I’m trying to move past the phase of calling for Kevin Gilbride’s head every time I think he’s being too conservative.  He’s been a part of two Super Bowl winning teams and that says a lot, but far too often I find myself with my head in my hands watching Gilbride’s offense fail to put in the dagger at the end of games.  Monday night is a microcosm of what I have come to expect with Gilbride: the offense is clicking early, Eli is hitting his receivers, and points start to pile up, the Giants seemingly control the pace of the game through the end of the third quarter.

Then, sometimes things go bad.

The offensive game plan becomes this weak attempt to control the ball and the momentum shifts.  Even though Bradshaw may be struggling through three quarters, he will continue to get the ball on a consistent basis.  Gilbride’s play calling completely takes Eli Manning out of the game and relies heavily on obvious runs up the middle with Bradshaw (and formerly Jacobs).  This is frustrating to no end, and a few fellow Giants fans would probably agree with me when I say that his schemes and coaching are holding back the passing game.

Not since 2007 has the running game been effective. It may be because the offensive line has gotten older, or simply that too much is expected from these running backs.  Either way, the ground game is the weaker aspect of this New York Giants attack, yet in key plays late in games, we continue to see Gilbride go back to the run like he trusts it more than his passing game.  I understand that in today’s NFL there must be some sort of balance between run and pass to keep defenders honest, but when your team is built around a quarterback of Manning’s caliber, wouldn’t you think that almost every do-or-die situation should be placed squarely on his shoulders?

I have no problems with running the ball 25 times a game even though it rarely works (I may have a problem with the running back that is getting those carries, but that’s a different story).  But when the team needs a scoring drive to cement the victory, the offense takes its foot off the pedal. These are the worst games to watch because you know exactly how it’s going to end.  I’ve seen it too many times to count, but the two instances that are freshest in my mind are the game from Monday, and the game a few years back when Mathias Kiwanuka failed to bring down Vince Young on a late third down that ended up winning the game.  I feel like he is so committed to his flawed schemes that he sometimes doesn’t adapt to the game.  The faster two-minute offense that we see before halftime and at the end of close games just looks like it fits better than the current system.

I’m sure he has his reasons for calling the games the way he does, but whatever way you cut it, Gilbride isn’t taking full advantage of his personnel.  Am I wrong on this?  Sure, the receiving core could be healthier, but isn’t throwing often to Victor Cruz and a banged-up Hakeem Nicks more effective than Ahmad Bradshaw’s fragile feet rushing it on predictable first and second downs all day?  It’s frustrating to know that nothing is going to change anytime in the foreseeable future, and I needed to vent.