For those who complain about the game plan/adjustments in the 2007 Super Bowl:

[Blizzzard]

He averaged 4.5 ypc that year. In the playoffs, he had 22 carries for 122 (5.55 ypc) against Jacksonville and 25 carries for (again) 122 (4.88 ypc) against San Diego.

The sun shines on even a dogs @ss now and then....

A broken clock is still right 2 times a day...

and any other old cliche you can think of to say that any running back can put up a decent rushing total (notice I didn't say running game) now and again.. but it doesn't prove he is a good runner.

I fully understand what you are saying here Deus, but I think that it would be pretty hard for most NFL caliber RB's to not put up a good rushing total when the opposing team is selling out to stop the most prolific passing offense of all time.

 

[Blizzzard]

You blaming Maroney for running issues in the SB is asinine given that Evans was pointing first to the TEs. Trying to twist this as something where I'm biased is even more asinine.

Remind me again... Which position does Evans play?

Not saying he was wrong. Just saying that if a Back is asked "who's to blame" in the gameplan (running game) I tend to think he wouldn't point to the Running Backs as the first problem

 

[RayClay]

I'm not shocked to read that we planned on running more. Apparently, we couldn't power run successfully. Whether it was the lack of Neal or not, we couldn't string together 2-3 decent running plays in a row. I was a Maroney backer, but he was never consistent. In hindsight, his great S.D. game wasn't a breakthrough, but an exception.

We've got a power runner who's just getting better IMO (I think he's healthy) better TEs and better starters and depth on the Oline (I think Neal was worn out even when "healthy" then) and Polite, if we choose to use him.

When talking about the run, people overlook the factor of just beating on those undersized linemen of the Giants. We'll pass to win, but physical play, as much as defense, wins the big ones.

 

[RayClay]

Remind me again... Which position does Evans play?

Not saying he was wrong. Just saying that if a Back is asked "who's to blame" in the gameplan (running game) I tend to think he wouldn't point to the Running Backs as the first problem

Evans wasn't much of a blocker for his size, more of a possession receiver first fullback.

 

[captain stone]

I agree. That 3rd and 1 sticks in my mind as an underrated turning point in that game.

And another turning point (of many) was what happened after the Pats punted on 4th/1:

Pierre feckin Woods allows Ahmad Bradshaw to take the football away from him.

 

[Harry Yelreh]

Wow - great discussion in this thread.

I think a lot of you gentlemen have hit on one of the great keys for this game: the Pats' running game, and their patience to stick with it.

The Giants' D has been getting a lot of press for their formidability, and rightly so. They've been fantastic lately. But not invincible. They were pretty mediocre against the run all year, and while we hear a lot about how they're playing differently now, their ability to stop the run against Green Bay and San Fran was not impressive. Their ability to force turnovers was, but not their ability to stop the run.

Green Bay averaged 6.4 ypc against the Giants; San Fran 5.4. Granted, a decent portion of that was scramble yardage by the QBs. But Starks and Grant combined for 76 yards on 14 carries for GB, and Hunter and Gore combined for 105 yards on 20 carries for San Fran. That's pretty serious production from the RB spot alone, and it gets overshadowed because of the Giants' pass rush and ability to force turnovers.

I was quite impressed with how New England ran on the Ravens. They key, I suspect, is going to be to find the right balance and not become over-dependent on the run or Brady's arm. Hopefully the Pats have the right back in Green-Ellis: good combo of speed, power, and balance, and the guy just does not fumble (knock on wood).

As for Super Bowl 42, so many things had to come together for the Giants to win that game (and I give them all the credit in the world for making the most of their opportunities), and so many things had to happen for New England to lose it. It all did, obviously. Maroney was a good back in his prime, but it's always been my opinion that a powerful back with a more physical running style - an Antowain Smith, for instance - would have made all the difference and then some in that game.

On a side note, I've always felt that that game was - contrary to popular opinion - one of Brady's finest moments. I remember watching it unfold and in disbelief at how - with all that pressure on him, both physically and mentally, no run game, little protection, playing hurt, etc. - he sucked it up and drove the team to take the 14-10 lead.

Anyway, thanks for the great discussion, guys.

 

[goheels22002]

This is one of the problems I have with us running a lot early in the game.
When we try to establish the run, typically we mix the short pass, and we end up in a lot of good, makable 3rd downs. The dink and dunk approach forces us to convert a ton of 3rd downs to drive the field. This is not the way our offense works best. We can have the start of a good drive and fail on a 3rd and 1-3, just a tipped pass or missed route adjustment.
When our O is working optimally, we are getting 1st on 1st or 2nd down.

In other words, getting into a bunch of 3rd downs makes it tough to convert every one to drive to a score, and when you have an offense that doesn't need to, a game plan that is run or short pass on 1st and 2nd down makes you much easier to defend.
That happened in the first half of this years Giant game, and seems to happen every time the offense isn't lighting up the socreboard.

We all wish the Pats could just get first downs at will. But that ain't gonna happen. The Giants front seven is too good. The Patriots have to attack that front seven and that means running the ball underneath passes and screens.

Getting a bunch of third and short situations keeps the opponent's defense on the field and wears them down and keeps the Patriots' defense off the field. Over the course of the game, this has value against teams like the Giants, Ravens or Niners.

These are very good defenses that do not allow teams like the Patriots to race up and down getting first downs at will. You have to game plan for short gains and take the occasional 10+ yard play when it presents itself with a mismatch or favorable substitution.

 

[SeymourTrophies]

The first area Evans pointed to was tight end.

Yeah, Kyle Brady had an epically bad game, and Watson was always more of a receiver. Brady and Mankins were the worst of the lot. That was the one game where I really wished we still had Big Dan Graham. Not that he would have made a difference when the world around him was ablaze.

 

[SeymourTrophies]

The Giants' front four is very good. Their front seven is just pretty good. That's not Antonio Pierce running the show anymore.