SB Experience Pats vs. Giants

[PatsFanSince74]

If experience in the big game means anything, then the Patriots have a big edge over the Giants in SB XLII.

As far as I can see, of the players on the Giants Roster, only Michael Strahan and Amani Toomer have been to one Superbowl each, for a total of two games of SB experience. (Patrick Pass is not listed on their website as being on the Roster, but he would add three more years of experience)

The Patriots, on the other hand, have 20 players on their roster with a total of 43 games of SB experience.

We can't make too much of this, but I think it could be important as to how we play in the first quarter or so of the game, giving us an advantage.

 

[PatsFaninAZ]

We can't make too much of this, but I think it could be important as to how we play in the first quarter or so of the game, giving us an advantage.

I think where it really helps is understanding how long the game is.

Most NFL games are played in about 2:50 or so. The super bowl takes much longer -- over 4 hours. It's a real marathon and can mess with you if you're not prepared for it.

 

[Phil Simms]

If experience in the big game means anything, then the Patriots have a big edge over the Giants in SB XLII.

As far as I can see, of the players on the Giants Roster, only Michael Strahan and Amani Toomer have been to one Superbowl each, for a total of two games of SB experience. (Patrick Pass is not listed on their website as being on the Roster, but he would add three more years of experience)

The Patriots, on the other hand, have 20 players on their roster with a total of 43 games of SB experience.

We can't make too much of this, but I think it could be important as to how we play in the first quarter or so of the game, giving us an advantage.

Hey guys, looking forward to a good competative game, but I don't think the SB experience argument holds much weight. After all, did the Pats have any SB experience when they won their first one? The Rams did that year and it didn't matter.

 

[Wildo7]

Hey guys, looking forward to a good competative game, but I don't think the SB experience argument holds much weight. After all, did the Pats have any SB experience when they won their first one? The Rams did that year and it didn't matter.

No, but I think that many teams who go there for the first time and lose will look back and say that what killed them was that so many were caught up in it and "just happy to be there." I think the Giants have good veteran leadership, but they have a lot of guys who haven't been there before.

 

[Phil Simms]

No, but I think that many teams who go there for the first time and lose will look back and say that what killed them was that so many were caught up in it and "just happy to be there." I think the Giants have good veteran leadership, but they have a lot of guys who haven't been there before.

You make a valid point, but I don't see the Giants being just happy to be there. Maybe the Bears last year, or the Panthers a few years ago fit that mold though.

 

[upstater1]

You make a valid point, but I don't see the Giants being just happy to be there. Maybe the Bears last year, or the Panthers a few years ago fit that mold though.

The Patriots in 2002 did talk about their poor second half and how the length of the game came as a big surprise to a majority of the team.

35 minute breaks at halftime are real killers on the body.

 

[scotphin]

Hey guys, looking forward to a good competative game, but I don't think the SB experience argument holds much weight. After all, did the Pats have any SB experience when they won their first one? The Rams did that year and it didn't matter.

Actually, I believe that the Pats had 9 holdovers from Superbowl XXXI. I don't know if there were any others with experience or not. I think that SB experience does play a factor in the game, but is often overrated.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

Hey guys, looking forward to a good competative game, but I don't think the SB experience argument holds much weight. After all, did the Pats have any SB experience when they won their first one? The Rams did that year and it didn't matter.

Welcome to the board. I think you'll find that folks out here are very tolerant of opponents' views when they are presented politely, but that they don't have much time for trolls or flamethrowers.

As for your comment, I thought that I worded my original post pretty carefully, viz., that we shouldn't make "too much" of experience but that it could give some advantage. I still think that's true. Re XXXVI, the Pats were coached by Belichick who had already won two SB's as a coordinator and so they were well-prepared. Also, the Rams' experience actually worked against them since they came into the game assuming they would win. I don't think you'll find anything like that sentiment among the Patriots who treat every opponent like it was a combination of Lombardi's Packers, Knoll's Steelers and Walsh's niners.

I think that SB experience comes into play in a lot of areas beyond "on the field." Another poster mentioned the unnatural length of the game. Belichick once gave an interview in which he said that things as mundane as the timing and content of the pregame meal have to be adjusted, not to mention knowing how to be at the center of the media and celebrity circus.

I do remember that I knew the Pats were going to win XXXIX when Donovan McNabb got off the plane in Jacksonville operating a Video Camera and saying that he was just happy to be there and when Brady got off the plane carrying a brief case.

 

[DonBlackmon55]

Hey guys, looking forward to a good competative game, but I don't think the SB experience argument holds much weight. After all, did the Pats have any SB experience when they won their first one? The Rams did that year and it didn't matter.

Yes we did......Players like Troy Brown, Bledsoe, Bruschi from 1997 just to name a few. Also, we had a coach who had been to MULTILPLE SB's before

Your point haolds no water. No go back get your facts together any try another attempt, just like your FG kicker :singing:

 

[Phil Simms]

Welcome to the board. I think you'll find that folks out here are very tolerant of opponents' views when they are presented politely, but that they don't have much time for trolls or flamethrowers.

Appreciate it. I have no interest in smack talk with anonymous internet users. I have friends that are Pats fans to argue with if I want that.

I do like to get the oppositions viewpoints as well as give you guys a few things to think about from my point of view.

Win or lose, we both beat the Cowboys this year, so all is good!

 

[DonBlackmon55]

You make a valid point, but I don't see the Giants being just happy to be there. Maybe the Bears last year, or the Panthers a few years ago fit that mold though.

and what makes you think Giants are not just happy to be there ? Are you one of the players or coaches ?

Why would Bears just e happy to make it and not Giants.

Another failed attempt at facts.

SB experience does play a role when teams have players and coaches who KNOW how to handle that circus and pressure of the game, and the length of the game.

These are things Giants have yet to experience with the exception of Toomer and Strahan when your team got blown out by the Ravens

 

[Phil Simms]

and what makes you think Giants are not just happy to be there ? Are you one of the players or coaches ?

Why would Bears just e happy to make it and not Giants.

Another failed attempt at facts.

SB experience does play a role when teams have players and coaches who KNOW how to handle that circus and pressure of the game, and the length of the game.

These are things Giants have yet to experience with the exception of Toomer and Strahan when your team got blown out by the Ravens

Not really interested in arguing with you Don, but where are your facts that SB experience helps? Cause BB said so? Do the stats show that teams with more SB experience win more of the SBs?

Do you really think Coughlin is just happy to be here? BB and TC are cut from the same exact mold, and the Giants (not to mention every team) usually mimic their coach.

 

[DonBlackmon55]

Appreciate it. I have no interest in smack talk with anonymous internet users. I have friends that are Pats fans to argue with if I want that.

I do like to get the oppositions viewpoints as well as give you guys a few things to think about from my point of view.

Win or lose, we both beat the Cowboys this year, so all is good!

ummm we were 1-0 vs Cowboys, Giants were 1-2. You did beat them in the playoffs where it counts.

 

[DonBlackmon55]

Not really interested in arguing with you Don, but where are your facts that SB experience helps? Cause BB said so? Do the stats show that teams with more SB experience win more of the SBs?

Do you really think Coughlin is just happy to be here? BB and TC are cut from the same exact mold, and the Giants (not to mention every team) usually mimic their coach.

Read my response again.....Notice I said it matters when teams have Players and coaches who KNOW how to handle it.

Stats do show that.....namely Steelers, 49ers, Packers(except vs John Elway Btoncos in 98 since Elway was in his 4th or so SB), Cowboys, Redskins, Raiders, Patriots, Giants...lookup how many of these teams SB record in their 2nd SB vs teams that were playing their first

The only exceptions per each era are Vikings, Bills, Broncos....Vikes played their SB's vs experienced teams, Bills lost to Giants(their #2), Redskins(#2), Cowboys (#1, and #2), and Broncos also lost to Redskins(Gibbs #2), Giants(BP #2), 49ers(Walsh #3), Cowboys (#1), Pats in 2nd SB beat Panthers(#1), and 3rd SB beat Eagles(#1)

So, stats do bear this out.

 

[bradmahn]

Belichick said on the Big Show yesterday that experience is pretty overrated (even used the '01 Super Bowl as an example). Experience isn't going to win you a game or give a huge advantage over the opponent. It helps to know what's going to happen and how to handle it, but it's not as big of an advantage as.... say.... having the better team.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

Not really interested in arguing with you Don, but where are your facts that SB experience helps? Cause BB said so? Do the stats show that teams with more SB experience win more of the SBs?

Um, Phil, the "stats" do show that "teams with more SB experience win more of the SB's."

If you look at the 12 teams that have gone to a total of one SB (eight teams) or two SB's (four teams) SB's, their combined record in those games is 5--11 (.313).

If you look at the eight teams that have gone to five SB's (five teams), six SB's (two teams) or eight SB's (one team), their combined record in those games is 28--17 (.622).

 

[bradmahn]

Um, Phil, the "stats" do show that "teams with more SB experience win more of the SB's."

If you look at the 12 teams that have gone to a total of one SB (eight teams) or two SB's (four teams) SB's, their combined record in those games is 5--11 (.313).

If you look at the eight teams that have gone to five SB's (five teams), six SB's (two teams) or eight SB's (one team), their combined record in those games is 28--17 (.622).

Those statistics mean absolutely nothing.

How much experience did the Steelers of '05 have because of the championship teams in the seventies?

 

[PatsFanSince74]

Those statistics mean absolutely nothing.

How much experience did the Steelers of '05 have because of the championship teams in the seventies?

i disagree. four of the steelers appearances occured over a six year period. five of the cowboys appearances occured over one seven year period and three occured over another four year period. four of the forty niners appearances occured over another seven year period. four of the patriots appearances are occuring over a seven year period. there was/is enough continuity of experience in winning SB's on those teams to make a difference, not determine the outcome, but make a difference.

Since the cap went in in 92/93, 12 teams have made either a single appearance in the SB or have made two appearances separated by multiple years. their combined record in those games is 4--11.

 

[Phil Simms]

Um, Phil, the "stats" do show that "teams with more SB experience win more of the SB's."

If you look at the 12 teams that have gone to a total of one SB (eight teams) or two SB's (four teams) SB's, their combined record in those games is 5--11 (.313).

If you look at the eight teams that have gone to five SB's (five teams), six SB's (two teams) or eight SB's (one team), their combined record in those games is 28--17 (.622).

Where is the evidence that SB experience was a cause of those records? Could it be possible that the winners were just the better teams?

I think the real evidence would be to find a bunch of teams that lost a superbowl, learned from it, and came back to win one. If you give a team 5 years to completely turn over, then I can find the Patriots, who were just on the 5 year turn over cutoff point, and they had a new coach and QB. Elway came back but his entire team was turned over. Pittsburgh came back 10 years later with a whole new team. On the other hand, the Rams and Packers sure didnt benefit, nor did the Bills (Rams had a new coach). I only glanced back to the early 90s...the game is quite different from the earlier era, but feel free to check those out on your own, who knows what they show.

 

[Phil Simms]

Hey street. These are mostly good guys here.

Actually, I am hopeful the Patriots are thinking their vast SB experience makes this game a cakewalk and all they have to do is show up and lean on their experience.