that set up a quick Philly touchdown and the Giants’ 12th loss in 16 games.

The Giants fired their coach the next day. A lot like 41 years ago. So again, the team is straying from the road to success, seeking some sense of control. Call it fishtail.

 

Giants, meet the new boss

Midstream, the New York Giants are changing horses. This defies proverbial wisdom, though it certainly doesn’t go against sporting custom. When a team loses 10 of its first 12 games, as the Giants have, the coach is susceptible to the heave-ho, an incomplete season notwithstanding. But with no guarantee that things will get better before they get worse.

I have seen this movie more than once in my nearly half-century as a sports journalist. Most similar to this week’s developments, there was 1976. Then-Giants owner Wellington Mara declared that “changing coaches in midseason always has been repugnant to me, because I’ve always felt that is a cop-out by management to pin the shortcomings on one man.”

Even as he spoke, Mara nevertheless had given coach Bill Arnsparger his pink slip a week before Halloween. The team was 0-7.

The best rationale for the move, Mara admitted, was that the players might respond to “another personality.” Certainly Arnsparger’s replacement, the personable John McVey, was a breath of fresh air compared to the intense, insecure Arnsparger.

The Giants lost their next two games, anyway, finished the year with four losses in seven games under McVey and won only 11 of 30 over the next two seasons before he, too, was let go. Proving two things: 1) That the Giants needed better players as much as they needed a different coach, and 2) Years of scholarly research and psychological interpretation correctly have predicted that the time-honored mid-season coaching shakeup is a 50-50 bet, at best.

Now we have Steve Spagnuolo, who has just replaced Ben McAdoo to lead a team fairly decimated by injury and deteriorating confidence. And good luck to Spagnuolo.

As just one example, a year-old study in the Economist, with graphs and charts and a numbing collection of numbers, analyzed performance effects of in-season managerial changes over 15 years in soccer’s English Premier League. “We find,” authors of the study wrote, “that some managerial changes are successful, while others are counterproductive. On average, performance does not improve….”

When the New York Islanders switched coaches early in the 2010-11 hockey season, I called sports psychologist John Murray—who has worked with coaches and athletes in all professional sports—for his take on this retooling process and got the same response. “I do believe there are benefits to novelty [of a new boss’ voice],” Murray said. “But you can’t substitute [player] quality.”

As far back as 1963, a fellow named Oscar Grusky, for a Journal of Sport Behavior paper, examined managerial changes in baseball and found a “negative correlation” between replacing the team’s skipper and its won-lost record. Grusky’s interpretation was that the manager/coach replacement process for a struggling team “is also disruptive to the organization. The uncertainty associated with a new leader with a different agenda and new ideas may result in even poorer sport team performance.”

There’s another factor at play. That is, “You can control performance,” Murray said, “but you don’t control the outcome in sports.” Statistics and maximum performance by a team’s players do not necessarily translate into winning.

Neither does a coach’s past success predict the best results in a different situation. Arnsparger had come to the Giants with the reputation of being a “defensive genius” and two Super Bowl rings, but seemed completely lost as a head coach. McAdoo had gotten the Giants’ job last year based on his top-notch work as an offensive coordinator.

A couple of years ago I asked John Mara, Wellington’s son and now half-owner of the team, about the science—or is it art?—of finding a great boss. “Sports is different,” he said, “because the person has to be strong enough for being constantly in the spotlight, having every one of his decisions criticized and talked about on sports talk radio.

“You don’t have to have Albert Einstein, but it’s good to have someone with some intelligence. And not someone who thinks he knows it all.” John Mara quoted the late George Young, five times the league’s executive of the year who had turned the team around in the 1980s after John’s father signed him as general manager.

“You hire somebody with a high energy level. And something to prove.”

And hope the new horse can swim.

(John Mara)