The understated key to the Giants, and the difference between NE and NY - New England Patriots Forums

ivanvamp · 02-06-2012, 08:18 AM

During the Giants' playoff run, there were 10 fumbles (not counting the one nullified by the Pats' penalty). 3 Giant fumbles and 7 opponent fumbles. Creating fumbles is a skill; recovering them, as statisticians will tell you, is essentially a 50/50 proposition. You can be in perfect position to recover it but, because of the shape of the ball, it could bounce totally away from you. So getting a fumble is mostly luck. Anyway, of these 10 fumbles, the Giants recovered *8* of them. All of them in the Super Bowl. Any one of them goes the other way and it's almost certainly the ballgame.

In the two Super Bowls between the two teams, there were 5 fumbles (4 by the Giants, 1 by the Patriots), and *ALL FIVE* were recovered by the Giants.

In the last 3 games between the two teams, there have been 9 fumbles (6 by NY, 3 by NE), and *8* of the 9 were recovered by the Giants. Again, forcing fumbles is a skill (and NE forced more Giant fumbles than NY forced Patriot fumbles). Recovering them is mostly luck, and those numbers I just cited are so far out of whack with what is statistically normal it boggles the mind.

Yes, we can talk about all kinds of things, but in many ways, the difference between these two evenly-matched teams comes down to the weird bounce of an oblong football.

And, frankly, that's a bit harder for me to take than if NY was simply better.

***g650*** · 02-06-2012, 08:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ivanvamp

During the Giants' playoff run, there were 10 fumbles (not counting the one nullified by the Pats' penalty). 3 Giant fumbles and 7 opponent fumbles. Creating fumbles is a skill; recovering them, as statisticians will tell you, is essentially a 50/50 proposition. You can be in perfect position to recover it but, because of the shape of the ball, it could bounce totally away from you. So getting a fumble is mostly luck. Anyway, of these 10 fumbles, the Giants recovered *8* of them. All of them in the Super Bowl. Any one of them goes the other way and it's almost certainly the ballgame.

In the two Super Bowls between the two teams, there were 5 fumbles (4 by the Giants, 1 by the Patriots), and *ALL FIVE* were recovered by the Giants.

In the last 3 games between the two teams, there have been 9 fumbles (6 by NY, 3 by NE), and *8* of the 9 were recovered by the Giants. Again, forcing fumbles is a skill (and NE forced more Giant fumbles than NY forced Patriot fumbles). Recovering them is mostly luck, and those numbers I just cited are so far out of whack with what is statistically normal it boggles the mind.

Yes, we can talk about all kinds of things, but in many ways, the difference between these two evenly-matched teams comes down to the weird bounce of an oblong football.

And, frankly, that's a bit harder for me to take than if NY was simply better.

It seems the Pats also play not to lose. The Giants play to win.

Palm Beach Pats Fan · 02-06-2012, 08:30 AM

If any one of these 9 plays doesn't happen the way they did, we are happier today:

Welker’s drop,
two fumbles that bounce to Giants teammates,
12 men on the field that negates a turnover and allows a TD later,
Ninkovich's offsides penalty that negated a 3rd down stop,
Hernandez’s drop,
Manningham's sideline catch & the TO wasted on a challenge,
the safety,

and Gronkowski’s ankle injury 2 weeks ago.

Oh well…

I am not saying any of them are "flukes" or anything. It is what it is. I'm sure we have won some where the opponent had nine things they could point to that could have turned the tide for them.

The roster is younger, the cap situation is manageable, the talent level is high, and we have capital in draft picks.

No time to let the ball stop rolling.

eom · 02-06-2012, 08:32 AM

That's actually some pretty interesting stuff.

I can't remember this story too well, but there was a former bear on local chicago radio ---- maybe doug buffone.
he said when he was playing he would make a point to haul ass after every fumble and he never gave up chasing those things but maybe 9 would escappe him, but when he finally got that tenth one everybody would say how lucky he was

strongside · 02-06-2012, 08:32 AM

Giants are just more balanced. They remind me of the 03/04 pats. Both those teams were built on tough physical Dline. 34 vs 43 but still it all started upfront with both those teams.

Palm Beach Pats Fan · 02-06-2012, 08:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by g650

It seems the Pats also play not to lose. The Giants play to win.

baloney!

Letting them score a TD and saving a minute of clock was playing to win.

Throwing the ball to Wes Welker at the 20 with 4 minutes left instead of using up clock by unsuccessfully running the ball was playing to win (Sure I would like to be able to ground and pound ala clock-killin' Cory Dillon, but that is not the make-up of our offense right now)

Playing tight coverage vs. dropping back in soft zones was playing to win.

I have no issue with how we played the game, strategically. We just did not make enough good plays.

PatriotFan77 · 02-06-2012, 08:37 AM

All plays aside, Pats just **** the bed.

***g650*** · 02-06-2012, 08:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Palm Beach Pats Fan

baloney!

Letting them score a TD and saving a minute of clock was playing to win.

Throwing the ball to Wes Welker at the 20 with 4 minutes left instead of using up clock by unsuccessfully running the ball was playing to win (Sure I would like to be able to ground and pound ala clock-killin' Cory Dillon, but that is not the make-up of our offense right now)

Playing tight coverage vs. dropping back in soft zones was playing to win.

I have no issue with how we played the game, strategically. We just did not make enough good plays.

That's how I see the Patriots play. Not that I'm complaining

WhiZa · 02-06-2012, 09:33 AM

Herm would like to put his two cents in:

***AndyJohnson*** · 02-13-2012, 10:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ivanvamp

During the Giants' playoff run, there were 10 fumbles (not counting the one nullified by the Pats' penalty). 3 Giant fumbles and 7 opponent fumbles. Creating fumbles is a skill; recovering them, as statisticians will tell you, is essentially a 50/50 proposition. You can be in perfect position to recover it but, because of the shape of the ball, it could bounce totally away from you. So getting a fumble is mostly luck. Anyway, of these 10 fumbles, the Giants recovered *8* of them. All of them in the Super Bowl. Any one of them goes the other way and it's almost certainly the ballgame.

In the two Super Bowls between the two teams, there were 5 fumbles (4 by the Giants, 1 by the Patriots), and *ALL FIVE* were recovered by the Giants.

In the last 3 games between the two teams, there have been 9 fumbles (6 by NY, 3 by NE), and *8* of the 9 were recovered by the Giants. Again, forcing fumbles is a skill (and NE forced more Giant fumbles than NY forced Patriot fumbles). Recovering them is mostly luck, and those numbers I just cited are so far out of whack with what is statistically normal it boggles the mind.

Yes, we can talk about all kinds of things, but in many ways, the difference between these two evenly-matched teams comes down to the weird bounce of an oblong football.

And, frankly, that's a bit harder for me to take than if NY was simply better.

The one Pierre Woods failed to recover in SB 42 was not luck.