The Giants, The Super Bowl, The FEAR!

[supafly]

The thing that worries me is Gronk's health. Ligament damage is not a good thing at all. I was feeling confident yesterday, but with Gronk likely being severely hobbled with ligament damage I'm not sure now. Offensive line is gonna have to be stellar, that's for sure.

I haven't been on here all day, I must have missed something pretty important.

We have proof of ligament damage with Gronkowski, or is that speculation from someone?

I still think he'll play, considering the circumstances, but if it is ligament damage he may not be as effective.

 

[BelichickFan]

I haven't been on here all day, I must have missed something pretty important.

We have proof of ligament damage with Gronkowski, or is that speculation from someone?

That's what's being reported. Of course, any sprain is "ligament damage" so take it FWIW. The fact is he came back into the game for Brady's TD dive and stayed in both blocking and route running for the remaining dozen or so offensive snaps.

 

[BradyToAmendola]

I haven't been on here all day, I must have missed something pretty important.

We have proof of ligament damage with Gronkowski, or is that speculation from someone?

I still think he'll play, considering the circumstances, but if it is ligament damage he may not be as effective.

Ian Rapoport reported it.

Report: Gronkowski has ligament damage in ankle | National Football Post

Thank god we have 2 weeks for this game. The more rest, the better.

 

[Ring 6]

The thing that worries me is Gronk's health. Ligament damage is not a good thing at all. I was feeling confident yesterday, but with Gronk likely being severely hobbled with ligament damage I'm not sure now. Offensive line is gonna have to be stellar, that's for sure.

Yeah, where is this coming from? Do you have a link? I would expect there to be 5 threads by now if it was reported he has ligament damage.
Is this your amateur diagnosis, or do you have facts?

 

[cmasspatsfan]

Brady played like a bonehead on the weekend and by his own admission, agreed post match with his commentary.

Thankfully, he made enough plays and the defense held.

He said he sucked but he didnt have that bad a game, look back at how many third and longs he converted to keep drives alive, yeah, he had the two int's and missed Gronk for a TD, he was probably too jacked up and was overthrowing but it surely wasnt a god awful performance.

 

[supafly]

Please watch the play. It wasn't triple coverage.
Slater ran a post, covered by Pollard. He had inside position on him to the post. Smith was trailing the play and wasn't even a factor in covering Slater, he was more than 5 yards away.
The 3rd defender was covering a different part of the field and ran to the ball when it was in the air and got within about 10-15 yards when the ball got there.
There were 3 players in the camera view, that is not triple coverage.
A good throw was a TD. Watch the play and tell me what happens if Brady throws it to the left hash, instead of behind the WR who has beaten his defender to the inside.

I will concur that it was not the textbook definiton of 'triple coverage,' and that there were 3 guys within about 5-7 yds or so, but it was at least double coverage--or well covered with a safety rolled.

I have heard the 'left hash' argument, but personally am not buying it. I think we both know throwing from midfield (the #1 spot to take a long bomb shot) off of a turnover (the #1 time to try and take a shot) with Slater as the target (the 'only' time anyone has really seen that was the week one long bomb) was incredibly predictable.

Like some others have said, when the player himself admits that he played poorly, I'm not sure what there is to debate?

They very well could've milked the clock, and tried to pick up a couple of first downs to make it a 6 pt game, late in the 4th quarter of the AFCCG. Instead, they ruined what amounted to be a potentially huge game saving INT by Spikes.

I have stuck up for Brady in his playoff performances many times, including the NYG SB and last yr's NYJ game, but I believe he played sub-par on Sunday, with the lowlight being that specific play. We seem to have a difference of opinions, but I would imagine that Brady and Belichick would not make that same playcall...

 

[Patriot Missile]

Under 30? I'd say we need to keep them in the 20-24 range, maybe better. Not saying we can't do it but we can't rely on scoring over 30 on that D

The 49ers can score 17 on them but we can't hang a 30 spot? I am relying on this to happen.

 

[supafly]

He said he sucked but he didnt have that bad a game, look back at how many third and longs he converted to keep drives alive, yeah, he had the two int's and missed Gronk for a TD, he was probably too jacked up and was overthrowing but it surely wasnt a god awful performance.

No, it wasn't a "god awful" performance..at all.

I believe it was a "sub-par" performance though.

The majority of the fanbase considered his 300 yd game with 2 TD's and 1 INT last yr against the Jets a very bad performance (which I do not agree with), so I don't know why many would consider a 230 yd 0 TD and 2 INT performance any better.

 

[ausbacker]

What exactly was boneheaded?

I understand that you're rather simple and that it's already been explained to you by others so I'll leave it at that.

He said he sucked but he didnt have that bad a game, look back at how many third and longs he converted to keep drives alive, yeah, he had the two int's and missed Gronk for a TD, he was probably too jacked up and was overthrowing but it surely wasnt a god awful performance.

The boneheaded plays have been discussed at length in this thread and elsewhere. Brady was average against the Ravens, which says enough about the high level of play he brings on a weekly basis.

 

[Triumph]

Double agreed

The calls into the radio stations of these chicken littles boggles my mind, this is a Tom Brady and Belichick led team for gods sake.

Its pathetic.

Some folks have no faith and are doom and gloomers.

 

[TheBostonStraggler]

It is really necessary to call the QB who just led us to the SB for the 5th time a bonehead because he made 3 poor throws?

Andy, not Brady is a bonehead, he made some boneheaded choices. At least for me there is a big difference. However, all kudos and deference to Tom Brady. Big fan of #12......

 

[supafly]

The 49ers can score 17 on them but we can't hang a 30 spot? I am relying on this to happen.

I am relying on this to happen also.

I don't think there's any reason why we can't assume that there is not a good shot at putting up 30+.

Red zone effeciency is key, and as a poster pointed out, should be more effective against a team other than BAL.

 

[Triumph]

Ian Rapoport reported it.

Report: Gronkowski has ligament damage in ankle | National Football Post

Thank god we have 2 weeks for this game. The more rest, the better.

How is it that this leaked out when the Pats are like the Kremlin about injuries?

I call smoke screen.

 

[Patriot Missile]

The Raven secondary was very good on Sunday. They closed the passing lanes into narrow gaps. I have to wonder if the Giants secondary can do the same? Pats offensive line handled their front 7 handily which I think bodes well for this team in 2 weeks.

 

[cmasspatsfan]

Originally Posted by cmasspatsfan
He said he sucked but he didnt have that bad a game, look back at how many third and longs he converted to keep drives alive, yeah, he had the two int's and missed Gronk for a TD, he was probably too jacked up and was overthrowing but it surely wasnt a god awful performance.

The boneheaded plays have been discussed at length in this thread and elsewhere. Brady was average against the Ravens, which says enough about the high level of play he brings on a weekly basis.

It was certainly well below his capabilities and we've come to expect more from him, I guess Im more reacting to a lot of the calls I heard on the radio today that were saying it was god awful, Brady sucks in the playoffs, Gints will kill us because Brady sucks against the Giants.
Your in Australia do you listen to Boston Sports radio?

 

[Triumph]

The Raven secondary was very good on Sunday. They closed the passing lanes into narrow gaps. I have to wonder if the Giants secondary can do the same? Pats offensive line handled their front 7 handily which I think bodes well for this team in 2 weeks.

The Pats OL and DL manhandled the Ravens. Brady was sacked only once.

Theyre playing great right now.

 

[Ring 6]

I will concur that it was not the textbook definiton of 'triple coverage,' and that there were 3 guys within about 5-7 yds or so, but it was at least double coverage--or well covered with a safety rolled.

Well the 3rd guy was covering someone else until the ball was in the air.
The second guy, whether he was supposed to be covering Slater or not was nowhere near him. If you pretend Pollard isnt there slater would be about the most wide open reciever you have ever seen.

I have heard the 'left hash' argument, but personally am not buying it. I think we both know throwing from midfield (the #1 spot to take a long bomb shot) off of a turnover (the #1 time to try and take a shot) with Slater as the target (the 'only' time anyone has really seen that was the week one long bomb) was incredibly predictable.

What does predictability have to do with it? He was open, he was inside Pollard. If Brady led Slater properly, Pollard couldn't have made a play on the ball.
If Slater kept running without looking at the ball, he would have been to the hash when it came down. Instead the ball was in the middle of the field. With a defender TRAILING him, he had to change direction, right back into the trailing defender.
Whether its predictable or not, its an open receiver and a TD with a good throw. Watch the play, its not really even questionable.

Like some others have said, when the player himself admits that he played poorly, I'm not sure what there is to debate?

He made 3 poor throws that dramatically affected the scoreboard. Of course its not up his standards. That doesnlt mean its appropriate to call him a bonehead.

They very well could've milked the clock, and tried to pick up a couple of first downs to make it a 6 pt game, late in the 4th quarter of the AFCCG. Instead, they ruined what amounted to be a potentially huge game saving INT by Spikes.

Brady didn't call the play. The 1st read was open. If he makes a good throw, the game is over.

I have stuck up for Brady in his playoff performances many times, including the NYG SB and last yr's NYJ game, but I believe he played sub-par on Sunday, with the lowlight being that specific play. We seem to have a difference of opinions, but I would imagine that Brady and Belichick would not make that same playcall...

The receiver was open, and its a TD with a good throw.
That, Gronk and the other pick are 3 bad throws that do equal a sub par day by Bradys standards. That doesn't mean a fan who calls him a bonehead isn't a moron.

 

[BradyToAmendola]

That's what's being reported. Of course, any sprain is "ligament damage" so take it FWIW. The fact is he came back into the game for Brady's TD dive and stayed in both blocking and route running for the remaining dozen or so offensive snaps.

Yeah, that is true. The thing that's more important is if it's a grade 2 or 3. There's no way he's not playing in this game though, hopefully he will be just as effective as he usually is.

 

[Triumph]

The bomb to Slater was a curious call.

He only comes in for the long ball

 

[supafly]

That's what's being reported. Of course, any sprain is "ligament damage" so take it FWIW. The fact is he came back into the game for Brady's TD dive and stayed in both blocking and route running for the remaining dozen or so offensive snaps.

I think he'll play, I am not too worried about that. But I hope he can be as effective as he usually is.

3 of our star offensive players, in 3 different yrs, with 3 different teams....that seems like a very strange coincidence to me. I wonder what the numeric odds off that happening are?

I believe there was some "decoying" on those last dozen or so offensive snaps, and that is probably my main concern. I hope this isn't Feb 2008 all over again (as negative as that sounds, it's really not meant to be).

We'll need Gronk to be at least 80% at worst, in my opinion anyway.