Why are ALL our SBs close?

[TheRainMaker]

It’s a good question and I think the trend could continue. Aaron Donald will be a nightmare and the best Defensive Lineman the Pats have faced since Strahan and crew in Super Bowl 42. Suh could be more effective since he’s got Donald next to him. Talib is a great CB.

Rams offense will also be a tough task with their zone blocking scheme. If they have success running the ball, it becomes even more difficult defending the boot legs and other play action passes. Cooks has intel on how the Pats play D. Cooks has also had success against the Pats when he was with the Saints (mostly from preseason and joint practices).

I will gladly admit I wrote the Pats DL off after their debacle in Pittsburgh, but they have been rock solid since. Even Elandan Roberts of all people gets no complaints from me.

The final test comes next Sunday.

 

[1960Pats]

NFL Network had Seattle SB on last night and I got nervous watching it even though I knew the outcome! We outplayed them so bad in the first half and should have lead 21 to 7 but Brady threw a pick going in and we let Seattle score a TD on a 30 second 80 yd drive, so it was 14 to 14.

All that got me thinking win or lose we are always in a nail biter! I grew up really watching football from about 1979 to present. Superbowls back then were just awful, never close, always blowouts, teams just making a ton of mistakes and turnovers. Doesnt math take over at some point and the probability says one of these isnt going to be a 3 to 4pt win or loss?

Why cant a team just come out fumble the opening kickoff and basically crap their pants. Just once I dont want to be pacing my living room. Seems crazy these are always so close.

Also saw a stat that shocked me but in 8 SBs we scored 3pts in the first quarter combined! Just once I want to see us come out hot and get the scoring rolling early.

I remember those times when it seemed like every SB was a blowout and I have some thoughts about why the games are closer now.

Back then the teams weren't as prepared to handle the extra time off or the distractions so most times one team handled those things better than the other.

Teams also seem to be better prepared in general these days. Yes, we have the GOAT HC, but all teams are more organized now than they were then.

The difference between teams is also less severe now than then. Other than the Pats we seem to be getting different teams in the SB each year with very few exceptions.

 

[PatsGirl2011]

We actually played good teams in the SB. Except for the Giants, most teams we played were 1 or 2 seeds.

 

[AAGunn]

That’s always one of the mind boggling things to me. How can 8 Super Bowls all basically come down to the final drive of the game? A big blowout win would be awesome.

I will say, one nice thing about the close Pats wins is that it means all the Pats haters get their hopes up, only to get them crushed as they see Brady and company jumping around in joy. If we were up, say, 35-10 in the third quarter, the haters would just turn the game off and put on Netflix or whatever.

I agree -- I treasure the memory of seeing Richard Sherman's face falling, and the Blank and dejected stares of Artie and his wife (especially sweet after their nauseating celebration dance.) It's nerve racking, but I'll take a Pats' comeback to victory over a SB blowout any day.

 

[fourhour]

If NEP opens up the SB like they did the last two games, and this time they MAINTAIN the score in the 2nd half, we may finally have the blowout we're looking for!

GO PATS!

 

[BobDigital]

Because we play in the salary cap era.

A lot of SBs have been close in this era. Also I believe a large part of the issue is that the Pats usually go up against more physically talented teams which they need to squeak by to win. Picking last in the draft all those years has effected the talent they've had in these runs and usually the other team manages to stay in the game by talent alone.

 

[slam]

Because the other teams have stayed away from Super Bowl Eve hookers, blow, and mental breakdowns?

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

They tend to start slow/ feel the opponent out. I think until last year we never scored in the fiirst quarter of a sb under bb, and that was just a fg. So in 8 opening quarters thats a total of 3 points. Its 1/4th of the game. Do that with the best or second best team in the league and blowout is unlikely.

I hope this year is different and follows the trend of the la and kc games with a nice long td drive to start. But im still betting itll be a nail biter

 

[scott99]

Also Denver over Carolina...

I wouldn't call that a blowout. I think it was something like 16-10 Denver, Carolina had the ball trying to drive a long way to tie or even take the lead, but fumbled deep in their own end, Denver scores a late TD (and 2 point conversion I think) to go up 24-10. Though it was close most of the game, it NEVER really felt like Carolina was going to even tie, let alone win. But it wasn't really a blowout, final score makes it look so. But it was a close game for 55+ minutes.

 

[tasmlab]

NFL Network had Seattle SB on last night and I got nervous watching it even though I knew the outcome! We outplayed them so bad in the first half and should have lead 21 to 7 but Brady threw a pick going in and we let Seattle score a TD on a 30 second 80 yd drive, so it was 14 to 14.

All that got me thinking win or lose we are always in a nail biter! I grew up really watching football from about 1979 to present. Superbowls back then were just awful, never close, always blowouts, teams just making a ton of mistakes and turnovers. Doesnt math take over at some point and the probability says one of these isnt going to be a 3 to 4pt win or loss?

Why cant a team just come out fumble the opening kickoff and basically crap their pants. Just once I dont want to be pacing my living room. Seems crazy these are always so close.

Also saw a stat that shocked me but in 8 SBs we scored 3pts in the first quarter combined! Just once I want to see us come out hot and get the scoring rolling early.

Dude, be careful for what you wish for! Blow outs go both ways.

 

[tasmlab]

If NEP opens up the SB like they did the last two games, and this time they MAINTAIN the score in the 2nd half, we may finally have the blowout we're looking for!

GO PATS!

It would be cool. Both Chargers/Chiefs the Pats clammed up on offense and defense for good portions.

 

[Observer]

Dude, be careful for what you wish for! Blow outs go both ways.

Yup, 28-3 was really depressing for a bit

 

[The Brandon Five]

Brady is GOAT but he has a fair amount of quite short, in the End Zone, interceptions in Super Bowls and playoffs for my liking...

Ok like 3 so sue me.

There was also the puzzling heave to Slater in the endzone in the 2012 AFCCG and then the pick near the Giants' endzone on bomb to a hobbled Gronk in the next game. I guess you can think of those are glorified punts, but they were both on first down.

 

[Hyped]

Margins of all Pats SB's: L 36, L 14, W 3, W 3, W 3, L 4, L 4, W 4, W 6 (OT), L 8, &???

Average SB margin in BB/Brady era: 4.375 points.

Drives me crazy.....

 

[Hammer of Thor]

Yup, 28-3 was really depressing for a bit

 

[SammyBlueCat]

Other teams draft and develop players that possess Cat like quickness

 

[JayNM]

Every team that reaches the SB is a great team or at least great virtues... its hard to blow out these kind of teams. They'll need to be a in a really bad day and we in a good one

 

[Steve102]

WORTH IT

 

[PatsFanInVa]

The difference between teams is also less severe now than then. Other than the Pats we seem to be getting different teams in the SB each year with very few exceptions.

The interesting part is that we don't generally dominate teams. Some in the playoffs yes, then never in the SB.

What does that tell us -- the unprecedented level of success, but with no clear evidence of being "just better than everybody," (except 2007...[sic])?

1) The Patriots build a team capable of going all the way like clockwork now.

2) They do this without building a prohibitive favorite.

3) It is reasonable to assume that (1) and (2) are related. That is, just like you never get too high or too low, you never go insane and mortgage the future for that one "window" (for example, about 5 years ago people started to say Brady's got a limited "win now" window).

But the Pats do not put all their chips on one number and spin the wheel, mortgaging several future years.

4) It also tells me that there's a huge level of wanting/believing more, to be corny about it. Being on the Patriots isn't about just getting out there and having fun like a kid in the back yard. It's about discipline, quality, and unrelenting preparation to carve out a small advantage. For instance, if this week the Pats have to be sack-happy, that's who they become this week.... and so on.

5) Because (4), the coaches are always ready for plan B, C, and D. Do what works until it stops working - saw a great version of that vs. KC. Conversely if it's not working and you're down 28-3, chill. We'll get it figured out LOL.

So, you get to where something finds a groove and make hay with that. When moved off that dime, as in vs. KC, you try to find the next groove, perhaps letting it become close again in the process. The same happens when you start off on the wrong foot, and keep probing to find what will work.

But if you stop probing for the weak spot, it doesn't work. That's what we have over the other 31 teams in the league. TFB is a pretty decent advantage too... but all in all he's maximized in a "no such thing as quit" setting.

Don't know if that made any sense.

Need game now.

 

[Ivan]

I have no answer for the original question, but the Rams better blow the Patriots out because a close game in the fourth quarter is not going to go their way.