Number of possessions, and why the Pats lost the SB, again

[patsderoer]

The Pats' defense only gave up 19 points to the Giants (2 points came off a safety). And if the Pats didn't have to let the Giants score quickly to have a shot at getting the ball back with time left on the clock, the defense would have most likely given up only 15 points. So your theory is out the window.

If a defense only gives up 15-19 points, it did its job for the most part. Yes, it fell apart on the final drive, but they kept a elite offense in check for most of the game only allowing 12 points until the final minute of the game.

Not quite. It didnt " only" give up 19 points, it gave up tons of yardage and Time. 3 times Patriots started from inside their 10. Brady had to tie the longest drive in Superbowl history to score a TD.
Giants shortest drive was 9 plays long. They had the ball 1 quarter more than the Patriots.

 

[upstater1]

I was saying this all game. I don't give a sh!t if the defense only held the Giants to 21 points because the advantage in time of possession was just as effective as scoring because it didn't allow Brady on the field. The PPG stat is meaningless if the time of possession is lopsided against you.

The safety tilted the field. Without the safety we wouldn't be talking about TOP.

 

[sambam94]

^ that makes no sense....they were backed up inside the 10, it would have been 2nd and 10 without the safety. What if they went 3 and out?..TOP would have been the same. You can't say the safety changed TOP..no guarantee the Pats even get 1 first down there.

 

[The Brandon Five]

^ that makes no sense....they were backed up inside the 10, it would have been 2nd and 10 without the safety. What if they went 3 and out?..TOP would have been the same. You can't say the safety changed TOP..no guarantee the Pats even get 1 first down there.

Three and out (two more plays and a punt) would have taken at least another 60-90 seconds off the clock, so it wouldn't have fixed the TOP problem but it defintely would have ameliorated it.

Running a play with a five-step drop that put your QB deep in the endzone was bad situational football. We had no idea how the pass protection was going to hold up at that point. On that play Vollmer got beat like he stole something.

So we had a bad play call followed up by questionable execution topped off by a horrible call by the officials.

 

[Ice Cold Bruschi]

Pats offense didn't get it done and the ball didn't bounce our way on a few key plays. Case closed. What's mind boggling to me is all the people on this board who think all our problems will be solved with a down field threat. I hope come draft day BB invests in the front seven and O-line best player available with the exception of OT and ILB

 

[upstater1]

^ that makes no sense....they were backed up inside the 10, it would have been 2nd and 10 without the safety. What if they went 3 and out?..TOP would have been the same. You can't say the safety changed TOP..no guarantee the Pats even get 1 first down there.

3 and out? Like they did the other 3 times backed up in their own red zone? The Patriots had drives out of their end zone all night.

I mean, the safety totally tilted the field. The defense was out there the entire first quarter, and their play against the Giants O showed they were tired and running out of gas, especially against the run. They stoned Baltimore and Rice two weeks ago because they weren't gassing like they were in the SB.

 

[Satchboogie3]

Pats offense didn't get it done and the ball didn't bounce our way on a few key plays. Case closed. What's mind boggling to me is all the people on this board who think all our problems will be solved with a down field threat. I hope come draft day BB invests in the front seven and O-line best player available with the exception of OT and ILB

It's NOT just about a deep threat. Here's our WR depth chart:
1. Welker
2. Branch
3. Edellman
4. Ochocinco
5. Underwood
6. Slater

#1 is a slot receiver
#2 needs to retire
#3 is a slot receiver
#4 needs to retire or get traded
#5 doesn't crack the roster on 31 other teams
#6 is a special teamer who can't catch a cold on the few times he manages to get open.

That's a BIG problem...

Also, where did all the screen plays go? This team needs to start putting screen plays back into their current playbook. Use the RBs more in the passing game too for that matter.

 

[sambam94]

^You can't say the Pats would have driven down the field or even gotten 1 first down..no one knows what might have happened.

What "tilted" the field was that the Pats defense couldn't stop the Giants..they scored or trapped the Pats deep in their own end the entire game.

 

[upstater1]

^You can't say the Pats would have driven down the field or even gotten 1 first down..no one knows what might have happened.

What "tilted" the field was that the Pats defense couldn't stop the Giants..they scored or trapped the Pats deep in their own end the entire game.

Sigh.

You're just not getting it.

The Patriots defense was gassed. They spent the whole first quarter on the field. The Giants had made their way down the field and were stopped, and then the defense was right back out there. Get it? After that, they were a wee bit tired.

 

[ivanvamp]

Football is a team game. If the D isn't playing well, the O needs to pick them up. And vice-versa.

Here are each team's drives:

NYG
10 plays, 35 yds, 5:50, punt
9 plays, 78 yds, 5:28, TD
8 plays, 39 yds, 3:39, punt
7 plays, 22 yds, 4:13, punt
(1 play, kneeldown...won't count this one)
10 plays, 45 yds, 4:37, FG
9 plays, 33 yds, 5:01, FG
10 plays, 49 yds, 4:53, punt
9 plays, 88 yds, 2:49, TD

AVERAGE: 9 plays, 49 yds, 4:34, 2.5 pts

NE
1 play, -6 yds, 0:00, safety
10 plays, 60 yds, 4:36, FG
3 plays, 9 yds, 1:27, punt
14 plays, 96 yds, 3:55, TD
8 plays, 79 yds, 3:40, TD
3 plays, -2 yds, 0:31, punt
5 plays, 23 yds, 1:18, INT
11 plays, 48 yds, 5:31, punt
8 plays, 29 yds, 0:57, end of game

AVERAGE: 7 plays, 37 yds, 1:26, 1.7 pts (counting the -2 for the safety)

Now, every drive, the Giants got at least one first down. Even if they didn't go real far, they took time off the clock. But the Pats had 5 of their 9 possessions lasting less than 2 minutes. That does NOT help the defense, because it puts them right back on the field.

I'd suggest that the key point in the game was the 2-possession stretch where NE went 3 plays, -2 yards, 0:31, punt and 5 plays, 23 yds, 1:18, INT. During that time, the Giants got two FG to cut a 17-9 lead down to 17-15. And following that INT the Pats had a HUGE chance to make the play of the game. They forced a Bradshaw fumble, but it bounced right to a Giants' player, keeping the ball from the NE at the NY 10 yard line. The Giants ended up going 10 plays, 49 yards, and using up 4:53 on that drive instead of coughing it up to the Pats, who would have been in prime position to score a TD which would have made it 24-15.

So the D didn't get off the field and usually gave the Pats terrible field position. But the O didn't help the D because they had so many short possessions that gave the ball right back to NY.

 

[Mack Herron]

Nothing was perfect, but the undermanned defense did their job on the scoreboard. The bottom line was 2 horrible QB decisions that turned the ball over to the Giants (safety, int) for extra possessions and TOP. After the Ed Reed int in the Ravens game, it was surprising to see Brady again taking unnecessary risks when each time the smart play was the safe play. The coaches put an enormous amount of responsibility on Brady's shoulders because when you look at the roster, and especially the absence of playmakers on defense, that is where the talent lies. But a turnover deficit will bite you and this time it cost us the championship. Brady simply needs to be smarter with the ball in the playoffs, especially late in games while protecting a lead.

 

[TheComeback]

The Giants defense only played as well as ours did. The difference is that their offense made plays when they had to, and ours made mistakes when they had to make plays. That's the end of the analysis for this game.