If you're a Football Outsider you're a TRUE player and true players don't stick to one passion only, so here's something else to excite you while you're waiting for the game to start. How about a free $30 chip to play slot machine games for as long as you want?
309 replies , Last at
07 Feb 2012, 11:19pm by
fiebre
1
Re: Superbowl XLVI Discussion
by PatsFan :: Sun, 02/05/2012 - 2:59pm
Pats fans seem to be cracking under the strain...
On one of the biggest Pats message boards is a 300+ post thread about the Tiquan Underwood cut, the main themes being handwringing about the cut destroying team morale and Underwood calling up the Giants and giving away the game plan.
Perhaps, but they may not have predicted Steve Grogan's costly interceptions, or that halftime would see Madonna be replaced at the last minute for Mighty Bomb Jack, as my program seems to be predicting.
Eli holds on too long twice, two sacks take them out of FG range. Lucky bounce on the punt gives them a field position win, but boy was that poor. Should've had points on the board.
I think what he meant was that Brady had plenty of time. That was a coverage sack. Err, coverage safety.
I think the reason it doesn't get called is that it never happens. Noone ever throws it away that deep. If it's deep it's usually sideline, and much easier to pretend it's "at" someone.
Fantastic. Good to see the epic fails are happening on both offense and defense. If this continues, it's good news for my family as I'll be in bed by half time.
by RichC (not verified) :: Sun, 02/05/2012 - 7:54pm
Seems typical of the Patriots in the playoffs the last couple years. Defense comes out, makes a big stop, the offense completely shits the bed, and then it all just goes to hell.
by Last Far Striter (not verified) :: Sun, 02/05/2012 - 8:15pm
What's the matter? Tired of all the movies based on comic book characters, sequels, and retread games? I'm calling it now-- Christmas 2013-- Operation, the Movie.
The Giants need to go up 2 scores on this drive. They're dominating the game but letting the Pats stay close. That's never a good idea when Bill and Ernie have an extended halftime to make adjustments.
I'm not going to say that wasn't holding, but in every other postseason game this year, that wasn't holding. And now the Pats have the massive advantage of back to back drives (provided they actually move the ball this time).
Giants dominating the game and could very easily be left playing catchup for the entire 2nd half.
Because if they keep moving it like this, it'll be 17-9 before the Giants see the ball again. Down 8 after dominating the first half. The game completely changes.
In a more standard Pats game, when they're ahead anyway, they pretty much get the chance to put a game away early in the third.
It also makes sense from a crowd standpoint in the regular season. Has always driven me nuts to see home coaches win the toss and take the ball. Then the defense is out at the start of the 2nd half without any crowd noise and the offense has a bit of peace to go to work. This is a very minor detail, of course, but every little bit helps.
The left leg must be Gronk's launch foot. Even before Collinsworth just pointed it out, he looked extremely slow off the line to me on previous drives. He can run, but it looks like he's delayed in moving, which tells me he's used to pushing off that left foot. I'm sure there's film out there that could confirm/destroy my suspicion.
ALso, on related note, solid commentary by Collinsworth tonight. I wonder if the SB announcers are ever 'coached' to be more user friendly given the SB crowd, or if its 'be who you are'.
Collinsworth is a smarmy prick, but he is the best color guy on TV by an order of magnitude. The things he notices immediately and gets cued up as teaching points consistently amaze me.
Collinsworth is one of the few guys I am always genuinely happy to listen to during a broadcast. I never get the smarmy prick impression from him; he clearly knows what he's talking about, and he's regularly able to explain things clearly and concisely within seconds of the play ending. That's difficult enough to do when it's scripted and you've had hours of rehearsal, never mind responding dynamically to live action in front of you. No other NFL analyst I've heard this season even comes close to him for clarity and general listenability.
If I'd being overenthusiastic, it's probably because I'm euphoric at the half time score.
I don't mind him at all. Just acknowledging that I can see why some don't like him. I think it's as much a function of the nasal voice as it is his actual attitude though.
Nonsense. He's got two hands outside at the snap (under pad BTW) and two fistfuls of jersey and his left hand never lets go and he uses that outside leverage to steer him outside.
From the commercials, it seems as if there is one movie coming out this summmer, in about five different versions.
I'm pretty good at guessing the first song of the halftime show...missed completely on "Vogue"
Oh, by the way, there's a football game going on in the midst of this cultural phenomenon. Felt like the Patriots were being pushed around a lot most of the half, yet they find a way to be in the lead. Bodes well for NE.
Actually, I've been reading Twitter and I guarantee it's more enjoyable than
the halftime show. At least Twitter has Schatz, Tanier, and Kluwe.
I'd like it if more half-time acts were younger than I am, but the league doesn't
seem to see it that way.
Your other alternatives are to be mildly disturbed by Torry Holt's finger on
NFLN, or watch Florio on the NBC Sports streaming feed. Me, I'm heading upstairs
for another drink.
The disappearing thing in a flash of light at the end was pretty cool. I've seen any number of performers who I wish had similarly vanished...much earlier in their performances.
This may be a hanging offence on this message board, but I thoroughly enjoyed that halftime show. (Yes, I'm still euphoric.) Much better than the ghost of Tom Petty and the undead minions formerly known as the Rolling Stones.
The Stones weren't bad, but I was surprised at how much more I enjoyed tonight's show than the Who. And it certainly blew away last year with the Black Eyed Peas.
Last Far Striter is right about the bar being low, though.
I thought the Stones were terrible. I was all geared up to go make lunch and a hot drink during this year's halftime show, but found myself mesmerised. Whatever you think of her music, she definitely knows how to put on a show.
I liked it. I mean the half time show is pretty much the low point of the broadcast if the game doesn't become a blowout, but it was decently entertaining.
Clint Eastwood making an effort to single-handedly (voicedly?) make up for that abomination of a halftime show just by talking dramatically. You go, Clint.
What a colossal failure by the Giants to capitalize. When you're playing Belichick and the Pats you don't fuck around. You need to seize your chances to put points on the board.
I'm not even rooting against the Pats and I'm furious at the missed opportunities. That went exactly as I expected it to, and now the Giants have absolutely no margin for error whatsoever. From a dominant half to down eight without touching the ball.
I can't even suggest an alternative, since the sacks and penalties made both those sub-50 yard line punts kind of the only choice... it just really sucks. They had to have had a better plan there once they got past mid field on those drives.
And now they'll kick a pointless field goal to take it from a one score game to... a one score game. And then the Pats will score to make it a two score game, and that will be the end of it.
I'm a pessimist in general, in a bad mood right now, and just generally not a fan of playing not to lose rather than playing for the kill. Especially against this coach and offense.
The same thing happened two years ago. The reason the onside kick, 2-point conversion, missed ill-advised 51-yarder, and Porter pick-6 all came into play was that the Colts simply couldn't step on the necks of the Saints early on when they had a chance to take a commanding lead (the oft-cited Garcon drop, the failed Hart 3rd and 1). Little swings like that don't show up in stats but drive me batshit.
Emotion aside, 25-30% shot is kind of awful, given how well the Giants started the game, wouldn't you agree? Especially given that they were at .77 WP with 5 minutes left in the first half.
(Actually it's 37% after the punt, not 25-30 - that sack was a 9% swing.)
Another missed opportunity. A 2-point game is much, much better, but still not ideal given the field position and opposing offense. I guess that sack isn't that big a deal, since it's not as if getting rid of it to throw it away changes the outcome, but that was still kind of a crappy sack to take.
Still, down 2 beats the hell out of down 8. Now the defense making a play can change the game again, not just give them a prayer. Major difference.
Edit: Hm. That sack was -8% WP. Never would've guessed it was worth that much.
I'm with you. It was one of the few points where I think Collinsworth messed up. The other one was when they were talking about that uncalled DPI late in the game and how hard it is to make that call in real time when it was pretty obvious in real time as well.
I have a friend who is a HUGE Cowboys homer. Thinks the NFL blatantly favors the Steelers and Giants and goes on and on about it without listening to logic.
I can't really argue against NYG fumble luck in big games lately though. That's two so far tonight, right?
I hate the formation rules. On the play where Ninkovich was offsides, the "on the LOS" receiver to the blind side was a full 1.5 yards behind the line of scrimmage. I know this is consistent league-wide, but it's really obviously wrong whenever the LOS is within a yard of a 5-yard line.
That's the kind of Eli play that makes me crazy. That's either insane, or
brilliant, and I can never tell which. This time Cruz caught it and he
gets away with it.
Perhaps it would be fair to characterize that type of Eli play as high risk/reward. It's not as if he has some unholy luck* since he'll get punished for some of those too.
*In aggregate. Obviously it's skill to be able to make a play like that in specific.
WP% creeping back to 50%. Talk of Brady being concussed by Tuck's knee on that sack on Twitter. Would excuse his bad decision on that pick.
I'm almost reaching a state that could be called optimism (so it turns out I'm rooting for the Giants... as one of the FO writers noted, a loose football tells you a lot about your rooting interests).
That really wasn't a bad decision. All-world TE against a replacement level LB. A slight underthrow and Gronks inabillity to make a play created the pick.
by bigtencrazy (not verified) :: Sun, 02/05/2012 - 10:23pm
If football fans, who b*tch nonstop about the refs calling tickey tack penalties, complain about THAT non-call then the complainers should be shoved into oncoming traffic
Easy there, tough guy. Your team has gotten every break except fumble recoveries, as you keep bitching about very loudly.
Can't remember a close penalty call that went against you, can you? DIdn't think so. You got the call that stopped a drive. You got the non-call that would have stopped a TD. You got the non-call that stopped a drive.
by Last Far Striter (not verified) :: Sun, 02/05/2012 - 10:29pm
Just my opinion, but I think the refs go a little lax every post-season, much the same way the strike zone changes during the baseball playoffs. You can see examples every week of the playoffs. On the pass call, that could go either way, but I agree that in "real time" the call for PI would be hard to make.
I'm impressed with the view of Belichick on that challenge replay. 800 pounds of NFL players coming at him full steam, and his expression never changes. Just watches them crash right in front of him.
Oh, what a great sequence for thinking football fans. Belichick is maybe one of three coaches with the balls to call that. And Bradshaw thought to stop, but had too much momentum. Fascinating.
Inside a minute with no timeouts I have a hard time getting too mad at Bradshaw there. But it's nailbiting time.
A little behind Branch by Brady there, but that ball has to be caught. And then Hernandez drops another pass (that probably works out since they have no timeouts). Very interesting.
Two mediocre teams winning the Super Bowl for the same city four years apart?
Landry and Lombardi are spinning in their graves. It used to be you had to be lucky and good to win a championship. Now, being good no longer matters. Just being lucky.
One caveat: we knew coming in the Giants had the best SOS (by DVOA and I think regular as well), and did win their division. My guess is, they manage not to lose one of those dumb games to the 'Skins (thus reaching the magical 10 wins mark) and we don't see them as "lucky" as much.
The short version of that comment is, I'm curious how SOS played out, maybe even as a predictor, over previous playoffs. It's getting more and more obvious that the NFL schedule's almost as imbalanced as the college game, and seemingly less predictably so. (Okay, I exaggerate a little - but the huge difference between playing the AFC North and AFC West, for instance, over the last couple years, is blatant.)
The shorter version: The '08 win was lucky. This one was a tight game but the Giants looked better most of the game - saying this as someone rooting for the Pats, if only because I predicted they'd win.
---
"When you absolutely don't know what to do any more, then it's time to panic." - Johann van der Wiel
Once again Brady amazes me with a throw inside of 20 seconds against the Giants in a super bowl. That was a perfect throw to the cone, and had Hernandez not hesitated he may have actually had a play on that one.
Based on this, why not put 20 men on defense in such a situation? Oh, you didn't complete against our cover-10. Take your five yards, we'll take the 7-10 seconds that play took. Repeat till time expires, then play normal on the last untimed down.
Palpably unfair act would come into play there, but yeah, it'd make more sense to just put the time from the play that never happened back on the clock.
Take your five yards, we'll take the 7-10 seconds that play took.
It wouldn't be 7-10 seconds per play. It'd be one. The offense would simply spike the ball on every play, and accept the five free yards for virtually no time off the clock at all.
the point was time did tick off on a play that was undone by penalty.
Why the NFL can't set the clock back to what it was before the play when a defensive penalty happens in the last two minutes of a half I don't know. I'd expect that to get some serious consideration based on this.
by fuck the NFL (not verified) :: Sun, 02/05/2012 - 10:54pm
Why the fuck isn't there an untimed down on a defensive penalty within 5 of the end? Giants CHEAT by having twelve men on the field, forcing the Pats to waste valuable seconds on a superior defense.
by Joshua Northey (not verified) :: Sun, 02/05/2012 - 11:03pm
I thoroughly doubt that. Makes you sound like a petty envious person to think so. I think people underestimate who little athletes care about hat sort of thing compared to things like say, their family.
by snik75 (not verified) :: Sun, 02/05/2012 - 10:59pm
That Welker drop was a killer - although it would have been a tough catch. And the INT really hurt the Pats, as it turned out. Strange game, enjoyable even if "my team" lost.
I see what went wrong. In the Bob Costas interview, Brady said he wanted the ball with a minute to go and down three points. It was that fourth point that did it.
I place some of the blame on the Gronk injury and the drops, which were new - but the biggest problem has remained the same since 2007:
Tom Brady seems to believe he has a god-given right to hold onto the ball for an eternity. You can pull that off in garbage games against the Dolphins, but you can't pull that off against a solid pass rush like Baltimore or New York.
The Giants pass rush was decidedly not the problem. Brady was only sacked twice, once less than Eli was. Brady's lack of accuracy was a bigger problem, not just with the passes thrown behind receivers, but also with the low passes batted away by the d-line.
Brady holds onto the ball for a while because, for the most part, he has the benefit of great pass protection.
by Geronimo (not verified) :: Sun, 02/05/2012 - 11:16pm
Brady was amazing. The best player on the field, in my opinion. The Pats had no downfield -- scratch that, mid-range -- threat in this game, though, which meant that Brady had to be perfect for them to score. And he damn nearly was.
I thought Eli took three sacks and threw three reckless passes (about par for the course) that Brady (and the other top tier QBs) never would have. As usual, he got bailed out - great catches and a safety Brady took - so nobody noticed. But he continues to be a bash-your-head-against-walls type of QB to watch. Love his demeanor and ability to play to the situation, but he still leaves so much on the field...
by Seth S (not verified) :: Mon, 02/06/2012 - 6:34am
I'll admit to not having a great eye for this kind of stuff, but at a certain point if a guy keeps making "reckless" passes and they keep working, don't you sort of have to assume he's doing something right? Eli seems to be really good at completing incredibly tight, seemingly-risky passes. Maybe he sees something in the development of the play that we're missing, and they're not as risky as they appear?
I'm more of a baseball guy, so the best analogy I can think of is pitchers who seem to get by on having a low BABIP year after year. At a certain point, it must be more likely that they're doing something right that we can't easily identify, and less likely that they're getting *so* lucky again and again and again.
I readily concede that I might be wrong on this, but after hearing how much Trent Dilfer gushes over Eli's ability to see plays open up seconds before they do, and to make the pass to exactly the right place, I'm inclined to believe Eli might just be a really good quarterback.
I just don't see how anybody can say that. Brady threw a lot of passes poorly. In the first half he threw two low passes that JPP easily blocked. And then in the 4th quarter he repeatedly threw the ball behind his receivers.
And the interception was awful. I thought that after his terrible deep pass against Baltimore he would have the sense to not throw a reckless deep pass against the Giants. Gronkowski was open deep and Brady simply could not reach him. I think he hasn't accepted the limitations to his deep ball. That one pass killed their offensive momentum in the second half more than anything else. That was a drive where they should have scored at least three points, and he threw the ball away.
by Geronimo (not verified) :: Mon, 02/06/2012 - 1:49am
What I meant was, Brady had to be perfect on any given drive if the Patriots were to score. I didn't see him getting a lot of help out there. His line played pretty well. But Gronkowski aside, the Patriots skill players on offense are not that good. Welker is a great possession/slot receiver, of course, but he's not scary when there isn't a deep threat to free up space for him.
Welker may not be "scary", but he led the league in receiving. If he did so without scaring you, I'm OK with that.
A deep threat would be a bit of a waste these days, since Brady cannot throw a deep pass consistently with accuracy. He tried once against the Ravens and once against the Giants. Both were badly thrown and intercepted. I had hoped he would have learned his lesson, but he just could not help himself.
by Last Far Striter (not verified) :: Sun, 02/05/2012 - 11:08pm
Oh wow-- I'm a BIG time Welker fan-- not really a Pats fan-- but that was MOSTLY on Welker. Both hands on the ball, and a ball he usually grabs. The way he acted after the miss, I believe he knew he should have brought that one down. Could not disagree with you more.
The pass was thrown well behind Welker. It's very hard to catch a ball when you're moving away from it. His momentum is pulling him away from the ball.
by Last Far Striter (not verified) :: Mon, 02/06/2012 - 12:09am
RickD-- Sorry, I respectfully disagree. As I said, as a Welker fan, I would like to think this is all on Brady, but I can't. If anything-- ANYTHING-- the throw is a bit too high. My view is still Welker missed that catch. Maybe he mistimed the jump for the catch? Maybe a slight twist throws him off? Lots of maybes, but I still think it is on Welker after watching it again (and again). At the point the ball gets to Wes, he has turned his body square to the line of scrimmage, maybe shading a bit towards Brady and the ball gets to him above his head yet hits him in both hands. I still believe this is a ball he could have caught. If he secured this catch, the Patriots are on the 20, with a 1st and 10 at just under the 4 minute mark. NBC has a good shot looking at Brady in slow motion of the play.
It may be academic however, if they settle for the field goal and the Giants travel down the field for the TD as they did after all. Lose by 4 or lose by 1-- pick your poison.
Still, If I'm drafting a new NFL team in Los Angeles and Wes Welker is left uncovered by the Pats (like THAT would EVER happen!), he's coming to L.A.
To me it looked like a catchable ball, but it would have been a very good play by Welker to get it. So assign to Welker the blame for not making a difficult catch that was within his capability to make and assign to Brady the blame for making a catch much more difficult that it needed to be.
Congrats, Giants. Aside from insane fumble luck, you made the plays when you had to, while the Patriots botched the plays they needed to make. You deserved it.
Yeah, but they also overcame awful officiating in the Packers game, and, while there was nothing on that level, the close calls (the only holding call I can remember in the playoffs on 3rd-and-1 early when they could have taken a decisive lead, no pass interference when there was early contact on their second last drive) went to New England today
I take any play result after the play starts with a known defensive penalty with a grain of salt, because it's hard to account for how strategy changes with a penalty in hand, as well as how the outcome of the play is affected by the defense, you know, cheating.
With respect to the Giants final touchdown, what would the rule be if, while Bradshaw was teetering at the goalline, Spikes knocked him into the endzone while trying to "tackle" him?
As long as Bradshaw held on to the ball while falling into the end zone, it's a TD. I actually did think Bradshaw was trying not to score, but was more concerned about not losing the ball and with his momentum he just decided to accept the touchdown.
by Ryan D. (not verified) :: Mon, 02/06/2012 - 1:46am
Isn't there a rule that says a player can verbally declare himself as down? It seems like Bradshaw could have yelled "DOWN!" before falling in the end zone. Would that kind of play be subject to review if the ref missed it?
You can give yourself up at any time and end the play. But understandably they require pretty clear intention and wont let you take advantage of it to avoid imminent mistake. Imagine if every player yelled "DOWN!" just prior to having the ball stripped. Had he slid or taken a knee or even just stopped his momentum before breaking the plane and sat there, he'd be down there.
I think he was right to score. Anytime you can go up 4 points with a minute left in the superbowl, you have to do it. You just don't know what might happen on the next few plays.
I do too. When you're tied, by all means take a knee at the 1. When you're losing, however, you need to take the points. There's just too much else that could go wrong to leave margin for error, even on a field goal that short.
Good game by the Giants. The Pats really need to significantly improve their defense. The fact that they cannot trust it puts too much pressure on the offense.
I thought the Pats could win this game if they played at their best level of ability. Brady made too many mistakes. And the receivers dropped too many passes, some of which were poorly thrown.
I really hope they fire Matt Patricia and bring in a real D-coordinator. The problem is not with the front seven. But the secondary needs to play a lot better. This is not news to anybody, I know.
Watching the game, I think the Pats' defense is almost there. Mayo, Chung, Ninkovitch, a still great Wilfork, the pass rush- they aren't elite, but they've been collecting decent players for a few years now. I actually think they need a deep threat more than anything else (assuming Brady can still hit the deep ball)
by Ryan D. (not verified) :: Mon, 02/06/2012 - 1:49am
In the last two SB appearances, the Pats' defense has only given up 17 and 19 points to the Giants' offense. The Pats' offense should be expected to win both games given that result. You can't blame their defense for giving up 18 points per game.
The Pats' defense consistently gave up easy passes without putting much pressure on Manning.
I don't blame the 2011 defense for the 2007 loss. The 2007 loss was bizarre and flukish and happened for a lot of reasons. In this one, the Pats' offense played reasonably well against a very good defense. The defense played inconsistently against a good offense. Look at where the Pats' drives were starting. Even when the defense forced a punt, the Pats got terrible field position.
But the inability to stop the passing game was what killed them.
Case in point: 3:57 left in the game and the Giants are down by 2. This is after the offense burned 5:38 moving the ball from their own 8 to Giants' territory. They punt to bury the Giants at their own 12.
First play on defense, Sterling Moore is burned for a 38-yard reception. Was anybody surprised by this? No, because Sterling Moore is not very good.
The punt was completely wasted. One play and the value of the punt is gone.
It took the Giants about 2 minutes to march 80 yards down the field, at which point they could try to optimally manage the end of the game.
Yes, Brady missed a couple passes, and yes, there were a few drops by the receivers. But look at the log of the first quarter. The Pats had one offensive play in the first 11 1/2 minutes, largely because the defense sucks. They gave up short completion after short completion. Eli picked them apart. And really, it's not like the Giants' game plan was any surprise.
This is a bad defense.
You want the Pats' offense to score more points? Get them on the field more often, and with better field position. Every time the Giants got the ball, they moved the ball down field with a 8-10 play drive with multiple first downs. Truly painful to watch.
But look at the log of the first quarter. The Pats had one offensive play in the first 11 1/2 minutes, largely because the defense sucks.
No. The Patriots had one offensive play in the first 11 1/2 minutes because the offense completely blew that one offensive play. The defense allowed no points on the opening drive, then the offense blew it. That is not the defense's fault.
As is often the case, blame/credit is shared. The defense bears a little responsibility for the field position, and the offense a lot for losing yardage when backed up like that.
I can not comment on the overall quality of Sterling Moore, but I couldn't come down too hard on him for the Manningham catch. It was a perfectly-placed ball thrown, what, 50 yards in the air (when you account for Eli's dropback and the diagonal), that required an outstanding catch by Manningham. Not sure what Moore could have done differently on that play - to me, that's a case of sometimes you just have to tip your hat to the other guys.
It wasn't the defense that gave up a safety on the first play of the game. It wasn't the defense that blew a great opportunity with a dumb interception on an underthrown pass to a guy who was playing on one leg.
by Aaron Brooks Go... :: Mon, 02/06/2012 - 11:16am
But it was the defense who gave up 26 first downs, and only escaped more damage because the refs changed the rules about "No Holding in the Playoffs" on behalf of the Pats.
by BCSJ (not verified) :: Sun, 02/05/2012 - 11:43pm
Crushing loss for Pats fan. That impossibly good 38-yard throw to Manningham was the dagger.
Every year of late, we say "get better on defense", and they don't. Pats have 2 1st rounders and 2 2nd rounders. BB will draft an OL, trade 2 of the picks, then bring in yet another DB. Sigh.
Every year of late, we say "get better on defense", and they don't.
Except this year, they did. Defense was not the problem in that game, at all.
I also wouldn't consider that a crushing loss. SB42 was a crushing loss. This was a frustrating but entirely foreseeable defeat in a game I was surprised to see the Patriots reaching in the first place.
I don't see any successful efforts there. Even when a punt was forced, it only came after at least two first downs.
The Pats didn't start any drive with the ball spotted at or beyond their own 30 yard line. They had it at the 29 once, and at the 21 once. For every single one of their other seven drives, they started at or inside the 20.
Look at time of possession: Giants 37:05, Pats 22:55. That's an insane advantage for the Giants.
The defense allowed one touchdown that wasn't a coaching decision to deliberately concede. One. To an elite Giants pass offense. That isn't a defense which is costing the team a game.
You are correct in part, but only in part. Even if you don't give up many touchdowns, you will lose more games than you win, against a good team, when you allow the good team to hold the ball for 37 minutes.
I'm not on board with pinning everything on the Pats defense, but you have to ding them for two allowed touchdowns not one. They allowed the whole drive down to the few yard line. That doesn't magically become OK just because they decided to let the Giants score on one play.
I'm certainly biased, but I think my home town did a great job hosting the Bowl this year. I've seen only positive reviews in the national press, and there weren't any debacles like the Jerry Jones Phantom Seat Ego-Fest last year.
Downtown Indy--where the stadium is--is pretty small. I think its smallness turned out to be an asset. Many nice hotels, restaurants, theaters, shops and a big convention center within walking distance of the game. The city just closed off about half of it and turned it into a week-long block party.
I live in the suburbs. There is a small airport near my home and I know that many of the uber-wealthy, Madonna included, stayed out in my neck of the woods. They took helicopters downtown instead of limos. All week long, I heard the steady drone and whup-whup-whup of the choppers overhead. Made me feel like I was in a M*A*S*H rerun.
The locals I talked to had a great time hosting the game. Living in an easy-to-forget flyover state gives one a slight sense of inferiority, I think, and an honest desire to show off your town and be good hosts when company from the "real cities" come to visit.
We do have the Indy 500, but that's different. For one thing, it happens every year, so we're used to it. But the real difference is that racing fans are people just like us. A half-million or so come to town on Memorial Day and whoop it up, but it feels closer to hosting the state fair than an international event.
The Super Bowl, on the other hand, is an event of truly Olympian proportions. I think everyone I know knew that our city was up to the task of hosting a good one and eager to show our city off. I think we succeeded.
So, kudos to Indianapolis. I hope we can do it again in 2017.
Thanks for asking. Yes, fresh guacamole was served for our Super Bowl fiesta! The produce manager at Whole Foods had a connection. It took some talking, but fortunately I was familiar enough with the Grateful Dead catalog to get him to trust me.
by Paul M (not verified) :: Mon, 02/06/2012 - 12:07am
Two questions here: 1) Which will be the next AFC team to win the SB? And when? (sorry, I guess that means three questions) Because I think it may be a while, and it might not be any of the Big Three (NE/PITT/BAL) given the age of Steelers and Ravens on defense and declining talent pool in NE.
2) Who was right-- Belichick or Bradshaw?? Clock was at 104 when he fell into end zone-- if he kneels and Pats call instant TO, there might be 103 or 102 left. Pats would not have timeout left-- If Eli kneels the kick is made, after a delay of game penalty, with 23 or 22 seconds left-- would take three seconds. So Brady would have 20 seconds left to throw two passes-- the 2nd of which would have to go OB-- and cover about 40 yds to have a shot at a long FG. Or the Pats let Eli score on a sneak and the same endgame plays out except the Pats dont have a TO and they have three or four fewer seconds with which to score the TD.
All told 80 yds with more than a minute and a timeout was preferable to 20 seconds and 45 yards with no timout. Belichick was right-- but maybe he should have done it a play or two earlier.
by Paul M (not verified) :: Mon, 02/06/2012 - 12:36am
oops-- Bradshaw play started at 104, not ended. He went into End Zone at 57-- so yes, Belichick was right-- it would have been 17 seconds less or left even if they had stuffed Bradshaw on that play when they get the ball back. Not enough time to throw two passes, both OB, and then kick a long FG. I wonder if he should have done it the play before and preserved two timeouts, though.
I was thinking the old guard of the AFC has slipped (still only New England, Indy and Pittsburgh in the Super Bowl since 2002, and it seems like the same teams make the playoffs every year). Houston looks like they're the best candidate right now.
I thought the Patriots' mistake was not going for it on fourth down at midfield the drive before the Giants scored
Presuming the Texans can play a season with moderately average injury luck, I think they're the best bet. They are clearly the team in the AFC with the best balance and a good number of young stars.
The Ravens' defense is getting creaky. Ditto for the Steelers. The Pats don't have a respectable defense.
If Peyton Manning ends up on the Jets and can play close to his historical level, then I would make them co-favorites with the Texans.
Look, the fact that the Giants won a close game this year should not be construed to mean very much. If the game were replayed next week, the Pats could easily win. These are two very closely matched teams.
The problem is that the two best teams in the NFC didn't make the Super Bowl. We're likely to see one of them there next year, or perhaps the 49ers if they can dramatically improve their offense. (Sorry, I'm not sold on Alex Smith. That effort against the Giants was dreadful and pissed away and cred he might have gotten from beating up the horrific Saints' pass defense.) But it's really way too early to think much about next year. It's quite possible that the Pats could pick up a cornerback or two and suddenly have a brilliant defense.
"Presuming the Texans can play a season with moderately average injury luck"
And one of these years, Bob Sanders will be healthy.
Now, that said, I think both the Packers and Saints just smoke this Pats team. Belichick is great at taking away what an offense does, but short of assassinating Drew Brees or Aaron Rodgers, he can't stop what the Saints and Packers do, because it's too multiple and distributed.
Belichick, but both plays are low-percentage. And, considering the flukey way both teams made the SB, I can understand Bradshaw's philosophy of taking the go-ahead points when available.
by GO PATS (not verified) :: Mon, 02/06/2012 - 2:44pm
Declining talent pool really??
Brady is still in his prime, they have a top notch OL, Gronk & Hernandez are in the 2nd years, Welker is in his prime, Wilfork, Mayo, Chung, Spikes, McCourtey are in or are approaching their primes (granted McCourtey had a bad year), they just need work on adding to the defense through the draft & FA this year. Hopefully they keep the 4 early picks and use them mostly on defense. I see no reason they can't be a force next year. They should win the division again. Pitt and Baltimore are mouch more long in the tooth. Houston will be a threat but that's about it. And as long as Norv is in SD, they are not going anywhere. If Gronk was healthy, there is a good chance NE wins yesterday inspite of the defense.
RSS Feed
Re: Superbowl XLVI Discussion
Pats fans seem to be cracking under the strain...
On one of the biggest Pats message boards is a 300+ post thread about the Tiquan Underwood cut, the main themes being handwringing about the cut destroying team morale and Underwood calling up the Giants and giving away the game plan.
(rolls eyes...)
Re: Superbowl XLVI Discussion
Poor Tiquan. Well, there's always House Party 4.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Reporting live from Indy. Just a few hundred blocks north of the Super Bowl. Avocado shortage at local grocery. No panic in the streets yet.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Getting through the last hours before the game with computer games, food and shutting up the people in my basement.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Tough break for Faulk -- inactive in what one would think will be his final game as a Patriot.
The following Patriots players are inactive today:
RB Kevin Faulk
QB Ryan Mallett
RB Shane Vereen
LB Gary Guyton
OL Donald Thomas
OL Nick McDonald
DL Ron Brace
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Anyhow, that means that besides Ocho, OL Cannon and RB Ridley will be active. Wonder if the Pats are planning more running than many people think...
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I have used a highly advanced Super Bowl simulation software device to make the following prediction:
Giants 20, Pats 17
I also predict Ottis Anderson will be MVP.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
You know, dice are known longer than recorded history.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Perhaps, but they may not have predicted Steve Grogan's costly interceptions, or that halftime would see Madonna be replaced at the last minute for Mighty Bomb Jack, as my program seems to be predicting.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
That program was pretty damn accurate.
Tecmo is the most advanced software of all time.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Ha!
Good thing the Ravens didn't make it; otherwise it might've struggled a bit
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Be sure to join a star-studded cast of your favorite FO posters Super Bowl XLVI! Point your favorite IRC client to bendenweyr.dyndns.org, channel #fo
Or for a web-based solution, just use this mibbit link: chat.mibbit.com/?channel=%23fo&server=bendenweyr.dyndns.org
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Over/Under bets...
Rush yards: 218.5
New England players with a reception: 6.5
Victor Cruz receptions: 6.5
First Turnover: Fumble, Interception, none.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Eli holds on too long twice, two sacks take them out of FG range. Lucky bounce on the punt gives them a field position win, but boy was that poor. Should've had points on the board.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Holy shit. A safety! Field position wins!
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Vegas has made their wishes known. I'm out.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
What were the prop bet odds on that?
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I saw 60 to 1 for the first score being a safety by either team. A very Brady mistake.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Wow. Thats the first time I've seen that called in a long time.
Usually if you get it past the line of scrimage, they don't give a crap if there's anyone in the area. No real pressure either.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
No real pressure? Are you having a laugh? Tuck put Brady on his back within a moment of the ball being released.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I think what he meant was that Brady had plenty of time. That was a coverage sack. Err, coverage safety.
I think the reason it doesn't get called is that it never happens. Noone ever throws it away that deep. If it's deep it's usually sideline, and much easier to pretend it's "at" someone.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Plenty of balls get thrown away deep.
You've never seen a ball thrown out of the back of the endzone?
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Wouldn't that be you know, out of bounds.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Didn't think of those.
I suppose it could be argued that with the smaller area in the end, there's always an intended receiver.
But yeah, exact same intent, but legal. Good point.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I have to say I rarely see them throw it that far.
Also refs do seem to be calling intentional grounding all little closer the last few years.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Ben Dreith redux. That crew will never work another Pats game.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Eh.... i disagree with about everything there! They always look for someone and he was hit while throwing.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I've never seen it called before this. I'm sure it's just a coincidence that my first time was in a Super Bowl.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Fantastic. Good to see the epic fails are happening on both offense and defense. If this continues, it's good news for my family as I'll be in bed by half time.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Seems typical of the Patriots in the playoffs the last couple years. Defense comes out, makes a big stop, the offense completely shits the bed, and then it all just goes to hell.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Wow, Pats look a bit clumsy so far. With a two score lead, the Giants can really release the hounds...
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Battleship:The Game: The Movie? Is Hasbro trolling?
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
What's the matter? Tired of all the movies based on comic book characters, sequels, and retread games? I'm calling it now-- Christmas 2013-- Operation, the Movie.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I'm holding out for Candyland, the movie.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I give you good odds of seeing that.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Starring Zooey Dechenel as Princess Lolly.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Parcheesi!
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Pokemon: The Movie: The Card Game: The Movie
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Down with JPP. Better or worse than St. Tebow's fire?
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Worse- With Tebow there is no limit, and NBC has had 2 weeks and unlimited $$$ to cook up something original.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I hate Volkswagons, and that new Beetle is UGLY, but that's two epic dog-based VW commercials. Good for them.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
That Nicks catch is exactly the thing Patriot nightmares are made of.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Another extremely dangerous pass by Eli rewarded. This is why nobody takes him seriously.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
"Extremely dangerous"? Are you Jason Campbell's agent?
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
God I hate punts from past midfield.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I can't believe Belichick just called a punt there.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
My thoughts exactly.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Welker! Welker! Welker! One Patriot came ready to play.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
The Giants need to go up 2 scores on this drive. They're dominating the game but letting the Pats stay close. That's never a good idea when Bill and Ernie have an extended halftime to make adjustments.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Steve Weatherford is channelling his inner Mike Scifres.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I'm not going to say that wasn't holding, but in every other postseason game this year, that wasn't holding. And now the Pats have the massive advantage of back to back drives (provided they actually move the ball this time).
Giants dominating the game and could very easily be left playing catchup for the entire 2nd half.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Why is that a massive advantage? Not snarky, just can't figure it out
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Because if they keep moving it like this, it'll be 17-9 before the Giants see the ball again. Down 8 after dominating the first half. The game completely changes.
In a more standard Pats game, when they're ahead anyway, they pretty much get the chance to put a game away early in the third.
It also makes sense from a crowd standpoint in the regular season. Has always driven me nuts to see home coaches win the toss and take the ball. Then the defense is out at the start of the 2nd half without any crowd noise and the offense has a bit of peace to go to work. This is a very minor detail, of course, but every little bit helps.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
You know, that makes sense. Never thought of that.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
The two questionable (to be charitable) DPIs ended their prior drives.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
GGiants' punter the MVP so far.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Absolutely agree. Field position is critical for the Giants Defense. Short fields have not been their friend this season.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Sadly, he's merely in the "field" for prop bet MVP @ 20/1.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
If you talk to the bookie, you might be able to persuade him to give you odds on the punter winning the MVP....
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Wheaterford having a great game - even his touchback hit the ground at the two and gave his team a good chance to down it.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
The left leg must be Gronk's launch foot. Even before Collinsworth just pointed it out, he looked extremely slow off the line to me on previous drives. He can run, but it looks like he's delayed in moving, which tells me he's used to pushing off that left foot. I'm sure there's film out there that could confirm/destroy my suspicion.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Great catch, proving Gronk is still Gronk.
ALso, on related note, solid commentary by Collinsworth tonight. I wonder if the SB announcers are ever 'coached' to be more user friendly given the SB crowd, or if its 'be who you are'.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Collinsworth is a smarmy prick, but he is the best color guy on TV by an order of magnitude. The things he notices immediately and gets cued up as teaching points consistently amaze me.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Agreed on both points- as a result I often watch most games on mute, or I'm at a bar where volume is unnoticeable.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Collinsworth is one of the few guys I am always genuinely happy to listen to during a broadcast. I never get the smarmy prick impression from him; he clearly knows what he's talking about, and he's regularly able to explain things clearly and concisely within seconds of the play ending. That's difficult enough to do when it's scripted and you've had hours of rehearsal, never mind responding dynamically to live action in front of you. No other NFL analyst I've heard this season even comes close to him for clarity and general listenability.
If I'd being overenthusiastic, it's probably because I'm euphoric at the half time score.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I don't mind him at all. Just acknowledging that I can see why some don't like him. I think it's as much a function of the nasal voice as it is his actual attitude though.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I have to say, with all the Gronkowski talk, to forget about Hernandez is a mistake too. He has been solid as well.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
That drive was very impressive.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Oh. Gee. The Patriots offense figured it out. Shocking.
And now you're losing AND giving them the ball to start the half. Good luck with that.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Tell me when halftime's over, please.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
54 couldn't have held more on that TD pass if he wanted to.
Notice how he looked to the umpire after the play to see if he got called for it.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Yeah. Noticed by plenty of folks at the game in that end zone too.
Good thing they called the one on that Jacobs run prior to the punt and not that, though.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Madonna!! jeez are the halftime bookers still listening to hits of the 80s
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
On second look (hey, maybe having passed on a free suite ticket wasn't a bad thing after all!) I don't see a hold on that touchdown. Good no call.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Nonsense. He's got two hands outside at the snap (under pad BTW) and two fistfuls of jersey and his left hand never lets go and he uses that outside leverage to steer him outside.
And he's out in space...easy call.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
From the commercials, it seems as if there is one movie coming out this summmer, in about five different versions.
I'm pretty good at guessing the first song of the halftime show...missed completely on "Vogue"
Oh, by the way, there's a football game going on in the midst of this cultural phenomenon. Felt like the Patriots were being pushed around a lot most of the half, yet they find a way to be in the lead. Bodes well for NE.
Dancing on bleachers looks difficult to me.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I wonder how much that stage cost.
All so they could play the album version of the song while people danced around on it.
This is even more pointless than Twitter.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Actually, I've been reading Twitter and I guarantee it's more enjoyable than
the halftime show. At least Twitter has Schatz, Tanier, and Kluwe.
I'd like it if more half-time acts were younger than I am, but the league doesn't
seem to see it that way.
Your other alternatives are to be mildly disturbed by Torry Holt's finger on
NFLN, or watch Florio on the NBC Sports streaming feed. Me, I'm heading upstairs
for another drink.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
It's hard to reconcile this halftime show with the concept of football!
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Precisely why having Don Julio as a consultant was a wise strategy.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
After watching Madonna do the Cheer Leader thing at half time, I doubt she makes the JV Squad.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Best line of the night by my 6 year old:
"who is that old lady singing?"
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
BIG PLUS 1! Comedy!
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Well, she is in her mid-fifties, I think. Some women that age have 6 year olds as grandchildren.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Omicron household awards your child 50 points for such brilliant truthiness!! Well done!
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
The disappearing thing in a flash of light at the end was pretty cool. I've seen any number of performers who I wish had similarly vanished...much earlier in their performances.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
This may be a hanging offence on this message board, but I thoroughly enjoyed that halftime show. (Yes, I'm still euphoric.) Much better than the ghost of Tom Petty and the undead minions formerly known as the Rolling Stones.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Well, yeah, but going from zero up......
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
The Stones weren't bad, but I was surprised at how much more I enjoyed tonight's show than the Who. And it certainly blew away last year with the Black Eyed Peas.
Last Far Striter is right about the bar being low, though.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I thought the Stones were terrible. I was all geared up to go make lunch and a hot drink during this year's halftime show, but found myself mesmerised. Whatever you think of her music, she definitely knows how to put on a show.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I liked it. I mean the half time show is pretty much the low point of the broadcast if the game doesn't become a blowout, but it was decently entertaining.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Clint Eastwood making an effort to single-handedly (voicedly?) make up for that abomination of a halftime show just by talking dramatically. You go, Clint.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Oh, look, they seem to be playing a football game this evening.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Ohcocinco with a catch. Somebody's prop bet just paid off.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I would have given BIG odds that Chad Ocho Cinco would never be heard from today.... But then, I lost the coin flip call too.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Well this hasn't taken very long.
What a colossal failure by the Giants to capitalize. When you're playing Belichick and the Pats you don't fuck around. You need to seize your chances to put points on the board.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
This is probably obvious, but Pats' OL is dominating.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I... uh. may have said this about Hernandez already.....
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I wish I'd had money on the Pats scoring on the opening drive of the second half. That was as predictable an event as sunrise.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I'm not even rooting against the Pats and I'm furious at the missed opportunities. That went exactly as I expected it to, and now the Giants have absolutely no margin for error whatsoever. From a dominant half to down eight without touching the ball.
I can't even suggest an alternative, since the sacks and penalties made both those sub-50 yard line punts kind of the only choice... it just really sucks. They had to have had a better plan there once they got past mid field on those drives.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
What a great first half. Homemade guacamole, shrimp cocktail, a nice ground beef and cheese dip.
Oh yeah, good game too.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Huge drive for the Giants, down 8. Giants better score or they're gonna be down 15 next time they get the ball.
....and they begin with a Jacobs' plunge up the middle.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
This has been a good game so far. The bad defenses will keep both teams in it.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Biggest surprise to me in this game: almost no YAC for the Giants. Incredible.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
MASSIVE hit by Chung there. Huge hidden play right there. That would've been a big gain. Instead one play later it's 3rd and long.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
That was an odd choice for a pass, 5 yard short of sticks?
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
And now they'll kick a pointless field goal to take it from a one score game to... a one score game. And then the Pats will score to make it a two score game, and that will be the end of it.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Dave you seem to think the outcome is a lot more predictable than it really is. I would still give the giants a 25-30% shot.
WHat is the reason for your certainty all game?
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I'm a pessimist in general, in a bad mood right now, and just generally not a fan of playing not to lose rather than playing for the kill. Especially against this coach and offense.
The same thing happened two years ago. The reason the onside kick, 2-point conversion, missed ill-advised 51-yarder, and Porter pick-6 all came into play was that the Colts simply couldn't step on the necks of the Saints early on when they had a chance to take a commanding lead (the oft-cited Garcon drop, the failed Hart 3rd and 1). Little swings like that don't show up in stats but drive me batshit.
Emotion aside, 25-30% shot is kind of awful, given how well the Giants started the game, wouldn't you agree? Especially given that they were at .77 WP with 5 minutes left in the first half.
(Actually it's 37% after the punt, not 25-30 - that sack was a 9% swing.)
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
big hit by blackburn, but he just killed jpp
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
The Giants finally get a sack.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Sack after a three man rush and now the Giants have it past midfield. The tide has turned. Perhaps I have been too pessimistic...
Nah. The QB is still Eli.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Haven't crunched any variances, but the NYG run game seems very very consistent tonight.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Another lucky fumble recovery by the Giants. what is that this postseason? 14?
give me a break
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Giants are pretty good at getting lucky breaks. It's like a whole team of Tebows.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Awesome
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
How did Eli get sacked on a 3-man rush??
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Another missed opportunity. A 2-point game is much, much better, but still not ideal given the field position and opposing offense. I guess that sack isn't that big a deal, since it's not as if getting rid of it to throw it away changes the outcome, but that was still kind of a crappy sack to take.
Still, down 2 beats the hell out of down 8. Now the defense making a play can change the game again, not just give them a prayer. Major difference.
Edit: Hm. That sack was -8% WP. Never would've guessed it was worth that much.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Yeah, given the time left in the game, and the field position they were in it doesn't really surprise me that much.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Solid game. No complaints.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Both offensive lines are being allowed to hold a fair amount but nothing egregious
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Brady really sucks throwing deep lately.
I can't believe he did that. Just left it way short.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
For those playing in a squares pool, that safety has been a killer. Who'd thought 5/7 was even thinkable.
Also, heckuva game- Looking forward to great forth.
As I type- big pick by Blackburn.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Underthrew it. Rats
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
On the interception replay, you could see that Gronkowski can't jump.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Gronkowski couldn't beat a replacement linebacker?
Another recovery by Giants...
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
ANOTHER fumble recovery?
You have GOT to be kidding me.
C'mon.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Ummm Mr. Colinsworth (whom I actually think is the best color guy), that ball was under-thrown badly. It wasn't Gronkowski's fault.
NYG getting some nice fumble luck so far.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I'm with you. It was one of the few points where I think Collinsworth messed up. The other one was when they were talking about that uncalled DPI late in the game and how hard it is to make that call in real time when it was pretty obvious in real time as well.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I have a friend who is a HUGE Cowboys homer. Thinks the NFL blatantly favors the Steelers and Giants and goes on and on about it without listening to logic.
I can't really argue against NYG fumble luck in big games lately though. That's two so far tonight, right?
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Any Cowboys fan who complains about favoritism is nuts. I guess he misses the never-called Michael Irvin push off.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
On any other site the fumble recoveries topic would not be worth discussing because posters wouldn't grasp the significance.
But HERE, can we not agree that the Giants have been incredibly lucky? Recovering EVERY fumble?
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
To be fair, EVERY means two...
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I am speaking in terms of the entire postseason. The Giants have recovered all THEIR fumbles and almost all of the opponents.
That's crazy
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
It's two fumbles, Harveys, settle down.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
...and the 12-men-on-the-field penalty.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I mean, I know it was underthrown, but that should be incomplete when giving your all-world TE so much time to zero in on a deep throw.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I hate the formation rules. On the play where Ninkovich was offsides, the "on the LOS" receiver to the blind side was a full 1.5 yards behind the line of scrimmage. I know this is consistent league-wide, but it's really obviously wrong whenever the LOS is within a yard of a 5-yard line.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Honestly I wish they would just liberalize them since they don't enforce them anyway.
Eli looks really sharp.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Rut-roh. Ballard is down.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Sometimes these injuries can even be good with so little time left in the season. I get the felling that NYG might be better of calling more 3WR sets.
Collinsworth is really on form tonight (even with my previous jab at him considered).
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
That's the kind of Eli play that makes me crazy. That's either insane, or
brilliant, and I can never tell which. This time Cruz caught it and he
gets away with it.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Perhaps it would be fair to characterize that type of Eli play as high risk/reward. It's not as if he has some unholy luck* since he'll get punished for some of those too.
*In aggregate. Obviously it's skill to be able to make a play like that in specific.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
WP% creeping back to 50%. Talk of Brady being concussed by Tuck's knee on that sack on Twitter. Would excuse his bad decision on that pick.
I'm almost reaching a state that could be called optimism (so it turns out I'm rooting for the Giants... as one of the FO writers noted, a loose football tells you a lot about your rooting interests).
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
That really wasn't a bad decision. All-world TE against a replacement level LB. A slight underthrow and Gronks inabillity to make a play created the pick.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Don't the NFL rules on concussion preclude returning to play in the same game?
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
No other announcer blames that on Cruz. And not only did he do that, but he had the team prepared with a graphic to talk about WR technique.
All hail Collinsworth.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Are you referring to Manningham too close to the sideline? Or is that simply another example?
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Burning their 2nd TO - the Giants have to make that TO work for them. Four-down approach here on 3rd and 5.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Great camera shot of Ballard on the sidelines trying to go.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Give me a break Tom. If that's Ross you are clapping your hands and getting your guys off the field
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I agree if the DB gets such solid contact on the ball as well you cannot call that.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Another penalty by Boothe on 3rd down at about the 40. If the Giants lose, it is entirely acceptable to blame it on him.
And that looked like PI to me.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Yow! Watching Ballard go down after trying to run on the sideline was painful.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Agree
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Okay, that looked like PI to me, too. Anybody asks, though, and I'll argue the ball arrived before the contact.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Close enough, but in cases like this, I prefer the non call
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
PI. No doubt.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
The Crue, back from the dead and ready to party!
I think the Giants just lost the game on that drive.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I might have been wrong about that last part.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Anyone else think Gilbride is glad to see the TEs dropping like flies? Now he can go full-bore run and shoot!
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
If football fans, who b*tch nonstop about the refs calling tickey tack penalties, complain about THAT non-call then the complainers should be shoved into oncoming traffic
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Easy there, tough guy. Your team has gotten every break except fumble recoveries, as you keep bitching about very loudly.
Can't remember a close penalty call that went against you, can you? DIdn't think so. You got the call that stopped a drive. You got the non-call that would have stopped a TD. You got the non-call that stopped a drive.
Stop whining.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
What the h*ck?
I am a Packer fan.
Just relishing a good game
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
The refs have all but eliminated calling PI and defensive holding this postseason.
That would have been an odd place to START calling such a penalty.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Just my opinion, but I think the refs go a little lax every post-season, much the same way the strike zone changes during the baseball playoffs. You can see examples every week of the playoffs. On the pass call, that could go either way, but I agree that in "real time" the call for PI would be hard to make.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
That Welker play fooled me completely for some reason
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Excellent
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
That third down conversion is basically the game right there.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Perhaps...that non- 3rd & 11 conversion may prove otherwise
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
BUTTERFINGERS.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
If refs overturn this THEN Giants fans can complain
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Yes, we are all just bitter giant fans.
Knucklehead.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
That's a hell of a catch-- you can't argue that effort. Wow!
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I'm impressed with the view of Belichick on that challenge replay. 800 pounds of NFL players coming at him full steam, and his expression never changes. Just watches them crash right in front of him.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I thought the same thing. Remarkable nonchalance.
Now it's clock milking time. And I never say stuff like that.
I both like and distrust the idea that they're doing it via the passing game. Lately I have no idea what to make of Kevin Gilbride.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Let 'em score, no?
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Agree
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
They DID. And Bradshaw considered it and fucked it up!
Wow. I have never seen that.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Brilliant drive here. Just brilliant. Except for going out of bounds.
Inside of a minute I think you just let it play out. Score the TD if you can.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
That's awesome and hilarious and bizarre
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Why let them score now? Why not at the two-minute warning?
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
And now we'll truly test the merits of 'let 'em score'.
Personally, this is a far more preferable scenario than a potential Ray Finkle situation.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Laces out!
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Oh, what a great sequence for thinking football fans. Belichick is maybe one of three coaches with the balls to call that. And Bradshaw thought to stop, but had too much momentum. Fascinating.
Inside a minute with no timeouts I have a hard time getting too mad at Bradshaw there. But it's nailbiting time.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Most bizarre feeling. Your team scores a go-ahead touchdown with a minute to go in the 4th quarter of the Super Bowl, yet you can't cheer.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Best SB moment ever (of course I am someone who likes football mostly for the game theory).
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
A little behind Branch by Brady there, but that ball has to be caught. And then Hernandez drops another pass (that probably works out since they have no timeouts). Very interesting.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Oh, they do still have that one. Whoops.
Sack kills that idea though. This now feels a lot like 2007.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
OK, Tuck for MVP?
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Giants just might be the luckiest team in NFL history.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
*Might*!?!?!?
Two mediocre teams winning the Super Bowl for the same city four years apart?
Landry and Lombardi are spinning in their graves. It used to be you had to be lucky and good to win a championship. Now, being good no longer matters. Just being lucky.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
One caveat: we knew coming in the Giants had the best SOS (by DVOA and I think regular as well), and did win their division. My guess is, they manage not to lose one of those dumb games to the 'Skins (thus reaching the magical 10 wins mark) and we don't see them as "lucky" as much.
The short version of that comment is, I'm curious how SOS played out, maybe even as a predictor, over previous playoffs. It's getting more and more obvious that the NFL schedule's almost as imbalanced as the college game, and seemingly less predictably so. (Okay, I exaggerate a little - but the huge difference between playing the AFC North and AFC West, for instance, over the last couple years, is blatant.)
The shorter version: The '08 win was lucky. This one was a tight game but the Giants looked better most of the game - saying this as someone rooting for the Pats, if only because I predicted they'd win.
---
"When you absolutely don't know what to do any more, then it's time to panic." - Johann van der Wiel
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Spinning in their graves? The two Giants assistants from the early Fifties?
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Like making the Super Bowl by beating 8 consecutive QBs of replacement-level or worse?
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Wow
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Once again Brady amazes me with a throw inside of 20 seconds against the Giants in a super bowl. That was a perfect throw to the cone, and had Hernandez not hesitated he may have actually had a play on that one.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Fantastic finish here
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Congrats to the Giants
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Im voting sheer luck for MVP.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I'll second that.
Or 12th man on the field.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
What a game!
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
It almost seems unfair that the 9 seconds geot to stay off the clock after that 12 men penalty. Almost like a page out of Buddy Ryan's playbook.
Oh so close there for Gronk.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
That was odd indeed.
Guess what rule the NFL will look at this offseason.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Based on this, why not put 20 men on defense in such a situation? Oh, you didn't complete against our cover-10. Take your five yards, we'll take the 7-10 seconds that play took. Repeat till time expires, then play normal on the last untimed down.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Palpably unfair act would come into play there, but yeah, it'd make more sense to just put the time from the play that never happened back on the clock.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Take your five yards, we'll take the 7-10 seconds that play took.
It wouldn't be 7-10 seconds per play. It'd be one. The offense would simply spike the ball on every play, and accept the five free yards for virtually no time off the clock at all.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Or actually zero, considering the game cannot end on an accepted defensive 12-man call.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Uh-huh, which the poster I was replying to covered when he said:
Repeat till time expires, then play normal on the last untimed down.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Indeed, which results in zero time elapsing on the last play involving a penalty.
But congratulations on unnecessarily being an ass about it.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
the point was time did tick off on a play that was undone by penalty.
Why the NFL can't set the clock back to what it was before the play when a defensive penalty happens in the last two minutes of a half I don't know. I'd expect that to get some serious consideration based on this.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Er, what? You have a bizarre definition of being an ass.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Why the fuck isn't there an untimed down on a defensive penalty within 5 of the end? Giants CHEAT by having twelve men on the field, forcing the Pats to waste valuable seconds on a superior defense.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
+1
Giants, 2011 Super Bowl champions
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
CHEATS
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Tuck Rule says hi
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
You mean the correctly adjudicated tuck rule?
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
According to the 2011 rulebook, that would have been a fumble. The second hand making contact ends the tuck.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Hell of a game, man. Hell of a game. Congrats Giants
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
The game seemed to finish early when you figure in a long halftime.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Please give the MVP to a defender.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Justin Tuck deserves it. Granted, he also deserved it in SB42 so...
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Well the Pats are still 3-2 in 'small sample size, those are the breaks' Super Bowls
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Media will go with Manning for MVP, in my opinion. Do they ever watch the defense?
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Defense? What is that?
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
As I said.... The writers IGNORE the Defensive side of the ball-- welcome to the Heisman Trophy Award, Part II.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Losing team sleeps with Madonna, right?
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Bad form. Please take misogyny elsewhere.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Okay.
But she started it.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
She smeared you on a chat group somewhere?
Seems unlikely.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I vote BnB Tobacco Girl as honorary MVP
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Peyton probably almost as unhappy as Tom and Bill.
Awesome game, though.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I thoroughly doubt that. Makes you sound like a petty envious person to think so. I think people underestimate who little athletes care about hat sort of thing compared to things like say, their family.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I agree, Joshua. Peyton may not be celebrating quite as purely as the rest of his family, but I have no doubt he is celebrating.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I agree, Joshua. Peyton may not be celebrating quite as purely as the rest of his family, but I have no doubt he is celebrating.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
That Welker drop was a killer - although it would have been a tough catch. And the INT really hurt the Pats, as it turned out. Strange game, enjoyable even if "my team" lost.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Well, they pulled it out. Shows what I know. Maybe they just need to be playing from behind in the fourth.
Now I'll just go drink away the fact that I could've been there in a great spot for free, but I chose not to.
I enjoyed all your company, though...
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I see what went wrong. In the Bob Costas interview, Brady said he wanted the ball with a minute to go and down three points. It was that fourth point that did it.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Fantastic game, even though I'm gutted about the result.
Boy, has the Patriots offense underachieved in big games recently.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I place some of the blame on the Gronk injury and the drops, which were new - but the biggest problem has remained the same since 2007:
Tom Brady seems to believe he has a god-given right to hold onto the ball for an eternity. You can pull that off in garbage games against the Dolphins, but you can't pull that off against a solid pass rush like Baltimore or New York.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
The Giants pass rush was decidedly not the problem. Brady was only sacked twice, once less than Eli was. Brady's lack of accuracy was a bigger problem, not just with the passes thrown behind receivers, but also with the low passes batted away by the d-line.
Brady holds onto the ball for a while because, for the most part, he has the benefit of great pass protection.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Don't agree with the characterization -- which I see everywhere -- that that was a drop on Welker. Brady threw a bad pass to a wide-open receiver.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
It appeared to me, completely subjectively, that he wasn't the same after his shoulder got hurt.
Granted, he was amazing in the stretch before that so it may just have been him coming down to earth a bit.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
It was not a good throw, and required a crazy twisting catch. Still, he did drop it. I don't know.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Brady was amazing. The best player on the field, in my opinion. The Pats had no downfield -- scratch that, mid-range -- threat in this game, though, which meant that Brady had to be perfect for them to score. And he damn nearly was.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Really? I thought he was kind of off, and that Eli clearly outplayed him.
$0.02
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I thought Eli took three sacks and threw three reckless passes (about par for the course) that Brady (and the other top tier QBs) never would have. As usual, he got bailed out - great catches and a safety Brady took - so nobody noticed. But he continues to be a bash-your-head-against-walls type of QB to watch. Love his demeanor and ability to play to the situation, but he still leaves so much on the field...
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I'll admit to not having a great eye for this kind of stuff, but at a certain point if a guy keeps making "reckless" passes and they keep working, don't you sort of have to assume he's doing something right? Eli seems to be really good at completing incredibly tight, seemingly-risky passes. Maybe he sees something in the development of the play that we're missing, and they're not as risky as they appear?
I'm more of a baseball guy, so the best analogy I can think of is pitchers who seem to get by on having a low BABIP year after year. At a certain point, it must be more likely that they're doing something right that we can't easily identify, and less likely that they're getting *so* lucky again and again and again.
I readily concede that I might be wrong on this, but after hearing how much Trent Dilfer gushes over Eli's ability to see plays open up seconds before they do, and to make the pass to exactly the right place, I'm inclined to believe Eli might just be a really good quarterback.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I just don't see how anybody can say that. Brady threw a lot of passes poorly. In the first half he threw two low passes that JPP easily blocked. And then in the 4th quarter he repeatedly threw the ball behind his receivers.
And the interception was awful. I thought that after his terrible deep pass against Baltimore he would have the sense to not throw a reckless deep pass against the Giants. Gronkowski was open deep and Brady simply could not reach him. I think he hasn't accepted the limitations to his deep ball. That one pass killed their offensive momentum in the second half more than anything else. That was a drive where they should have scored at least three points, and he threw the ball away.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
What is so perfect about a player who stands for six seconds in the endzone before taking a safety?
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
What I meant was, Brady had to be perfect on any given drive if the Patriots were to score. I didn't see him getting a lot of help out there. His line played pretty well. But Gronkowski aside, the Patriots skill players on offense are not that good. Welker is a great possession/slot receiver, of course, but he's not scary when there isn't a deep threat to free up space for him.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Welker may not be "scary", but he led the league in receiving. If he did so without scaring you, I'm OK with that.
A deep threat would be a bit of a waste these days, since Brady cannot throw a deep pass consistently with accuracy. He tried once against the Ravens and once against the Giants. Both were badly thrown and intercepted. I had hoped he would have learned his lesson, but he just could not help himself.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I just thought Hole in Zone made one heck of a play on the ball there.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Oh wow-- I'm a BIG time Welker fan-- not really a Pats fan-- but that was MOSTLY on Welker. Both hands on the ball, and a ball he usually grabs. The way he acted after the miss, I believe he knew he should have brought that one down. Could not disagree with you more.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
The pass was thrown well behind Welker. It's very hard to catch a ball when you're moving away from it. His momentum is pulling him away from the ball.
The Hernandez drop was not Brady's fault.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
RickD-- Sorry, I respectfully disagree. As I said, as a Welker fan, I would like to think this is all on Brady, but I can't. If anything-- ANYTHING-- the throw is a bit too high. My view is still Welker missed that catch. Maybe he mistimed the jump for the catch? Maybe a slight twist throws him off? Lots of maybes, but I still think it is on Welker after watching it again (and again). At the point the ball gets to Wes, he has turned his body square to the line of scrimmage, maybe shading a bit towards Brady and the ball gets to him above his head yet hits him in both hands. I still believe this is a ball he could have caught. If he secured this catch, the Patriots are on the 20, with a 1st and 10 at just under the 4 minute mark. NBC has a good shot looking at Brady in slow motion of the play.
It may be academic however, if they settle for the field goal and the Giants travel down the field for the TD as they did after all. Lose by 4 or lose by 1-- pick your poison.
Still, If I'm drafting a new NFL team in Los Angeles and Wes Welker is left uncovered by the Pats (like THAT would EVER happen!), he's coming to L.A.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
To me it looked like a catchable ball, but it would have been a very good play by Welker to get it. So assign to Welker the blame for not making a difficult catch that was within his capability to make and assign to Brady the blame for making a catch much more difficult that it needed to be.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
That's how I saw it.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Who else felt this was a dink and dunk super bowl? Dunno how the YPC stands vs other super bowls, but it seemed like it was a lot of short work.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Congrats, Giants. Aside from insane fumble luck, you made the plays when you had to, while the Patriots botched the plays they needed to make. You deserved it.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Two fumble recoveries does not constitute "insane" luck.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
It does when you include the whole post season. There was only one fumble in the post season, by either team, that the Giants didn't recover.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Yeah, but they also overcame awful officiating in the Packers game, and, while there was nothing on that level, the close calls (the only holding call I can remember in the playoffs on 3rd-and-1 early when they could have taken a decisive lead, no pass interference when there was early contact on their second last drive) went to New England today
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Plus the one wiped out by the 12-men penalty.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
It's not "luck" when you lose the fumble.
And really, do we need to point out that maybe it was easier for the Pats to force a fumble on a play when they had an extra man on the field?
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I take any play result after the play starts with a known defensive penalty with a grain of salt, because it's hard to account for how strategy changes with a penalty in hand, as well as how the outcome of the play is affected by the defense, you know, cheating.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
With respect to the Giants final touchdown, what would the rule be if, while Bradshaw was teetering at the goalline, Spikes knocked him into the endzone while trying to "tackle" him?
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
As long as Bradshaw held on to the ball while falling into the end zone, it's a TD. I actually did think Bradshaw was trying not to score, but was more concerned about not losing the ball and with his momentum he just decided to accept the touchdown.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
But if Bradshaw slides, then the ball is dead at the point where he starts the slide, no?
Or does that only apply to QBs?
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I would guess that's only for QBs, but it's a good question.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Isn't there a rule that says a player can verbally declare himself as down? It seems like Bradshaw could have yelled "DOWN!" before falling in the end zone. Would that kind of play be subject to review if the ref missed it?
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
You can give yourself up at any time and end the play. But understandably they require pretty clear intention and wont let you take advantage of it to avoid imminent mistake. Imagine if every player yelled "DOWN!" just prior to having the ball stripped. Had he slid or taken a knee or even just stopped his momentum before breaking the plane and sat there, he'd be down there.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I think he was right to score. Anytime you can go up 4 points with a minute left in the superbowl, you have to do it. You just don't know what might happen on the next few plays.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I do too. When you're tied, by all means take a knee at the 1. When you're losing, however, you need to take the points. There's just too much else that could go wrong to leave margin for error, even on a field goal that short.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Good game by the Giants. The Pats really need to significantly improve their defense. The fact that they cannot trust it puts too much pressure on the offense.
I thought the Pats could win this game if they played at their best level of ability. Brady made too many mistakes. And the receivers dropped too many passes, some of which were poorly thrown.
I really hope they fire Matt Patricia and bring in a real D-coordinator. The problem is not with the front seven. But the secondary needs to play a lot better. This is not news to anybody, I know.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Watching the game, I think the Pats' defense is almost there. Mayo, Chung, Ninkovitch, a still great Wilfork, the pass rush- they aren't elite, but they've been collecting decent players for a few years now. I actually think they need a deep threat more than anything else (assuming Brady can still hit the deep ball)
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
In the last two SB appearances, the Pats' defense has only given up 17 and 19 points to the Giants' offense. The Pats' offense should be expected to win both games given that result. You can't blame their defense for giving up 18 points per game.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
The Pats' defense consistently gave up easy passes without putting much pressure on Manning.
I don't blame the 2011 defense for the 2007 loss. The 2007 loss was bizarre and flukish and happened for a lot of reasons. In this one, the Pats' offense played reasonably well against a very good defense. The defense played inconsistently against a good offense. Look at where the Pats' drives were starting. Even when the defense forced a punt, the Pats got terrible field position.
But the inability to stop the passing game was what killed them.
Case in point: 3:57 left in the game and the Giants are down by 2. This is after the offense burned 5:38 moving the ball from their own 8 to Giants' territory. They punt to bury the Giants at their own 12.
First play on defense, Sterling Moore is burned for a 38-yard reception. Was anybody surprised by this? No, because Sterling Moore is not very good.
The punt was completely wasted. One play and the value of the punt is gone.
It took the Giants about 2 minutes to march 80 yards down the field, at which point they could try to optimally manage the end of the game.
Yes, Brady missed a couple passes, and yes, there were a few drops by the receivers. But look at the log of the first quarter. The Pats had one offensive play in the first 11 1/2 minutes, largely because the defense sucks. They gave up short completion after short completion. Eli picked them apart. And really, it's not like the Giants' game plan was any surprise.
This is a bad defense.
You want the Pats' offense to score more points? Get them on the field more often, and with better field position. Every time the Giants got the ball, they moved the ball down field with a 8-10 play drive with multiple first downs. Truly painful to watch.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
But look at the log of the first quarter. The Pats had one offensive play in the first 11 1/2 minutes, largely because the defense sucks.
No. The Patriots had one offensive play in the first 11 1/2 minutes because the offense completely blew that one offensive play. The defense allowed no points on the opening drive, then the offense blew it. That is not the defense's fault.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
As is often the case, blame/credit is shared. The defense bears a little responsibility for the field position, and the offense a lot for losing yardage when backed up like that.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I can not comment on the overall quality of Sterling Moore, but I couldn't come down too hard on him for the Manningham catch. It was a perfectly-placed ball thrown, what, 50 yards in the air (when you account for Eli's dropback and the diagonal), that required an outstanding catch by Manningham. Not sure what Moore could have done differently on that play - to me, that's a case of sometimes you just have to tip your hat to the other guys.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
The Giants had the ball for 37 minutes. Some of that lack of offensive production is on the defense.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
It wasn't the defense that gave up a safety on the first play of the game. It wasn't the defense that blew a great opportunity with a dumb interception on an underthrown pass to a guy who was playing on one leg.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
But it was the defense who gave up 26 first downs, and only escaped more damage because the refs changed the rules about "No Holding in the Playoffs" on behalf of the Pats.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Crushing loss for Pats fan. That impossibly good 38-yard throw to Manningham was the dagger.
Every year of late, we say "get better on defense", and they don't. Pats have 2 1st rounders and 2 2nd rounders. BB will draft an OL, trade 2 of the picks, then bring in yet another DB. Sigh.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Every year of late, we say "get better on defense", and they don't.
Except this year, they did. Defense was not the problem in that game, at all.
I also wouldn't consider that a crushing loss. SB42 was a crushing loss. This was a frustrating but entirely foreseeable defeat in a game I was surprised to see the Patriots reaching in the first place.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Defense was not the problem in that game, at all.
Huh?
First drive: 10 plays, 35 yards
Second drive: 9 plays, 78 yards
Third drive: 8 plays, 39 yards
Fourth drive: 7 plays, 22 yards
skipping the kneel-down
Fifth drive: 10 plays, 45 yards
Sixth drive: 9 plays, 33 yards
Seventh drive: 10 plays, 49 yards
Eighth drive: 9 plays, 88 yards
I don't see any successful efforts there. Even when a punt was forced, it only came after at least two first downs.
The Pats didn't start any drive with the ball spotted at or beyond their own 30 yard line. They had it at the 29 once, and at the 21 once. For every single one of their other seven drives, they started at or inside the 20.
Look at time of possession: Giants 37:05, Pats 22:55. That's an insane advantage for the Giants.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
The defense allowed one touchdown that wasn't a coaching decision to deliberately concede. One. To an elite Giants pass offense. That isn't a defense which is costing the team a game.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
You are correct in part, but only in part. Even if you don't give up many touchdowns, you will lose more games than you win, against a good team, when you allow the good team to hold the ball for 37 minutes.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I'm not on board with pinning everything on the Pats defense, but you have to ding them for two allowed touchdowns not one. They allowed the whole drive down to the few yard line. That doesn't magically become OK just because they decided to let the Giants score on one play.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I'm certainly biased, but I think my home town did a great job hosting the Bowl this year. I've seen only positive reviews in the national press, and there weren't any debacles like the Jerry Jones Phantom Seat Ego-Fest last year.
Downtown Indy--where the stadium is--is pretty small. I think its smallness turned out to be an asset. Many nice hotels, restaurants, theaters, shops and a big convention center within walking distance of the game. The city just closed off about half of it and turned it into a week-long block party.
I live in the suburbs. There is a small airport near my home and I know that many of the uber-wealthy, Madonna included, stayed out in my neck of the woods. They took helicopters downtown instead of limos. All week long, I heard the steady drone and whup-whup-whup of the choppers overhead. Made me feel like I was in a M*A*S*H rerun.
The locals I talked to had a great time hosting the game. Living in an easy-to-forget flyover state gives one a slight sense of inferiority, I think, and an honest desire to show off your town and be good hosts when company from the "real cities" come to visit.
We do have the Indy 500, but that's different. For one thing, it happens every year, so we're used to it. But the real difference is that racing fans are people just like us. A half-million or so come to town on Memorial Day and whoop it up, but it feels closer to hosting the state fair than an international event.
The Super Bowl, on the other hand, is an event of truly Olympian proportions. I think everyone I know knew that our city was up to the task of hosting a good one and eager to show our city off. I think we succeeded.
So, kudos to Indianapolis. I hope we can do it again in 2017.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
What's the latest on the avocado situation?
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Thanks for asking. Yes, fresh guacamole was served for our Super Bowl fiesta! The produce manager at Whole Foods had a connection. It took some talking, but fortunately I was familiar enough with the Grateful Dead catalog to get him to trust me.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Two questions here: 1) Which will be the next AFC team to win the SB? And when? (sorry, I guess that means three questions) Because I think it may be a while, and it might not be any of the Big Three (NE/PITT/BAL) given the age of Steelers and Ravens on defense and declining talent pool in NE.
2) Who was right-- Belichick or Bradshaw?? Clock was at 104 when he fell into end zone-- if he kneels and Pats call instant TO, there might be 103 or 102 left. Pats would not have timeout left-- If Eli kneels the kick is made, after a delay of game penalty, with 23 or 22 seconds left-- would take three seconds. So Brady would have 20 seconds left to throw two passes-- the 2nd of which would have to go OB-- and cover about 40 yds to have a shot at a long FG. Or the Pats let Eli score on a sneak and the same endgame plays out except the Pats dont have a TO and they have three or four fewer seconds with which to score the TD.
All told 80 yds with more than a minute and a timeout was preferable to 20 seconds and 45 yards with no timout. Belichick was right-- but maybe he should have done it a play or two earlier.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
oops-- Bradshaw play started at 104, not ended. He went into End Zone at 57-- so yes, Belichick was right-- it would have been 17 seconds less or left even if they had stuffed Bradshaw on that play when they get the ball back. Not enough time to throw two passes, both OB, and then kick a long FG. I wonder if he should have done it the play before and preserved two timeouts, though.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
I was thinking the old guard of the AFC has slipped (still only New England, Indy and Pittsburgh in the Super Bowl since 2002, and it seems like the same teams make the playoffs every year). Houston looks like they're the best candidate right now.
I thought the Patriots' mistake was not going for it on fourth down at midfield the drive before the Giants scored
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Presuming the Texans can play a season with moderately average injury luck, I think they're the best bet. They are clearly the team in the AFC with the best balance and a good number of young stars.
The Ravens' defense is getting creaky. Ditto for the Steelers. The Pats don't have a respectable defense.
If Peyton Manning ends up on the Jets and can play close to his historical level, then I would make them co-favorites with the Texans.
Look, the fact that the Giants won a close game this year should not be construed to mean very much. If the game were replayed next week, the Pats could easily win. These are two very closely matched teams.
The problem is that the two best teams in the NFC didn't make the Super Bowl. We're likely to see one of them there next year, or perhaps the 49ers if they can dramatically improve their offense. (Sorry, I'm not sold on Alex Smith. That effort against the Giants was dreadful and pissed away and cred he might have gotten from beating up the horrific Saints' pass defense.) But it's really way too early to think much about next year. It's quite possible that the Pats could pick up a cornerback or two and suddenly have a brilliant defense.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
"Presuming the Texans can play a season with moderately average injury luck"
And one of these years, Bob Sanders will be healthy.
Now, that said, I think both the Packers and Saints just smoke this Pats team. Belichick is great at taking away what an offense does, but short of assassinating Drew Brees or Aaron Rodgers, he can't stop what the Saints and Packers do, because it's too multiple and distributed.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Belichick, but both plays are low-percentage. And, considering the flukey way both teams made the SB, I can understand Bradshaw's philosophy of taking the go-ahead points when available.
Re: Superbowl XLVI Open Discussion Thread
Declining talent pool really??
Brady is still in his prime, they have a top notch OL, Gronk & Hernandez are in the 2nd years, Welker is in his prime, Wilfork, Mayo, Chung, Spikes, McCourtey are in or are approaching their primes (granted McCourtey had a bad year), they just need work on adding to the defense through the draft & FA this year. Hopefully they keep the 4 early picks and use them mostly on defense. I see no reason they can't be a force next year. They should win the division again. Pitt and Baltimore are mouch more long in the tooth. Houston will be a threat but that's about it. And as long as Norv is in SD, they are not going anywhere. If Gronk was healthy, there is a good chance NE wins yesterday inspite of the defense.
Post new comment