Super Bowl Wrap, Giants Made Plays Patriots Let Opportunities Slip Away - New England Patriots Forums

PatsFans.com Article · 02-06-2012, 03:00 PM

Super Bowl Wrap, Giants Made Plays Patriots Let Opportunities Slip Away
By: Steve Balestrieri

But perhaps the biggest play was the one that didn't get called.The Patriots used it as one of its biggest weapons, keeping opponents off-balance and not allowing them to freely substitute, wearing them down. Yet the Patriots ran hurry up for only 9 of 62...

CLICK HERE TO READ THIS STORY

***rlcarr*** · 02-06-2012, 03:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pat Kirwan

The Patriots used nine snaps of no-huddle in the whole game. Against the Ravens, they employed the usual 35 snaps of no-huddle (just like they did against the Broncos a week earlier). It was a big part of what got New England to the Super Bowl. The Pats had their best drive of the day in the second quarter, when they drove 96 yards on 14 plays to take a 10-9 halftime lead. On this drive, Tom Brady went no-huddle on four snaps, resulting in 30 yards gained. For the game, the nine no-huddle snaps generated 54 yards and a touchdown. Entering the game, I was convinced the Pats would frequently attack with the no-huddle, and I'm sure Giants defensive coordinator Perry Fewell was happy that they didn't.

Some theorize that Bill Belichick was protecting his defense by slowing the game down. This is flawed thinking. Brady has been protecting his defense all year by scoring as many points as possible as fast as he can. I'm not so sure "protecting the defense" was the reason we didn't see the no-huddle more often, but I do know the Giants benefited from being able to substitute pass rushers. Late in the game, the New York pass rush still had the gas to go get Brady.

NFL.com news: Patriots' mystifying game plan, Eli's excellence and much more

DefenseRules · 02-06-2012, 03:06 PM

I guess the Gronk injury hurt the no-huddle?

Patdown93 · 02-06-2012, 03:08 PM

Coulda shoulda woulda. The gameplan was largely fine. The fact is this team needed to make one or two more plays to win and it couldn't. That's it.

***ctpatsfan77*** · 02-06-2012, 03:09 PM

Simple answer, IMO. The no-huddle depends on GRONKnandez, AND it takes a toll on the Pats, too. With GRONK hobbled, they couldn't run it as much as they would have liked.

strongside · 02-06-2012, 03:11 PM

Kirwan is spot on as usual. I'll wait for the answer from Bill...

Patriot Missile · 02-06-2012, 03:14 PM

Not so sure. You would of figured the Pats would of tried to enhance it after the last game. Seattle clobbered the Giants with it, you would figure the Pats could of used it to their advantage at some point. Gronk injury as some suggested could of been key.

PatriotDynasty_12 · 02-06-2012, 03:16 PM

Fu(k you Pollard

TheSparks1 · 02-06-2012, 03:21 PM

This one is easy. The Giants had the ball 37 mins. The Patriots had the ball 22 mins, including only 3 mins in the 1st quarter. Pats run hurry up the entire game, the discrepancy is even greater.

sambam94 · 02-06-2012, 03:22 PM

I think people should check the game log..the answer is clear. Look at how many possessions the Pats had in the 2nd half, the circumstances, and what happened.

1st drive of second half, drove down the field for a TD
2nd drive.- 3 and out, 3rd down sack by Tuck(Brady hurt)
3rd drive - only had ball for 1 minute, INT on 2nd play of 4th quarter.
4th drive- started from own 8 with 9:24 to go...move ball down the field to Giants 44 yard line...drive ended with the Welker, Branch drops.
5th drive- only 57 seconds left