Welcome to PatsFans.com

SB Experience Pats vs. Giants

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by PatsFanSince74, Jan 22, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. PatsFanSince74

    PatsFanSince74 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2005
    Messages:
    9,806
    Likes Received:
    9
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -1

    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.
    Last edited: Jan 22, 2008
  2. PatsFaninAZ

    PatsFaninAZ Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2006
    Messages:
    4,097
    Likes Received:
    5
    Ratings:
    +5 / 0 / -0

    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.
  3. Phil Simms

    Phil Simms Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2008
    Messages:
    13
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0


    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.
    Last edited: Jan 22, 2008
  4. Wildo7

    Wildo7 Totally Full of It

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,845
    Likes Received:
    28
    Ratings:
    +32 / 2 / -0

    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.
  5. Phil Simms

    Phil Simms Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2008
    Messages:
    13
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    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.
  6. upstater1

    upstater1 Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    12,926
    Likes Received:
    9
    Ratings:
    +9 / 0 / -0

    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.
  7. scotphin

    scotphin Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2007
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    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.
  8. PatsFanSince74

    PatsFanSince74 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2005
    Messages:
    9,806
    Likes Received:
    9
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -1

    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.:D

    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.
    Last edited: Jan 22, 2008
  9. DonBlackmon55

    DonBlackmon55 Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2006
    Messages:
    1,500
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    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:
  10. Phil Simms

    Phil Simms Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2008
    Messages:
    13
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    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!
  11. DonBlackmon55

    DonBlackmon55 Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2006
    Messages:
    1,500
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    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
  12. Phil Simms

    Phil Simms Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2008
    Messages:
    13
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0


    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.
  13. DonBlackmon55

    DonBlackmon55 Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2006
    Messages:
    1,500
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0


    ummm we were 1-0 vs Cowboys, Giants were 1-2. You did beat them in the playoffs where it counts.
  14. DonBlackmon55

    DonBlackmon55 Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2006
    Messages:
    1,500
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    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.
  15. bradmahn

    bradmahn Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2006
    Messages:
    2,008
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    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. ;)
  16. PatsFanSince74

    PatsFanSince74 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2005
    Messages:
    9,806
    Likes Received:
    9
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -1

    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).
    Last edited: Jan 22, 2008
  17. bradmahn

    bradmahn Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2006
    Messages:
    2,008
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    Those statistics mean absolutely nothing.

    How much experience did the Steelers of '05 have because of the championship teams in the seventies?
  18. PatsFanSince74

    PatsFanSince74 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2005
    Messages:
    9,806
    Likes Received:
    9
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -1

    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.
    Last edited: Jan 22, 2008
  19. Phil Simms

    Phil Simms Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2008
    Messages:
    13
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    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.
  20. Phil Simms

    Phil Simms Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2008
    Messages:
    13
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    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. :D :p
  21. PatsFanSince74

    PatsFanSince74 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2005
    Messages:
    9,806
    Likes Received:
    9
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -1


    once again, you put words in my mouth. i never said this was causitive. i only said it was one element among many that should not be taken too far but that suggests an impact on outcomes.

    see my post just above addressing the other issue you raise. the evidence is reasonably clear that teams that play in multiple sb's within defined time frames that are short enough to allow experience to be transferred among players, that these teams have higher sb winning records than other teams. it doesn't say that they are sure to win. it says that the winning percentage is higher.
  22. PatsFanSince74

    PatsFanSince74 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2005
    Messages:
    9,806
    Likes Received:
    9
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -1

    and if you read what i say, that's pretty much all i'm arguing. sb experience impacts some big and little things that can have an impact. it's pretty much a truism that the quality of the team is more important.
  23. bradmahn

    bradmahn Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2006
    Messages:
    2,008
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    The aggregate W/L record is a completely misleading statistic.

    This is the Giants fourth Super Bowl, second in the last eight years, yet they are inexperienced. Again, did you add the Steelers most recent win into the winning percentage? What does the experience the Broncos gained from losing in the seventies have to do with their wins in the '90s?

    The Bills went to four in a row, yet the experience didn't help them. The Cowboys, Vikings, and Broncos in the seventies? All went to multiple Super Bowls and lost more than they won (including the Cowboys).

    Super Bowl experience does not mean anything more than having an idea as to what to expect in the lead up and length of the game. It does not win games (and your statistics paint the picture that you believe it does).

    I just saw your most recent post. Regardless of what you are arguing, the use of those "facts" is wrong. The win/loss percentage of teams that have played in more than five Super Bowls means nothing unless all of those games played occurred in some presupposed time frame that shows that more players than not were on the same Super Bowl teams. I also think that those wins and losses have way more to do with the quality of teams than it does the experience, otherwise the Broncos would have beat the Giants in '86 and the Rams would have beat the Pats in '01. You can run down the lists of Super Bowl champions who beat franchises that had already been there.
    Last edited: Jan 22, 2008
  24. PatsFanSince74

    PatsFanSince74 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2005
    Messages:
    9,806
    Likes Received:
    9
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -1

    no, our vast sb experience suggests that a 14 point underdog can beat the greatest show on turf. however, it also provides a small advantage that belichick or the players will not acknowledge, but that can help.
  25. PatsFanSince74

    PatsFanSince74 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2005
    Messages:
    9,806
    Likes Received:
    9
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -1


    OK. i've made a statistical argument that does not claim to be universal and that certainly doesn't claim to dictate what happens on the field or by luck. it only says that if you look over time, there is a trend.

    i am confident that the facts support this incontrovertibly as i presented them above. please note that what i am arguing doesn't claim universality or causation. it simply says that teams that have more sb experience in their measureable, collective experience TEND to do better in sb's than teams that do not.

    the vikings and bills had a lot of sb experience but, for them, it didn't translate for reasons that their fans will argue for decades (the vikings certainly had the bad luck of playing against some great teams in their sb's).

    however, for the teams that have dominated the sb over the last 42 years, the experience can be statistically correlated to success. all that means is that success is more likely, not that it is a necessary outcome.
  26. PatsFanSince74

    PatsFanSince74 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2005
    Messages:
    9,806
    Likes Received:
    9
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -1

    First of all, thanks. this is a great discussion. but, i actually do argue that proximity of sb experiences is correlated to outcomes. and, of course, the outcome is far more driven by the quality of the team. a regression analysis would attempt to say how much of an outcome can be related to the independent variable, "sb experience within the last seven years." i don't have the time or the inclination to run that regression, but i would bet that it would show that experience in playing sb's within a seven year horizon explains around 20--30% of the outcome. the rest would be immeasureable because it is so intangible. that is all i am arguing.
    Last edited: Jan 22, 2008
  27. PatsFanSince74

    PatsFanSince74 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2005
    Messages:
    9,806
    Likes Received:
    9
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -1

    before you and your buddy get too excited that we're all overconfident out here, you ought to read the thread "for the 'old' Pats Fans."
  28. FrontSeven

    FrontSeven Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2007
    Messages:
    1,464
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    Experience should help with controlling the release and burn-rate of adrenalin.

    It should help in filtering out the many draining distractions leading up to the game, and even going out onto the field.

    It should help with coaches and players not overreacting to things that go wrong or right during the game, panicking or relaxing at the wrong times.
  29. SunnyDenmark

    SunnyDenmark Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2006
    Messages:
    522
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    food for thought for all fans (Pats and Giants)...

    Does experience in high stress situations help (in future similar stress situations) ?? This appears to be the point of contention regarding any advantage of the Pats recent SB experience for a majority of their players.

    Does it help to take the SAT's multiple times?

    How about going to several job interviews over a short period of time ? - even for jobs you really don't want.

    Is it better to rehearse a speech before presenting to a large public crowd?

    Is there a greater chance to pass a drivers test the 2nd or 3rd time?

    I could go on and on...these are all situations most of us have experience with. I think you can see that it DOES have an advantage to have repeated experience in high stress situations. All of these situations (and more), coaches and psychologists advise repetition and simulating the stressfull situation as much as possible. Why would the SB be any different ? Some sports figures are 'big time' players while others just wilt from the pressure. I can't see how the previous experience CAN'T be anything but an advantage.

    I don't even see how this can be debated.....

    Is it a HUGE advantage ?...probably not. Depends on the individual. In combat some rookies throw up and wet themselves. While other rookies are fine.

    But I would take any and every advantage possible....even something as mundane as what kind of food will 'burn longer' for a 4 1/2 hour game (and much longer pre-game) than the usual 3 hour September game.....Belicheck said that they have altered some of there previous SB logistics as some things just did not work out too well.

    Life is about experience, learning from your mistakes and then adapting to what works well...(or you die - see Darwin)..

    Hoping for a good game with no / few injuries and no stupid bogus penalties.
    And oh yeah by the way: GO PATS!
    Last edited: Jan 22, 2008
  30. bradmahn

    bradmahn Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2006
    Messages:
    2,008
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    I'm not going to say experience means a lot in the Super Bowl, so what makes you think I'll say inspiration will have any effect? Have the Patriots not been inspired in the playoffs? Will they not be inspired in the Super Bowl?

    Of course I am concerned that if the Giants come with a great gameplan on both sides of the ball (and STs), play really well, and do all the little things right they'll win, but I have more confidence in the Patriots to do all those things than the Giants.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page