Robert Stolzenberger asks: A lot has been made, rightfully, about the Commanders\u2019 poor deciding and executing at the end of OT in game 5. But wouldn\u2019t it have been much safer and smarter for the Giants to have tried the field goal on 2nd down (I think it was) instead of handing it off to Skattebo for a couple of more yards up the middle? They were already inside the 25 yard line and any score would have won the game immediately. Winston had been on fire and the Washington defense was pretty grabby already on every play. Seems to me I recall Parcells and other team\u2019s coaches not waiting for 4th down or taking more time off the clock in similar situations — rather just get it over with. Also, who would make that call, the OC or Harbaugh? We should be 4-1.<\/p>\n
Ed says: Robert, no. Stay with me, and I will explain.<\/p>\n
Skattebo ran for 5 yards and a first down right before the overtime two-minute warning. So, what you are asking is if the Giants should have simply kicked the field goal on first down coming out of the two-minute warning. Now, of course if the Giants make the kick there they win the game, Both teams had already possessed the ball once.<\/p>\n
But \u2026 there is always a\u2019but\u2019.<\/p>\n
Remember that placekicker Dominic Zvada missed three of five field-goal tries in the game, and had already missed from 46 yards during overtime. Washington had already used its two allotted timeouts in overtime.<\/p>\n
Yes, if you make the kick there you win the game. If you miss, though, you are handing the ball to Washington at about the 32-yard line with 1:50 to play. They have plenty of time to go down the field and kick a game-winning field goal, even without timeouts. We saw that play out. Had the Commanders not screwed up the clock management they moved down the field after the fumble and had plenty of time to get off a makeable field-goal try.<\/p>\n
The idea is to run the ball twice, maybe three times and work the clock down so that the game-winning field goal try by Zvada would be the final play of the game. That way, you take away any chance Washington has of winning the game.<\/p>\n
Here is how Harbaugh explained it Sunday night:<\/p>\n
\u201cThe idea was to run it twice, and then run it down, get as close as we could, protect the football, which we talked about numerous times, and then run it down and take the knee. So in case he doesn\u2019t make the field goal, there\u2019s no time for them to come back and get the field goal. That\u2019s the strategy.\u201d<\/p>\n
It was absolutely the proper way to play the situation. If Skattebo does his job, the Giants leave the Commanders with no opportunity to win. The only other way to do it is to take a knee three straight times, but that does result in moving the ball back a bit.<\/p>\n
Peter Calamari asks: I wonder jf anyone says a connection between the deterioration of the Giants running game and the substitution of Hudson for Schmitz at center. It seems like since that switch was made the Giants are running much less effectively although possibly pass blocking somewhat better.<\/p>\n
Ed says: Peter, it\u2019s not the move to Bryan Hudson at center in place of John Michael Schmitz. Hudson has been better than Schmitz. If you judge by Pro Football Focus grades, which isn\u2019t always the best way to judge, Hudson has been about 30 points better as both a run- and pass-blocker.<\/p>\n
The difference is adjusting to a run game where the big difference-maker was supposed to be Jaxson Dart\u2019s mobility. Dart\u2019s Week 1 22-yard run is still the longest of the season for the Giants. Without the threat of the quarterback run game, the Giants are much more predictable and limited on the ground. Neither Cam Skattebo nor Najee Harris are guys who can outrun NFL defenders or possess enough wiggle to make defenders miss.<\/p>\n
The blocking has to be perfect, and with teams loading up the box and outnumbering the Giants at the line of scrimmage <\/a>it hasn\u2019t been.<\/p>\n Another thing that doesn\u2019t help is Andrew Thomas\u2019s groin injury. He is clearly laboring to get through games, and while he is playing well, he isn\u2019t playing as well as a healthy Thomas is capable of.<\/p>\n Peter Smyth asks: I\u2019m wondering about the \u201cpunch\u201d play that Washington used to get Skattebo to fumble in OT and used on Likely\u2019s second TD (didn\u2019t count as a fumble). I guess I\u2019ve never noticed a defensive player just standing there and making no attempt at a tackle, just waiting, watching the ball, then punching it as the guy goes down. <\/p>\n My questions: How to protect against this play? Are the Giants doing this to other teams? Has this been going on for years and I\u2019m just noticing it? Isn\u2019t this on the head coach to prevent? It must work a lot if they are trying it. Interested in your thoughts. <\/p>\n Ed says: Peter, I am not crazy about the play. It is legal, though, and has been around for a while. It does seem to be becoming more of a thing in recent years. Yes, the Giants do it to other teams. Jevon Holland is good at it. I have seen Arvell Reese try to do it. It is becoming standard practice when one defender has a player under control for the next defender to try and punh the ball out. Tell me what a head coach is supposed to do about it. If a runner has the ball securely in two hands with a good grip on it and a defender punches the ball in the right spot with enough force it is going to come out.<\/p>\n Maybe the smartest thing a runner can do is realize when it\u2019s time to stop fighting for six more inches and get to the ground before somebody knocks the ball out.<\/p>\n Bob Donnelly asks: With Sunday\u2019s tie the NY Giants are in first place in the NFC East and, with a .700 winning percentage (3.5 \/5), have the third best record in the NFC. Could you please share the scenarios of how, at the conclusion of the 18 game season, a tie helps\/hurts a team?<\/p>\n Ed says: Bob, tie games count as a half-win and half-loss. So, let\u2019s say the Giants and Eagles both finish with nine wins atop the NFC East. The Eagles, unless they also tie a game this season, would be 9-8. The Giants would be 9-7-1. The way the NFL looks at ties, they would technically be 9.5-7.5, so they would have the better record and would be division champs.<\/p>\n This played out in 2022. The Giants were 9-7-1. They made the playoffs as a wildcard. The 9-8 Detroit Lions went home without a playoff berth. Right now, there is no way to know what all of the scenarios will look like at the end of the year.<\/p>\n ctscan123 asks: Hey Ed, I do not understand any resistance whatsoever to J.J. McCarthy being a Giant. I don\u2019t see how it could be considered anything less than a slam dunk. It\u2019s a fifth-round pick for a quarterback drafted 10th overall who missed his entire rookie season due to injury and started only 10 games in his second year. The expectation that young quarterbacks should make the leap from college to the NFL and immediately hit the ground running is bordering on ridiculous. If he develops into a starting quarterback, whether for us or for another team after we\u2019ve developed him, it\u2019s an absolute steal in terms of trade value. If he becomes a competent backup, it\u2019s still a good deal. And for those keeping track, regardless of whether he blossoms and supplants Winston, we do actually need a backup quarterback this year. If he fails, you\u2019ve lost a fifth-round pick. For Pete sake, what is the hit rate on fifth round picks in the NFL? I\u2019m not much of a gambler, but isn\u2019t this deal basically all upside? What am I missing here? I know this is a rant disguised as a question which is one of your favorite things, but the opposition to this move is one of the bigger head-scratchers I\u2019ve encountered in a long time.<\/p>\n Ed says: CT, where are you reading about resistance to the McCarthy trade? I have not seen much resistance to the trade itself, but everyone is entitled to his or her own feelings about whether or not the Giants should have done it. I wasn\u2019t crazy about giving up a fifth-round pick, but the Giants felt he was the best quarterback available at the time and that the price was reasonable.<\/p>\n There are people who will argue the Giants simply should have signed Jimmy Garoppolo or grabbed Joe Milton off the Dallas practice squad. So be it.<\/p>\n There is more disagreement about when, or if, McCarthy should play.<\/p>\n In the end, no matter what move gets made someone always disagrees. It\u2019s the way of the world.<\/p>\n Jim Jordan asks: I know Skattebo is very popular in the locker room, but watching the body language of his teammates after his fumble yesterday, I have to wonder if Harbaugh needs to sit him down for a week or two and activate Singletary instead. Given how much Harbaugh talks about accountability and meritocracy, I would think it sends a pretty bad message to turn a blind eye to the fact that his starting back has now fumbled on roughly 5% of his carries this year so far. Particularly when his reaction to them luckily avoiding a loss was to say he was happy to take the tie and get out of town. What do you think? Should Harbaugh try to get Skatt\u2019s attention with a week on the inactive list.<\/p>\n Gary Siems asks: Harbaugh has stressed that everyone has to earn playing time. Tracy seems to have been benched based on two preseason mistakes (missed blocking assignment and a fumble) and regular season fumble where he was using proper technique. Does Skattebo now get benched having now fumbled four times in five games? I would prefer Tracy getting more reps based on his pass catching ability and change of pace capability as a runner. Your thoughts?<\/p>\n Ed says: Jim and Gary, first I\u2019m going to talk about Cam Skattebo\u2019s reaction. What was wrong with it? If you read or watched what he said, he knew he screwed up. He said so. He took accountability. He was also simply saying he was relieved that his screwup did not lead to a loss. That\u2019s the same reaction most Giants fans had.<\/p>\n Yes, Skattebo\u2019s teammates were upset in the moment. They knew how costly the play was. If you think the head coach is turning a blind eye to the situation, I don\u2019t think you have been paying attention.<\/p>\n A week on the inactive list? That\u2019s Draconian, and in my view doesn\u2019t help the team. I can see the distribution of carries changing somewhat, but more in an effort to spark the running game that to punish Skattebo.<\/p>\n Would I be shocked if someone other than Skattebo starts the game on Sunday? No. But, removing him completely is something I don\u2019t think will happen.<\/p>\n Here is something Harbaugh said on Friday:<\/p>\n Adam Jacobs asks: Hi Ed. It is a few hours after the stress inducing but very entertaining game. The one thing I am curious about, and maybe you can enlighten me, is this. Skattebo took his gloves off (I think in OT), which can be linked directly with his OT fumble. Is there a protocol in place for gloves, or cleats, or any equipment, being used or removed during a game, especially in a quagmire such as the game was? It seems to me the last thing you want to do is remove any equipment that could help you either run on the field better or hold on to the ball better. You would think someone with a fumbling problem would wear everything possible to make sure he doesn\u2019t drop the ball, especially when they are in position to win the game.<\/p>\n Ed says: Adam, Skattebo did take his gloves off late in the game. He gave a full explanation of that decision on Thursday<\/a>. It came down to the conditions making it such that he felt the gloves were not helpful.<\/p>\n Bill Virginia asks: The Giants have a stable of running backs. They also have a fullback, which not many teams have. Unfortunately the running game is mediocre at best. It\u2019s hard to say if its the line or the back. My question is their best back seems to be missing. What has happened to Singletary? I believe he is the best back on the team.<\/p>\n Ed says: Bill, where did this idea come from that Devin Singletary is the Giants\u2019 best running back? He has NEVER been the Giants\u2019 best running back.<\/p>\n Singletary became a Giant in 2024. Tyrone Tracy took his job after four games and had 839 rushing yards with 4.4 yards per carry average to 439 and a 3.9 yards per carry average for Singletary.<\/p>\n In 2025, Singletary was the clear RB3 behind Tracy and Skattebo. After Skattebo was injured, Singletary became No. 2. He was still third on the team in rushing yards behind Tracy (740) and Dart (487), and averaged just 3.7 yards per carry.<\/p>\n Singletary has clearly declined since the first five years of his career, when his lowest yards per carry average was 4.2. He is not the answer to the Giants\u2019 issues running the ball.<\/p>\n More diversity in how they run the ball to get teams to stop crowding the line of scrimmage, and perhaps more opportunities for Tracy are the best options the Giants have right now.<\/p>\n As for fullback, Patrick Ricard has played more snaps (116) than any other fullback in the NFL. That\u2019s 44.96%. Only Kyle Juszczk of the San Francisco 49ers (47.68%) has played a higher percentage of offensive snaps. So, \u201cthey need to use the fullback more\u201d doesn\u2019t hold water.<\/p>\n
Furthermore I think they need to have the fullback more involved in offense. <\/p>\n