Takeaways from the New York Giants' 24-16 Win vs. Houston Texans

The bye week is often a week for an NFL coaching staff to take stock of what they have and what they need to do to achieve success moving forward.

So when I asked New York Giants offensive coordinator Mike Kafka about changes and trends the offensive side of the ball identified during its self-scouting, he didn't dive into specifics. Still, he seemed excited by the question for a brief moment.

"Yeah, there was some good stuff that we looked at as a staff. Really took some good time and evaluated first, second down, third down, red zone," he said. "Just really went piece by piece on personnel groupings, the players, putting those guys in the spots – that they were in the right spots. I think we came out with some good information and stuff that we can apply moving forward."

Kafka finally unveiled some of what they uncovered against the Texans Sunday, and it was creative and intriguing.

First, let's talk about the rushing attack, which used a mix of every concept rather than leaning too heavily on one or two concepts. New this season was the Giants' use of extra heavy personnel packages, which at times saw up to eight offensive linemen on the field (two as tight ends and one as a fullback).

Based on the snap counts, offensive linemen Nick Gates (13), Matt Peart (5), and Jack Anderson (5) saw more action than one might have expected. The various personnel packages, by the way, had success for several reasons.

First, it forced the Texans to counter with their own heavy personnel package. Now while the Giants didn't take advantage of that by throwing more often, it's probably fair to wonder if the Giants might mix in more of the super heavy packages moving forward to gain that extra advantage.

Second, the extra heavy package combined with the rushing attack appeared to run down the Texans. The Giants had 89 rushing yards at the half, 75 by Saquon Barkley. By the end of the game, those totals swelled to 191 rushing yards (152 by Barkley), as the Giants, through a mixture of inside and outside zone runs, kept pounding the ball down the Texans' throats.

There was one other notable difference on offense this week that we hope continues moving forward. Whereas in the past, the Giants would often run the clock down to the nub (thus making it easier for the defense to time their get-offs), the Giants mixed up the tempo. Besides preventing Houston from substituting, this varied tempo also contributed to wearing down the defense.

Here are some more thoughts on the game.

More Crafty Coaching? Many people will look at the Giants' ultra-conservative game plan from Sunday and blame the fact that the team leaned heavily on the running game because of the lack of elite talent at receiver.

But is it also possible that the Giants, knowing that Houston had its issues with the running game (a strength), purposely held back a little on the passing aspect so as not to show upcoming opponents what they have cooking in the lab?

When you think about it, the receiver's job is simple: run the correct route and catch the ball. Theoretically, any receiver on an NFL roster should be able to do that.

The differences between the elite and the not-so-elite (besides stats and contract dollars) usually boil down to how well a receiver can move in space, agility to adjust body position to catch passes, speed, and ability to separate.

While one might be correct in saying the Giants lack an elite receiver who grades at or near the top of these categories, they have guys who can run routes and make catches, plus a quarterback who seems to be getting better every week with his accuracy.

It sure would make sense if the Giants' game plan on offense was purposely crafted to show just enough to get the job done while avoiding bringing out anything to give their upcoming opponents a jumpstart on game planning.

The Head Scratcher... I wasn't sure what the Giants were trying to accomplish at the end of the first half with their play-calling sequence.

The Giants got the ball back with 23 seconds on their 17, and they ran three straight passing plays. Now perhaps they were looking to give themselves a little more breathing room, which they did on the first pass, which went for 16 yards to tight end Tanner Hudson over the middle.

But why, with the lead and knowing that you’d get the ball back to start the second half, put Daniel Jones at risk? Sure enough, he got sacked by Jerry Hughes on the final play of the half, and while it turned out to be no big deal, why take that risk with eight seconds left? Why not just take a knee at that point when you're on your 37-yard line?

Being aggressive is fine, but there has to be a reason behind things, and given the circumstances, I'm still not sure what offensive coordinator Mike Kafka was thinking there, but the good news is that it didn't hurt the team.

Punter Clunker. For the first half of the season, punter Jamie Gillan's big leg had been a major asset in helping the Giants flip the field. But a problem with Gillan lies in his consistency.

Simply put, Gillan is marvelous when punting for distance (usually), but he is inconsistent with touch.

Following a strong opening 49-yard punt, his 40-yard pooch attempt bounced easily into the end zone for a touchback. His third one, another pooch went for 14 yards, failing to land inside the 20.

His fourth punt was acceptable, but his fifth one lacked height or direction and resulted in a 13-yard return. Same with the sixth punt, which resulted in a 10-yard return that was wiped out by a penalty (the re-do was more acceptable, a 47-yarder that was fair caught at the Texans' 8-yard line.

Again, there's no question that Gillan has a strong leg. He's also done an excellent job as a holder. But unless he starts to develop more of a touch on those pooch punts, it's fair to wonder what the team might do at the position after this year.

Well, That Was Disappointing. Receiver Kenny Golladay seemed rejuvenated about being able to participate on a winning team, the first winning team of his career, after missing time with a sprained knee.

One ugly drop--and some might say two--later, and Golladay was benched in the second half, thrusting his future with the team deeper in doubt.

For those who keep asking, the Giants cannot cut Golladay this year. If they do, they will get hit with an additional $4.5 million in dead money (a result of the guaranteed money he's due next year) that their already delicate cap situation just can't handle.

That said, I don't see any way Golladay is back with this team in 2023, as it's clear he doesn't see eye-to-eye with this coaching staff. I suspect general manager Joe Schoen is waiting until the very last minute to see if he has to touch any of Golladay's contract to get some cap relief and that if he can avoid it, he would prefer to do so to not add dead money to next year's pot.

I also wouldn't be surprised if, come next year, the Giants, once they cut Golladay, designate him as a post-June 1 transaction. Doing so means they'd save $13.9 million on the cap (which should be more than enough to sign their rookie class) and would only have to eat $7.9 million in dead money for 2023 and the rest ($6.8 million) in 2024.

Join the Giants Country Community

Sign up for our FREE digest newsletter
Follow and like us on Facebook
Submit your questions for our mailbag
Check out the new Giants Country YouTube Channel.
Listen and subscribe to the daily LockedOn Giants podcast.
Subscribe and like the LockedOn Giants YouTube Channel
Sign up for our FREE message board forums
Get your Giants tickets today from SI Tickets!