Mark my words: If we rush the ball at least 30 times we will win the Super Bowl

[VrabelJr]

It's as simple as that. So far in the playoffs against the Giants Atlanta, Green Bay, and San Francisco ran the ball against them 21, 23, and 28 times respectively. SF almost managed to beat them.

Lets look at the Giants 7 losses during the regular season:
Washington - 26 rushes
Seattle - 29 rushes
San Francisco - 20 rushes
Philadelphia - 33 rushes
New Orleans - 30 rushes
Green Bay - 28 rushes
Washington #2 - 40 rushes

While not every single game they lost supports my argument you can certainly see a trend. Everyone knew going into the season that the Giants vulnerability was the run game due to injuries and lack of experience at the LB positions. All of a sudden teams decided to stop attacking this.

We have two All-Pro Guards, two great TEs that can block, a Center who has really surprised a lot of us, an RB that knows how to run hard and another RB that is small and elusive. If we don't run the ball that just lets Umenyiora, Tuck, and Pierre-Paul pin their ears back. By running the ball 30+ times we can make them pay for over-pursuing and also set up our passing game. This will also wear out their defense for later in the game and at which point we can really start throwing the ball.

It's time to go old-school in this one, folks. Beat the Giants with the type of game that they used to win championships back in the day. I'm setting the number at 20 rushes. If we have 20 rushes by half time we can do whatever we want to their defense in the second half.

 

[PatsBoy12]

Mark my words: That WILL NOT happen. Sorry, but the Pats are just not that kind of offense and BoB is not that kind of play-caller.

 

[makoute]

I for one would be shocked.

 

[VrabelJr]

Oh, and in the Giants 9 regular season wins teams only rushed the ball more than 30 times twice.

 

[VrabelJr]

Mark my words: That WILL NOT happen. Sorry, but the Pats are just not that kind of offense and BoB is not that kind of play-caller.

I never said we would do this. I just said if we do, we will win.

 

[TheGodInAGreyHoodie]

Hasn't the "establish the run" myth been beaten to death already.

Most teams throw the ball more when they are behind then when they are winning.

Yes, if we run the ball 30 times we will win the game especially if the last 15 of those running plays are in the last 10 minutes of the 4th quarter with a 21 point lead.

 

[PatsBoy12]

I never said we would do this. I just said if we do, we will win.

And I never said that you said it would happen. You made a proposal and I gave you my opinion. Nobody knows what either team's game plan will be.

VrabelJr, I was not attacking you in any way, so there is no need to get defensive. I was merely saying that I do not believe this is something we will see from this offense.

 

[Spiral]

I hope Vollmer is back. I'd love to see Vollmer as RT and Solder and Gronk as TE's, with BJGE ramming it down the throats of the Giants DL. That would set a completely different tone for this game.

 

[VrabelJr]

And I never said that you said it would happen. You made a proposal and I gave you my opinion. Nobody knows what either team's game plan will be.

VrabelJr, I was not attacking you in any way, so there is no need to get defensive. I was merely saying that I do not believe this is something we will see from this offense.

I'm not getting defensive. But I must say you nearly using my post title accompanied with bolded remarks to reply to me is a pretty ********ed move. I have thicker skin than that though. 99% of people on here are just benefitting from internet courage. But anyway...

 

[MSU]

If we score more points than the Giants we will win the Superbowl.

 

[VrabelJr]

Hasn't the "establish the run" myth been beaten to death already.

Most teams throw the ball more when they are behind then when they are winning.

Yes, if we run the ball 30 times we will win the game especially if the last 15 of those running plays are in the last 10 minutes of the 4th quarter with a 21 point lead.

I'll agree we shouldn't be overly infatuated with total rushing numbers. However, at the bottom of my post I also indicate that if 20 of those come before the half we'll be in much better shape. The best way to slow a pass rush frenzy team down is to run the ball against them.

 

[jmt57]

Hasn't the "establish the run" myth been beaten to death already.

Most teams throw the ball more when they are behind then when they are winning.

Yes, if we run the ball 30 times we will win the game especially if the last 15 of those running plays are in the last 10 minutes of the 4th quarter with a 21 point lead.

You beat me to it TGIAGH.

I'm not going to say that running the ball against the Giants is or is not a good plan; I haven't even begun to consider what should or should not work against the Giants yet. But to me the "must run the ball X number of times to win" cliche has been proven to be meaningless; typically teams are running more often because they are winning, not winning because they ran the ball.

Time of possession used to be held up as one of those 'keys to winning the game' cliches on every pregame show, and that too was exposed as myth because turnovers can alter that so dramatically.

If the coaching staff reviews game film and determines that is where the Giants vulnerability is, then fine, go for it. But I'm skeptical to believe that the Patriots should alter their offense based on those numbers, when the quantity of those rushes in each of those games the Giants lost may very well be due in a large part to their opponents attempting to run the clock down after they had a lead.

 

[Wax Frog]

If TB plays like he did yesterday I'll mark my shorts!

 

[PatsBoy12]

I'm not getting defensive. But I must say you nearly using my post title accompanied with bolded remarks to reply to me is a pretty ********ed move. I have thicker skin than that though. 99% of people on here are just benefitting from internet courage. But anyway...

I'll reiterate that I was not attacking you, but take it however you want. I surely am not one to say anything on a message board that I wouldn't say if the person(s) I am debating are sitting right in front of me.

Again, I was simply stating my opinion. That is what people do on message boards. I know that things can get a bit "chippy," and maybe that's why you think I am attacking you. But I assure you I was not. In fact, if you look at my posts, then you'll see that I've never really gone after anyone and my posts are usually benign and sometimes neutral. But alas, take it how you will. I really can't allow myself to become overly concerned with whether or not I upset someone by giving my opinion. I'm more concerned with trying to get my hands on a Gronkowski home (blue) jersey in time for the SB.

 

[PatsFan24]

It's as simple as that. So far in the playoffs against the Giants Atlanta, Green Bay, and San Francisco ran the ball against them 21, 23, and 28 times respectively. SF almost managed to beat them.

Lets look at the Giants 7 losses during the regular season:
Washington - 26 rushes
Seattle - 29 rushes
San Francisco - 20 rushes
Philadelphia - 33 rushes
New Orleans - 30 rushes
Green Bay - 28 rushes
Washington #2 - 40 rushes

While not every single game they lost supports my argument you can certainly see a trend. Everyone knew going into the season that the Giants vulnerability was the run game due to injuries and lack of experience at the LB positions. All of a sudden teams decided to stop attacking this.

We have two All-Pro Guards, two great TEs that can block, a Center who has really surprised a lot of us, an RB that knows how to run hard and another RB that is small and elusive. If we don't run the ball that just lets Umenyiora, Tuck, and Pierre-Paul pin their ears back. By running the ball 30+ times we can make them pay for over-pursuing and also set up our passing game. This will also wear out their defense for later in the game and at which point we can really start throwing the ball.

It's time to go old-school in this one, folks. Beat the Giants with the type of game that they used to win championships back in the day. I'm setting the number at 20 rushes. If we have 20 rushes by half time we can do whatever we want to their defense in the second half.

So keep running it up to 30 times even if it is not effective because of some stats? No thanks. I think the Patriots should do what works well for them and not what works for the Redskins.

 

[Shockt327]

Football myth....

Play calling is dictated by circumstance. More Rushing attempts are simply a result of already having a lead most of the time...

 

[supafly]

So keep running it up to 30 times even if it is not effective because of some stats? No thanks. I think the Patriots should do what works well for them and not what works for the Redskins.

Exactly. For one thing, some of those teams are able and built much better for running the ball--so that makes a big difference.

Also, SF 'almost won' b/c they played tough defense, were at home, and sacked Manning 6 times.

Regardless though, I can appreciate the OP's thoughts, and having ball control would definitely help. The problem I see is that they likely would not run as effectively as most of those other teams.

 

[Wolfpack]

I never said we would do this. I just said if we do, we will win.

Essentially you said "If A, then B." Considering "A" is simply not even remotely in the realm of possibility, then the entire statement becomes nothing more than wasted space.

 

[Wolfpack]

Football myth....

Play calling is dictated by circumstance. More Rushing attempts are simply a result of already having a lead most of the time...

This is 100% accurate and every time I hear one of those "this team wins the game everytime so-and-so gets 20 rushes" it irritates the heck out of me.

 

[Steve1iron]

I think you're right. Ball control is key to beating the Giants. Keep the clock running, wear down their defense and keep Eli and his WR's off the field. It's the kind of strategy people have used against us. Now we should use it against them.

Sometime you just need to do the unexpected.