SB Thoughts

[Ring 6]

Bingo.
http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showthread.php?t=76787

Andy predicted a 48-13 blowout. The offense underperformed his prediction by 34 points. The defense underperformed his prediction by 4 points.

I didnt realize there was a standard on this board that you have to respond to every prediction you make after the fact. And your talent or lack of at prediction affects you qualification to offer opinions thereafter.

 

[makewayhomer]

I didnt realize there was a standard on this board that you have to respond to every prediction you make after the fact. And your talent or lack of at prediction affects you qualification to offer opinions thereafter.

Miguels point is very solid - you are pointing fingers in the wrong direction if you think the defense didn't do it's job. they did exactly what we hoped they would do!

every single poster on this board would have been thrilled last Saturday if you told them the Pats would give up only 17 points. Even if we tied our season low in points (20) we still win the SB.

the defense played OUTSTANDING in the SB. they had a bunch of breaks/weird plays go against them in the final drive, and now all of a sudden people want to blame them for the loss.

anybody questioning the defenses play in the SB is playing very little weight on the majority of the game and a whole lot of weight on a bunch of weird plays. well in sports bad luck happens, and there really is no explanation needed besides "**** happens"

 

[richpats]

Miguels point is very solid - you are pointing fingers in the wrong direction if you think the defense didn't do it's job. they did exactly what we hoped they would do!

every single poster on this board would have been thrilled last Saturday if you told them the Pats would give up only 17 points. Even if we tied our season low in points (20) we still win the SB.

the defense played OUTSTANDING in the SB. they had a bunch of breaks/weird plays go against them in the final drive, and now all of a sudden people want to blame them for the loss.

anybody questioning the defenses play in the SB is playing very little weight on the majority of the game and a whole lot of weight on a bunch of weird plays.

What's Belichick's specialty - SITUATIONAL FOOTBALL. Like when you lead by 4 with 2:30 left and the opposition has 83 yards to go, YOU MAKE THE STOP. You can't rationalize, "oh if we give up another TD it's still only 17 points, that's good win or lose!"

 

[makewayhomer]

What's Belichick's specialty - SITUATIONAL FOOTBALL. Like when you lead by 4 with 2:30 left and the opposition has 83 yards to go, YOU MAKE THE STOP. You can't rationalize, "oh if we give up another TD it's still only 17 points, that's good win or lose!"

sigh. STOP THE FOOTBALL. you mean, by having a QB throw a wounded duck lob? or by having him throw a ball right at your CB? twice?

 

[Spiral]

Gay was the worst player on the field in the SB. Manning came in with a plan to find 21 and throw to his guy.

I remember Charlie Weis saying that the matchup between most teams' 3rd WR and the other team's 3rd best CB is usually a mismatch. Gay was pretty fast in college (4.3's), but he doesn't play nearly that fast now. When I saw the Giants convert all those 3rd downs on their first drive, I started to get this sickening feeling in my stomach. The short and intermediate routes over the middle were open all day. I think there was a reason why BB whacked Rodney's salary before this season.

 

[mgteich]

So, you are saying that Belichick got it right and our defensive backfield just didn't quite measure up. And why was Plaxico in one-on-one coverage in the end zone?

sigh. STOP THE FOOTBALL. you mean, by having a QB throw a wounded duck lob? or by having him throw a ball right at your CB? twice?

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Gay was the worst player on the field in the SB. Manning came in with a plan to find 21 and throw to his guy.

That's just not fair. He went off the field with a hyper extended elbow three and a half minutes into what turned out to be the longest drive in Superbowl history with the Giants still on their own side of the field... 16 plays, 63 yards, 38 on the ground, FG which proved to be their margin of victory. He returned in the next series and played the remainder of the game seriously injured and they didn't score until the 4th quarter and he didn't give up the crucial play in either of their 4th quarter drives, nor was he the guy beaten for 2 TD's.

We lost because the greatest offense in NFL history was ***** slapped in the trenches for two and a half quarters by a DL you didn't think could hold their collective jocks. The worst players on the field in the SB were the NE Patriots Oline and their incompetent assistants, the NE TE's. 5 sacks, 8 knockdowns, untold hits in 21 pressures. That's 50% of NE's total offensive snaps dominated by 4 and occasionally 5 guys you assessed as posing no serious threat to impact a juggernaut passing offense indoors under climate controlled optimum passing conditions. We managed just two scoring drives seperated by two and a half quarters in which we couldn't even sniff the red zone. One of those came before the Giants DL got dialed in, the other came when they were finally, mercifully gassed.

Our defense gave up half as many points on Sunday as they did in the regular season matchup when we only beat them by 3. The problem was the Offense produced considerably less than half as many points.

 

[makewayhomer]

So, you are saying that Belichick got it right and our defensive backfield just didn't quite measure up. And why was Plaxico in one-on-one coverage in the end zone?

yeah, I'm saying BB got it right, and that those plays just didn't go our way in the SB. this stuff happens, we're just used to the bounces going our way.

seriously, how many times out of 100 does Tyree make that catch?? Plaxico was one-on-once b/c we blitzed and we gambled that we could get to Eli before he could make a good throw. we lost the gamble. this happens. it doesnt mean the playcall was awful, it just means that THIS TIME it didn't work out. even if a play has a 90% chance of being successful, sometimes that 10% comes and hits you in the ass. that doesn't make the call wrong, it just means that the nature of probability didn't turn in your favor this time.

this is a concept that some people on this board fail to understand

 

[Ring 6]

Miguels point is very solid - you are pointing fingers in the wrong direction if you think the defense didn't do it's job. they did exactly what we hoped they would do!

every single poster on this board would have been thrilled last Saturday if you told them the Pats would give up only 17 points. Even if we tied our season low in points (20) we still win the SB.

the defense played OUTSTANDING in the SB. they had a bunch of breaks/weird plays go against them in the final drive, and now all of a sudden people want to blame them for the loss.

anybody questioning the defenses play in the SB is playing very little weight on the majority of the game and a whole lot of weight on a bunch of weird plays. well in sports bad luck happens, and there really is no explanation needed besides "**** happens"

I suppose it depends on your standards. Playing overwell, and chalking it up to bad luck isnt acceptable to me.
The perfect season with 2:40 left was in the hands of the defense and they flat out failed.
Did the D 'play well enough to win" I suppose so.
Did they allow a decent amount of points. Sure
Did they play well enough to win if our O had an average day. Sure

But none of those things really matter to me because you don't win SBs statistically. You don't win SBs without each unit having a point where they must come through in the clutch (regardless of what they did all day) and doing so. Our defense was in that position and failed. No matter what happened in the first 57 1/2 minutes, we were 2 1/2 away from a Chamionship, the onus was on the defensive side of the ball, and they failed.
That doesn't make them a bad defense, but considering this makes 2 Championships in a row where the defense surrendered leads for us, the defense is bad IMO, in the most important characteristic: When its win or lose can they come through.

 

[Ring 6]

sigh. STOP THE FOOTBALL. you mean, by having a QB throw a wounded duck lob? or by having him throw a ball right at your CB? twice?

So even though they allowed an 83 yard TD drive in 2 1/2 minutes, even though they FAILED TO BRING MANNING DOWN, and FAILED TO COVER TYREE. Even though they DROPPED potential Ints, they did nothing wrong, and it isnt their fault we lost because they couldn't stop the most important drive of their lives?
Clutch play wins SBs. Clutch players do not think failing in the clutch is OK if you can make excuses.

 

[BPF]

So even though they allowed an 83 yard TD drive in 2 1/2 minutes, even though they FAILED TO BRING MANNING DOWN, and FAILED TO COVER TYREE. Even though they DROPPED potential Ints, they did nothing wrong, and it isnt their fault we lost because they couldn't stop the most important drive of their lives?
Clutch play wins SBs. Clutch players do not think failing in the clutch is OK if you can make excuses.

As Asante was quoted in today's Globe: "No, we basically just broke down and didn't make plays," he said. "I'm never gonna criticize my coaches about things you guys may have thought they did wrong. I thought it was a perfect game plan but we just didn't make the plays."

The players didn't make the plays when they needed to and that's why we lost.

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/articles/2008/02/08/patriots_samuel_wants_to_stay/

 

[makewayhomer]

Playing overwell, and chalking it up to bad luck isnt acceptable to me.

on one hand, you're right - we lost, it doesn't matter how. bad luck or bad skill? who cares, we don't have the trophy.

however, if you are interested in debating WHY we lost, then debating luck vs skill is certainly relevant.

and more importantly, if you are Piolichick, then figuring out WHY we lost is very important. if we lost b/c of pure skill, then changes are needed. if we lost b/c of bad luck, then there's not much you can do about that, and you make slight tweeks instead of philosophical overhauls.

 

[Ring 6]

That's just not fair. He went off the field with a hyper extended elbow three and a half minutes into what turned out to be the longest drive in Superbowl history with the Giants still on their own side of the field... 16 plays, 63 yards, 38 on the ground, FG which proved to be their margin of victory. He returned in the next series and played the remainder of the game seriously injured and they didn't score until the 4th quarter and he didn't give up the crucial play in either of their 4th quarter drives, nor was he the guy beaten for 2 TD's.

We lost because the greatest offense in NFL history was ***** slapped in the trenches for two and a half quarters by a DL you didn't think could hold their collective jocks. The worst players on the field in the SB were the NE Patriots Oline and their incompetent assistants, the NE TE's. 5 sacks, 8 knockdowns, untold hits in 21 pressures. That's 50% of NE's total offensive snaps dominated by 4 and occasionally 5 guys you assessed as posing no serious threat to impact a juggernaut passing offense indoors under climate controlled optimum passing conditions. We managed just two scoring drives seperated by two and a half quarters in which we couldn't even sniff the red zone. One of those came before the Giants DL got dialed in, the other came when they were finally, mercifully gassed.

Our defense gave up half as many points on Sunday as they did in the regular season matchup when we only beat them by 3. The problem was the Offense produced considerably less than half as many points.

The offense carried the team all season. (Not saying the defense NEEDED to be carried, but it was) The entire season came down to 14:52 left with a 4 point lead. From that point the Giants scored 14 points and threw for 152 yards.
Of course the offense did not play well. I guess we just see things differently. To me winning or losing isn't adding up numbers over 60 minutes. Winning or losing comes down to clutch play. And when it was time for clutch play our defense played its poorest. Twice.

As far as Gay, I suggest you rewatch and focus on him. Manning LITERALLY dropped back and look only at whoever Gay was covering. Gay wasn't even close to covering his man on a ton of plays.
Its obvious if you watch that the Giants gameplan in the passing game was to throw to whoever Gay and/or Harrison covered. Interestingly there were MANY plays where Gay and Harrison were side by side. One would allow th eguy to get open and they'd both make the tackle. Clearly the Giants created that so Eli could focus on one area of the field, and if somehow Gay or Harrison got coverage the other one wouldn't.

Watch the game, and watch Gays play before you say criticism of him is unfair. He was terrible.

 

[makewayhomer]

FAILED TO COVER TYREE

LOL.

andy simple question - given that EXACT coverage by Rodney, and that EXACT throw by Eli, how many times out of 100 does Tyree make that catch?

 

[Ring 6]

on one hand, you're right - we lost, it doesn't matter how. bad luck or bad skill? who cares, we don't have the trophy.

however, if you are interested in debating WHY we lost, then debating luck vs skill is certainly relevant.

and more importantly, if you are Piolichick, then figuring out WHY we lost is very important. if we lost b/c of pure skill, then changes are needed. if we lost b/c of bad luck, then there's not much you can do about that, and you make slight tweeks instead of philosophical overhauls.

I do not understand what you consider luck.
The game came down to their offense needing to drive 83 yards in 2:40 to beat us. They succeeded, we failed.
It doesnt matter if the plays were typical, unusual or fluky. The end result is our players couldnt make plays and theirs did.

 

[Ring 6]

LOL.

andy simple question - given that EXACT coverage by Rodney, and that EXACT throw by Eli, how many times out of 100 does Tyree make that catch?

Apparently 100, because he did.
Are you implying Harrisons coverage was good? That ball was in the air a long time. Good coverage would have been intercepted without question. His coverage was so poor he could not even get there to break it up.

 

[makewayhomer]

I do not understand what you consider luck.
.

if an opposing player is put into a spot where he can only make that exact play, say, 10% of the time, and he makes it anyways, thats bad luck.

 

[makewayhomer]

Apparently 100, because he did.
.

yeah, and this is why I put you on ignore in the first place.

you just must be a troll. no sane person would look at that play and think "he makes that catch 100% of the time"

you're incapable of separating "what did happen" from "what was likely to happen"

 

[Ring 6]

yeah, and this is why I put you on ignore in the first place.

you just must be a troll. no sane person would look at that play and think "he makes that catch 100% of the time"

you're incapable of separating "what did happen" from "what was likely to happen"

Yeah, I'm a troll.
Your question is pointless. A game is about making plays. Whether or not you would normally make that play is irelevant.
The Patriots have zero SB wins, or 42 depending on how you look at it, if plays were only made based on what you normally do.
MAKING PLAYS determines games.
You are almost arguing the defense was good in allowing an 83 yard drive in 2:40 because they did everything they could. They didn't come close to that. Manning didn't escape because of luck, he escaped because he didnt tackle him, and because he got away. He made the play, we failed. Tyree didnt catch the ball because of luck he caught it because of skill, and Harrison didn't not defend the play because of luck, he didnt defend it because he played it poorly.

 

[Ring 6]

if an opposing player is put into a spot where he can only make that exact play, say, 10% of the time, and he makes it anyways, thats bad luck.

Who determines what % he can make the play?

You get one opportunity in a competitve sport, you either do it or you fail.
Most NFL games swing on 3-5 plays. You dont win by making the plays that are easy, you win by making the plays that are difficult.