9:00 Penalty on Tom Brady, Intentional Grounding In Own End Zone. NE 0 - 2 NY 3:29 Victor Cruz 2 Yard Pass From Eli Manning (Lawrence Tynes Kick is Good) NE 0 - 9 NY
13:52 Stephen Gostkowski 29 Yard Field Goal is Good NE 3 - 9 NY 0:15 Danny Woodhead 4 Yard Pass From Tom Brady (Stephen Gostkowski Kick is Good) NE 10 - 9 NY
11:25 Aaron Hernandez 12 Yard Pass From Tom Brady (Stephen Gostkowski Kick is Good) NE 17 - 9 NY 6:47 Lawrence Tynes 38 Yard Field Goal is Good NE 17 - 12 NY 0:40 Lawrence Tynes 33 Yard Field Goal is Good NE 17 - 15 NY
Pats are gonna crush face! Their only problem in the regular season was defense, which they seemed to have figured out. Either way should be an awesome game! I've already got mass ordered burritos and wings in the works
On February 05 2012 09:26 13_Doomblaze_37 wrote: Can there be an option for doesn't care? My team is also the lions so who wins makes no difference to me.
Two worst possible teams to make it. Patriots are going to crush the Giants who shouldn't even be here to begin with. Could have been worse though, thankfully Steelers ain't playin' this year. But definitely add a who cares option to the poll for those who don't like either team....
Pats. long time pats fan, and anyone who thinks Eli is better than Brady is crazy. but we know that this is a team sport, and if you look at it the giants defense is slightly better than that pats, and the pats offence is much better than the g-men. pats have a better passing game by a little more than 20 yards per game, and a better running game, again by about 20 more yards, but the giants ranked last in the run this year. on defense looking at the stats the giants have a slight edge, but are worse at scoring defense allowing 4 more points per game than the pats. so better offence, better defense, better coach, pats should win i expect it to be close. score 28-23 pats
A lot of my friends are cheering hard for the New England, so the logical pick for me would be a Giant upset. I cannot wait to see their faces tomorrow if the prediction comes through!
I really don't care who wins. I just picked the Patriots because... well because. But I will be watching because this is 'Merica! And in 'Merica we watch the superbowl! Gotta continue my 2 year streak of randomly picking the winning team!
@britwrangler the creativity bit is just wrong. if you know both sports in-depth you would realize that american football is much more creative, than soccer.
On February 05 2012 10:50 TheRealViceroy wrote: @britwrangler the creativity bit is just wrong. if you know both sports in-depth you would realize that american football is much more creative, than soccer.
He's saying that the players aren't creative. They're like robots, just executing the shit that they're told to do from the coach.
well even that has changed, if you watch good quarterbacks at the line they read the defense and audible, or "hot-route" (change the receivers pattern) to be more effective, and defenses had started to do this as well. also players have many options to choose from for any play. example could be a tight end who has a block first, then option route, making him read the defense to see if he needs to block, and for how long, then after deciding between which route is open.
although I hve nothing wrong with American football, like whatever you want I dont care really, the thing that always gets me is that there is seperate people who do the attacking and the defending and then one guy who kicks the ball every so often, are they incapable of doing both?
Ill root for the Giants as I think the patriots seem to be in the final every time i hear about the superbowl (not very often)
@SnowyPsilocybin most players played both ways in high school but at a professional level its it much harder due to the complex game-plans. juilean eddleman (who plays for the pats) played a total of 54 snaps in his last game, 27 on defense and 27 on offence. football isnt the only sport to have specializations (goalies, pitchers/hitters in baseball, etc.) but it does take it to a whole new level.
I think the Giants are the best team right now. They're well-rounded with a good defense, good running game, and good passing attack. I think if it becomes a shootout Brady has an edge over Eli, but I don't think the game will go that way. I think the Giants will win by less than a touchdown in a relatively low-scoring game.
On February 05 2012 12:07 DannyJ wrote: If people played on both offense and defense they'd die of exhaustion by half time.
You realise that people play both offense and defense in both Football(soccer) and Rugby?
Edit: Additionally there isn't a stop play every 10seconds for a minute or so like there is in american football
Not sure how comparing it to 2 totally different sports from it really makes any sense. You obviously don't understand the sport so why even argue? Even if a player could physically do it (unlikely unless they sit out alot of plays) each positions in football takes a different type of athleticism and understanding of the game. People need to specialize in what they do.
On February 05 2012 12:07 DannyJ wrote: If people played on both offense and defense they'd die of exhaustion by half time.
You realise that people play both offense and defense in both Football(soccer) and Rugby?
Edit: Additionally there isn't a stop play every 10seconds for a minute or so like there is in american football
yeah but players in football go at 100% while the clock is running. lost of players in soccer jog it out when they arent the focus, or sit around at midfield when their team is on the attack.
Giants are good on both side of the ball. Patriots only have a good offence. All they have to do is smack Brady a few times and Eli and his plethora of weapons should take it home. Giants 30 - 20 Patriots
On February 06 2012 03:31 Klive5ive wrote: Giants are good on both side of the ball. Patriots only have a good offence. All they have to do is smack Brady a few times and Eli and his plethora of weapons should take it home. Giants 30 - 20 Patriots
Uhhh no.
New England ranked 31st during the regular season in defense, sure, but the Giants were 27th. That's not much of a difference. However, in the playoffs, the Patriots defense have ranked 1st overall while the Giants were 4th. Both defenses have made big plays when it matters the most, which is why these two teams are in the Super Bowl. So to say that the Giants are going to win because their defense is awesome while the Pats defense is nonexistent sounds ridiculous. I mean, people used to say that defense wins championships, but I don't even really believe in that anymore. Elite quarterbacks win championships, and catching fire at the right time / defense making big plays wins championships.
I'm an Eagles fan and I really don't want to see the Giants win. Also as a Penn Stater, it will be great to have a Super Bowl winning coach at the helm. If you didn't know, the Patriots Offensive coordinator Bill O'Brien is the new Head Coach of PSU.
Am i allowed to ask about possible streaming possibilites? Can´t watch it on TV (dont have one) and im not sure i am able to pay for the stream on NFL.com (bc it costs money as far as i understood) .
On February 06 2012 03:44 Skeggaba wrote: Am i allowed to ask about possible streaming possibilites? Can´t watch it on TV (dont have one) and im not sure i am able to pay for the stream on NFL.com (bc it costs money as far as i understood) .
On February 06 2012 03:44 Skeggaba wrote: Am i allowed to ask about possible streaming possibilites? Can´t watch it on TV (dont have one) and im not sure i am able to pay for the stream on NFL.com (bc it costs money as far as i understood) .
On February 06 2012 03:31 Klive5ive wrote: Giants are good on both side of the ball. Patriots only have a good offence. All they have to do is smack Brady a few times and Eli and his plethora of weapons should take it home. Giants 30 - 20 Patriots
However, in the playoffs, the Patriots defense have ranked 1st overall while the Giants were 4th.
They played Tim Tebow and Joe Flacco! whilst the Giants played the Packers at home. Talk about lies, dam lies and statistics; that's some epic cherry picking.
Plus you know the Giants had key players back from injury towards the end of the season. We'll see anyway.
On February 06 2012 03:44 Skeggaba wrote: Am i allowed to ask about possible streaming possibilites? Can´t watch it on TV (dont have one) and im not sure i am able to pay for the stream on NFL.com (bc it costs money as far as i understood) .
On February 06 2012 03:44 Skeggaba wrote: Am i allowed to ask about possible streaming possibilites? Can´t watch it on TV (dont have one) and im not sure i am able to pay for the stream on NFL.com (bc it costs money as far as i understood) .
NBC streams all its games, and luckily Super Bowl is on NBC this year!
Does it work for "foreigners" as well? Usually american website restricts it to only US residents ..
I don't know, but it is by far your best bet lol
You can alsoy try www.atdhe.tv but the quality is pretty bad.
Well i could buy it from the swedish site, but 10 dollars and swedish commentators which sucks. Thanks for the help, i guess ill just wait (nfl video works so the stream should be fine as well i guess, just nervous). GOGO GIANTS GO UPSET!
On February 06 2012 03:31 Klive5ive wrote: Giants are good on both side of the ball. Patriots only have a good offence. All they have to do is smack Brady a few times and Eli and his plethora of weapons should take it home. Giants 30 - 20 Patriots
However, in the playoffs, the Patriots defense have ranked 1st overall while the Giants were 4th.
They played Tim Tebow and Joe Flacco; whilst the Giants played the Packers at home! Talk about lies, dam lies and statistics; that's some epic cherry picking.
So because the Giants gave up a lot more yardage to the Packers while Patriots got things done versus a solid running team in Denver (Tebow doesn't fucking matter, Denver was always a running team) and Ray Rice of Ravens (one of the most dangerous running backs and a very competent quarterback in Flacco) somehow make your argument of Giants beating the Pats because of a "good" defense makes sense? I am sorry, but it really doesn't.
I feel that both defenses are playing well enough. Hopefully the Pats offensive line can get its job done protecting Brady.
On February 06 2012 03:31 Klive5ive wrote: Giants are good on both side of the ball. Patriots only have a good offence. All they have to do is smack Brady a few times and Eli and his plethora of weapons should take it home. Giants 30 - 20 Patriots
However, in the playoffs, the Patriots defense have ranked 1st overall while the Giants were 4th.
They played Tim Tebow and Joe Flacco; whilst the Giants played the Packers at home! Talk about lies, dam lies and statistics; that's some epic cherry picking.
So because the Giants gave up a lot more yardage to the Packers while Patriots got things done versus a solid running team in Denver (Tebow doesn't fucking matter, Denver was always a running team) and Ray Rice of Ravens (one of the most dangerous running backs and a very competent quarterback in Flacco) somehow make your argument of Giants beating the Pats because of a "good" defense makes sense? I am sorry, but it really doesn't.
hahaha. denver has a horrible offense and flacco is borderline competent at best (is below average)
LOL the media makes such a big deal about how the patriots have the "worst defense ever to make a superbowl." It's a bunch of BS. Sure they ranked last in yards allowed but they were in the top half in points allowed. Who gives a shit how many yards you give up? What a useless stat. Last time I checked games are decided by the score.
On February 06 2012 03:31 Klive5ive wrote: Giants are good on both side of the ball. Patriots only have a good offence. All they have to do is smack Brady a few times and Eli and his plethora of weapons should take it home. Giants 30 - 20 Patriots
However, in the playoffs, the Patriots defense have ranked 1st overall while the Giants were 4th.
They played Tim Tebow and Joe Flacco; whilst the Giants played the Packers at home! Talk about lies, dam lies and statistics; that's some epic cherry picking.
So because the Giants gave up a lot more yardage to the Packers while Patriots got things done versus a solid running team in Denver (Tebow doesn't fucking matter, Denver was always a running team) and Ray Rice of Ravens (one of the most dangerous running backs and a very competent quarterback in Flacco) somehow make your argument of Giants beating the Pats because of a "good" defense makes sense? I am sorry, but it really doesn't.
You know the weakness of the Patriots defence is their pretty terrible secondary. Tebow couldn't exploit that because his throwing offence is very simple and Flacco actually did put up a surprising amount of points against the Patriots and they almost won the game. How is run defence even relevant when playing the Giants? They barely have a running game. What matter is if you can stop the pass and this season the Patriots have shown that they can't stop the pass. On the other hand the Giants defence shut down Atlanta to 2 points, held Green bay AT HOME to 20 and managed to hold out against the 49ers as well. That's far more impressive than what New England have done.
Flacco played superbly in the first three quarters (better than Tom) and he's certainly above average. What the fuck are you talking about? Can you name 16 quarterbacks who are better than Flacco?
Denver relies on low scoring games with defense playing well and grinding out the clock with its running game. Well, its defense failed so they got destroyed.
On February 06 2012 03:31 Klive5ive wrote: Giants are good on both side of the ball. Patriots only have a good offence. All they have to do is smack Brady a few times and Eli and his plethora of weapons should take it home. Giants 30 - 20 Patriots
However, in the playoffs, the Patriots defense have ranked 1st overall while the Giants were 4th.
They played Tim Tebow and Joe Flacco; whilst the Giants played the Packers at home! Talk about lies, dam lies and statistics; that's some epic cherry picking.
So because the Giants gave up a lot more yardage to the Packers while Patriots got things done versus a solid running team in Denver (Tebow doesn't fucking matter, Denver was always a running team) and Ray Rice of Ravens (one of the most dangerous running backs and a very competent quarterback in Flacco) somehow make your argument of Giants beating the Pats because of a "good" defense makes sense? I am sorry, but it really doesn't.
You know the weakness of the Patriots defence is their pretty terrible secondary. Tebow couldn't exploit that because his throwing offence is very simple and Flacco actually did put up a surprising amount of points against the Patriots and they almost won the game. How is run defence even relevant when playing the Giants? They barely have a running game. What matter is if you can stop the pass and this season the Patriots have shown that they can't stop the pass. On the other hand the Giants defence shut down Atlanta to 2 points, held Green bay AT HOME to 20 and managed to hold out against the 49ers as well. That's far more impressive than what New England have done.
The Pats secondary is indeed bad, but the pass-rushers have been playing really well in the playoffs, which has helped cover the secondary. I could say similar things about the Giants. I am not trying to argue that the Pats have a good defense (they don't, lol) but you are making the discrepancy between the Pats D and the Giants D far bigger than it actually is. Giants have good pass-rushers, but their secondary? Lol.
On February 06 2012 04:01 OneOther wrote: Flacco played superbly in the first three quarters (better than Tom) and he's certainly above average. What the fuck are you talking about? Can you name 16 quarterbacks who are better than Flacco?
Denver relies on low scoring games with defense playing well and grinding out the clock with its running game. Well, its defense failed so they got destroyed.
On February 06 2012 04:01 OneOther wrote: Flacco played superbly in the first three quarters (better than Tom) and he's certainly above average. What the fuck are you talking about? Can you name 16 quarterbacks who are better than Flacco?
Denver relies on low scoring games with defense playing well and grinding out the clock with its running game. Well, its defense failed so they got destroyed.
Ya pretty much. He clearly hasn't looked at the list of starting QBs in the NFL recently. Sure Flacco isn't an elite QB but he is definitely above average.
Tony Romo is 4th on the list of best QB ratings....
On February 06 2012 04:00 DEN1ED wrote: LOL the media makes such a big deal about how the patriots have the "worst defense ever to make a superbowl." It's a bunch of BS. Sure they ranked last in yards allowed but they were in the top half in points allowed. Who gives a shit how many yards you give up? What a useless stat. Last time I checked games are decided by the score.
Yeah you can exaggerate or you can call a spade a spade. The Patriots defence is reasonabe overall but lacking especially in pass defence. It's probably not "the worst defence ever" but it's certainly in the bottom half of SuperBowl teams.
On February 06 2012 03:31 Klive5ive wrote: Giants are good on both side of the ball. Patriots only have a good offence. All they have to do is smack Brady a few times and Eli and his plethora of weapons should take it home. Giants 30 - 20 Patriots
Uhhh no.
New England ranked 31st during the regular season in defense, sure, but the Giants were 27th. That's not much of a difference. However, in the playoffs, the Patriots defense have ranked 1st overall while the Giants were 4th. Both defenses have made big plays when it matters the most, which is why these two teams are in the Super Bowl. So to say that the Giants are going to win because their defense is awesome while the Pats defense is nonexistent sounds ridiculous. I mean, people used to say that defense wins championships, but I don't even really believe in that anymore. Elite quarterbacks win championships, and catching fire at the right time / defense making big plays wins championships.
On February 06 2012 04:01 OneOther wrote: Flacco played superbly in the first three quarters (better than Tom) and he's certainly above average. What the fuck are you talking about? Can you name 16 quarterbacks who are better than Flacco?
Denver relies on low scoring games with defense playing well and grinding out the clock with its running game. Well, its defense failed so they got destroyed.
On February 06 2012 04:01 OneOther wrote: Flacco played superbly in the first three quarters (better than Tom) and he's certainly above average. What the fuck are you talking about? Can you name 16 quarterbacks who are better than Flacco?
Denver relies on low scoring games with defense playing well and grinding out the clock with its running game. Well, its defense failed so they got destroyed.
Ya pretty much. He clearly hasn't looked at the list of starting QBs in the NFL recently. Sure Flacco isn't an elite QB but he is definitely above average.
Tony Romo is 4th on the list of best QB ratings....
Wait, you think Romo is a shit QB? Just lol.
And clearly Romo being 4th in QBR means something is wrong with the world, hurr.
On February 06 2012 04:01 OneOther wrote: Flacco played superbly in the first three quarters (better than Tom) and he's certainly above average. What the fuck are you talking about? Can you name 16 quarterbacks who are better than Flacco?
Denver relies on low scoring games with defense playing well and grinding out the clock with its running game. Well, its defense failed so they got destroyed.
Lol that is a pretty epic comeback. You've even got 1 QB to spare!
Any statistic that has Romo at 4th is clearly flawed. Tony Romo isn't shit and sure he puts up good numbers but he isnt even in the top 10 QBs. Maybe once he stops throwing games away.
On February 06 2012 04:01 OneOther wrote: Flacco played superbly in the first three quarters (better than Tom) and he's certainly above average. What the fuck are you talking about? Can you name 16 quarterbacks who are better than Flacco?
Denver relies on low scoring games with defense playing well and grinding out the clock with its running game. Well, its defense failed so they got destroyed.
On February 06 2012 04:01 OneOther wrote: Flacco played superbly in the first three quarters (better than Tom) and he's certainly above average. What the fuck are you talking about? Can you name 16 quarterbacks who are better than Flacco?
Denver relies on low scoring games with defense playing well and grinding out the clock with its running game. Well, its defense failed so they got destroyed.
On February 06 2012 04:01 OneOther wrote: Flacco played superbly in the first three quarters (better than Tom) and he's certainly above average. What the fuck are you talking about? Can you name 16 quarterbacks who are better than Flacco?
Denver relies on low scoring games with defense playing well and grinding out the clock with its running game. Well, its defense failed so they got destroyed.
Lol that is a pretty epic comeback. You've even got 1 QB to spare!
Any statistic that has Romo at 4th is clearly flawed. Tony Romo isn't shit and sure he puts up good numbers but he isnt even in the top 10 QBs. Maybe once he stops throwing games away.
Yeah, you're just delusional if you think Romo isn't at minimum a top 10 in this league. Care to name a QB that isn't: both Manning brothers/Brady/Rodgers/Roethlisburger/Brees/Stafford who is better than him? I'll lol if you say Rivers as he is now. And oh wait, that's only 8 people better than him!
On February 06 2012 04:01 OneOther wrote: Flacco played superbly in the first three quarters (better than Tom) and he's certainly above average. What the fuck are you talking about? Can you name 16 quarterbacks who are better than Flacco?
Denver relies on low scoring games with defense playing well and grinding out the clock with its running game. Well, its defense failed so they got destroyed.
Lol that is a pretty epic comeback. You've even got 1 QB to spare!
Any statistic that has Romo at 4th is clearly flawed. Tony Romo isn't shit and sure he puts up good numbers but he isnt even in the top 10 QBs. Maybe once he stops throwing games away.
Yeah, you're just delusional if you think Romo isn't at minimum a top 10 in this league.
and joe fucking flacco is above average? seriously.
On February 06 2012 04:01 OneOther wrote: Flacco played superbly in the first three quarters (better than Tom) and he's certainly above average. What the fuck are you talking about? Can you name 16 quarterbacks who are better than Flacco?
Denver relies on low scoring games with defense playing well and grinding out the clock with its running game. Well, its defense failed so they got destroyed.
Lol that is a pretty epic comeback. You've even got 1 QB to spare!
Epic comeback? Are you like...serious? I thought you just made a point earlier about statistics being a bad measurement. This is the worst example possible. I don't understand how you make a statistical argument one way then use the same thing the other way hahaha. Ironic much.
You have guys like Moore, Kolb and Cutler (who is a good quarterback but got injured halfway) up there with fewer than 200 passes attempted than Flacco. Vick? 100 fewer passes, fewer touchdowns and more interceptions than Flacco. Same story for Hasselback.
On February 06 2012 04:01 OneOther wrote: Flacco played superbly in the first three quarters (better than Tom) and he's certainly above average. What the fuck are you talking about? Can you name 16 quarterbacks who are better than Flacco?
Denver relies on low scoring games with defense playing well and grinding out the clock with its running game. Well, its defense failed so they got destroyed.
Lol that is a pretty epic comeback. You've even got 1 QB to spare!
Any statistic that has Romo at 4th is clearly flawed. Tony Romo isn't shit and sure he puts up good numbers but he isnt even in the top 10 QBs. Maybe once he stops throwing games away.
Yeah, you're just delusional if you think Romo isn't at minimum a top 10 in this league. Care to name a QB that isn't both Manning brothers/Brady/Roethlisburger/Brees/Stafford who is better than him? I'll lol if you say Rivers as he is now.
Top QBs lead their teams to the playoffs. There is no way cowboys should not make the playoffs with the talent they have and how "awesome" their QB is. Romo can put up all the numbers he wants but until he stops making terrible decisions with the game on the line it doesn't matter.
On February 06 2012 04:01 OneOther wrote: Flacco played superbly in the first three quarters (better than Tom) and he's certainly above average. What the fuck are you talking about? Can you name 16 quarterbacks who are better than Flacco?
Denver relies on low scoring games with defense playing well and grinding out the clock with its running game. Well, its defense failed so they got destroyed.
Lol that is a pretty epic comeback. You've even got 1 QB to spare!
Epic comeback? Are you like...serious? I thought you just made a point earlier about statistics being a bad measurement. This is the worst example possible. I don't understand how you make a statistical argument one way then use the same thing the other way hahaha. Ironic much.
You have guys like Moore, Kolb and Cutler (who is a good quarterback but got injured halfway) up there with fewer than 200 passes attempted than Flacco. Vick? 100 fewer passes, fewer touchdowns and more interceptions than Flacco. Same story for Hasselback.
you use numbers to fight numbers? you ignore flacco's dinky ass 6.6 YPA which means that he has those mediocre TD/INT and 57.6% completion rate even while playing the bus driver? that means he plays safer than even alex fucking smith...and still sucks.
and any team would be stark raving mad to take flacco over andy dalton
On February 06 2012 04:01 OneOther wrote: Flacco played superbly in the first three quarters (better than Tom) and he's certainly above average. What the fuck are you talking about? Can you name 16 quarterbacks who are better than Flacco?
Denver relies on low scoring games with defense playing well and grinding out the clock with its running game. Well, its defense failed so they got destroyed.
Lol that is a pretty epic comeback. You've even got 1 QB to spare!
Any statistic that has Romo at 4th is clearly flawed. Tony Romo isn't shit and sure he puts up good numbers but he isnt even in the top 10 QBs. Maybe once he stops throwing games away.
Yeah, you're just delusional if you think Romo isn't at minimum a top 10 in this league. Care to name a QB that isn't both Manning brothers/Brady/Roethlisburger/Brees/Stafford who is better than him? I'll lol if you say Rivers as he is now.
Top QBs lead their teams to the playoffs. There is no way cowboys should not make the playoffs with the talent they have and how "awesome" their QB is. Romo can put up all the numbers he wants but until he stops making terrible decisions with the game on the line it doesn't matter.
Flacco is like Sanchez, carried by his defense. Tho, if Ravens can get rid of Cam Cameron, I think flacco can progress to be a solid qb. Not a Rodgers/Brady/Brees type, but a qb that can win you some games.
On February 06 2012 04:01 OneOther wrote: Flacco played superbly in the first three quarters (better than Tom) and he's certainly above average. What the fuck are you talking about? Can you name 16 quarterbacks who are better than Flacco?
Denver relies on low scoring games with defense playing well and grinding out the clock with its running game. Well, its defense failed so they got destroyed.
Lol that is a pretty epic comeback. You've even got 1 QB to spare!
Any statistic that has Romo at 4th is clearly flawed. Tony Romo isn't shit and sure he puts up good numbers but he isnt even in the top 10 QBs. Maybe once he stops throwing games away.
Yeah, you're just delusional if you think Romo isn't at minimum a top 10 in this league. Care to name a QB that isn't both Manning brothers/Brady/Roethlisburger/Brees/Stafford who is better than him? I'll lol if you say Rivers as he is now.
Top QBs lead their teams to the playoffs. There is no way cowboys should not make the playoffs with the talent they have and how "awesome" their QB is. Romo can put up all the numbers he wants but until he stops making terrible decisions with the game on the line it doesn't matter.
Wow, are you actually trying to tell me Sanchez and Tebow are better QBs than Romo now because of the 'MAKE playoffs' criteria?
Hahahaha, and it's not like Dallas had a straight up terrible D this year or anything, this coming from someone who lives in fucking New York and watched Wrecks Ryan's defense this year.
And for the record, I believe Flacco has the potential to be far better than he is now for sure.
On February 06 2012 03:44 Skeggaba wrote: Am i allowed to ask about possible streaming possibilites? Can´t watch it on TV (dont have one) and im not sure i am able to pay for the stream on NFL.com (bc it costs money as far as i understood) .
On February 06 2012 04:01 OneOther wrote: Flacco played superbly in the first three quarters (better than Tom) and he's certainly above average. What the fuck are you talking about? Can you name 16 quarterbacks who are better than Flacco?
Denver relies on low scoring games with defense playing well and grinding out the clock with its running game. Well, its defense failed so they got destroyed.
Lol that is a pretty epic comeback. You've even got 1 QB to spare!
Epic comeback? Are you like...serious? I thought you just made a point earlier about statistics being a bad measurement. This is the worst example possible. I don't understand how you make a statistical argument one way then use the same thing the other way hahaha. Ironic much.
You have guys like Moore, Kolb and Cutler (who is a good quarterback but got injured halfway) up there with fewer than 200 passes attempted than Flacco. Vick? 100 fewer passes, fewer touchdowns and more interceptions than Flacco. Same story for Hasselback.
Obviously QB rating is somewhat flawed. But you made it sound like it was impossible to consider Flacco average, like "lol you'll never name 16 QBs better than him" and then the NFLs own rating system has him at number 18. We're miles off topic now.
On February 06 2012 04:01 OneOther wrote: Flacco played superbly in the first three quarters (better than Tom) and he's certainly above average. What the fuck are you talking about? Can you name 16 quarterbacks who are better than Flacco?
Denver relies on low scoring games with defense playing well and grinding out the clock with its running game. Well, its defense failed so they got destroyed.
Lol that is a pretty epic comeback. You've even got 1 QB to spare!
Any statistic that has Romo at 4th is clearly flawed. Tony Romo isn't shit and sure he puts up good numbers but he isnt even in the top 10 QBs. Maybe once he stops throwing games away.
Yeah, you're just delusional if you think Romo isn't at minimum a top 10 in this league. Care to name a QB that isn't both Manning brothers/Brady/Roethlisburger/Brees/Stafford who is better than him? I'll lol if you say Rivers as he is now.
Top QBs lead their teams to the playoffs. There is no way cowboys should not make the playoffs with the talent they have and how "awesome" their QB is. Romo can put up all the numbers he wants but until he stops making terrible decisions with the game on the line it doesn't matter.
Wow, are you actually trying to tell me Sanchez and Tebow are better QBs now because of the 'MAKE playoffs' criteria?
Hahahaha, and it's not like Dallas had a straight up terrible D this year or anything, this coming from someone who lives in fucking New York and watches both the Giants and the Jets.
it's his magic eyeball man. his eyeballs are better than any stat.
don't forget alex smith is beastly too. alex smith, sanchez, TEBOW, and flacco are gods among men. no way none of those teams would drop them in a heartbeat if tony romo came a-calling.
On February 06 2012 04:01 OneOther wrote: Flacco played superbly in the first three quarters (better than Tom) and he's certainly above average. What the fuck are you talking about? Can you name 16 quarterbacks who are better than Flacco?
Denver relies on low scoring games with defense playing well and grinding out the clock with its running game. Well, its defense failed so they got destroyed.
Ya pretty much. He clearly hasn't looked at the list of starting QBs in the NFL recently. Sure Flacco isn't an elite QB but he is definitely above average.
Tony Romo is 4th on the list of best QB ratings....
Wait, you think Romo is a shit QB? Just lol.
And clearly Romo being 4th in QBR means something is wrong with the world, hurr.
Romo is a shit QB. The longer he is the starting QB for Dallas, the better.
And about NE's defense. Look, everyone had the Packers as the favorites to win the Super Bowl going into the playoffs. Guess which team allowed more yards than the Pats? The Packers. No one would say a thing about the Packers defense being terrible though.
Defensive rankings of YPG is stupid. Go off what matters, how many points you allow. The Pats are 15th at 21.4ppg while the Giants are 25th at 25ppg.
This is a very close match up. Neither defense is dominate.
On February 06 2012 04:01 OneOther wrote: Flacco played superbly in the first three quarters (better than Tom) and he's certainly above average. What the fuck are you talking about? Can you name 16 quarterbacks who are better than Flacco?
Denver relies on low scoring games with defense playing well and grinding out the clock with its running game. Well, its defense failed so they got destroyed.
Lol that is a pretty epic comeback. You've even got 1 QB to spare!
Any statistic that has Romo at 4th is clearly flawed. Tony Romo isn't shit and sure he puts up good numbers but he isnt even in the top 10 QBs. Maybe once he stops throwing games away.
Yeah, you're just delusional if you think Romo isn't at minimum a top 10 in this league. Care to name a QB that isn't both Manning brothers/Brady/Roethlisburger/Brees/Stafford who is better than him? I'll lol if you say Rivers as he is now.
Top QBs lead their teams to the playoffs. There is no way cowboys should not make the playoffs with the talent they have and how "awesome" their QB is. Romo can put up all the numbers he wants but until he stops making terrible decisions with the game on the line it doesn't matter.
Wow, are you actually trying to tell me Sanchez and Tebow are better QBs now because of the 'MAKE playoffs' criteria?
Hahahaha, and it's not like Dallas had a straight up terrible D this year or anything, this coming from someone who lives in fucking New York and watches both the Giants and the Jets.
it's his magic eyeball man. his eyeballs are better than any stat.
don't forget alex smith is beastly too. alex smith, sanchez, TEBOW, and flacco are gods among men. no way none of those teams would drop them in a heartbeat if tony romo came a-calling.
Yes, actually watching games is relevant. Stats aren't everything. Do you think teams evaluate their players only based on stats? Romo just has moments where he goes full retard with the game on the line and I certainly wouldn't want that trait in my QB. Just look at game vs the Jets. And ya no way in hell the 49ers would drop Alex Smith for Romo.
On February 06 2012 04:01 OneOther wrote: Flacco played superbly in the first three quarters (better than Tom) and he's certainly above average. What the fuck are you talking about? Can you name 16 quarterbacks who are better than Flacco?
Denver relies on low scoring games with defense playing well and grinding out the clock with its running game. Well, its defense failed so they got destroyed.
Lol that is a pretty epic comeback. You've even got 1 QB to spare!
Any statistic that has Romo at 4th is clearly flawed. Tony Romo isn't shit and sure he puts up good numbers but he isnt even in the top 10 QBs. Maybe once he stops throwing games away.
Yeah, you're just delusional if you think Romo isn't at minimum a top 10 in this league. Care to name a QB that isn't both Manning brothers/Brady/Roethlisburger/Brees/Stafford who is better than him? I'll lol if you say Rivers as he is now.
Top QBs lead their teams to the playoffs. There is no way cowboys should not make the playoffs with the talent they have and how "awesome" their QB is. Romo can put up all the numbers he wants but until he stops making terrible decisions with the game on the line it doesn't matter.
Wow, are you actually trying to tell me Sanchez and Tebow are better QBs now because of the 'MAKE playoffs' criteria?
Hahahaha, and it's not like Dallas had a straight up terrible D this year or anything, this coming from someone who lives in fucking New York and watches both the Giants and the Jets.
it's his magic eyeball man. his eyeballs are better than any stat.
don't forget alex smith is beastly too. alex smith, sanchez, TEBOW, and flacco are gods among men. no way none of those teams would drop them in a heartbeat if tony romo came a-calling.
I would gladly take Alex Smith over Tony Romo. Romo shits away games far too often. Smith has learned to manage the game and won SF that game against the Saints. When Romo gets on the big stage like that, he falls apart.
QBs I would take over Romo: Brady, Peyton, Eli, Vick, Rodgers, Matt Ryan, Stafford, Brees, Roethlisberger, Alex Smith, Cam Newton, Philip Rivers (everyone knows he is better than what happened this season, remember Eli's 25 int season?), Matt Schaub, Andy Dalton, and I will take Andrew Luck as well.
Although I'm not a massive fan, I'll go with what seems to be the safe bet (Pats). Hosting the SB Party at my place this year, I wonder if I randomly switch the game to LiquiD vs EG they would kill me or not.
On February 06 2012 04:31 Slardar wrote: Although I'm not a massive fan, I'll go with what seems to be the safe bet (Pats). Hosting the SB Party at my place this year, I wonder if I randomly switch the game to LiquiD vs EG they would kill me or not.
Well you could surely convince them it's better than Madonna and squeeze some sneaky action in at half time.
On February 06 2012 04:32 Skeggaba wrote: You don't have permission to access "http://player.nbcsports.com/SNFPlayer.html?" on this server. Reference #18.6ffeef50.1328470276.42c62f29
On msnbc...What a dissapointment T_t
Not sure if you can access BBC iplayer in sweden but it will be on BBC1 and you can stream it live. Im going to be finding a less legit way to watch it because the BBC one doesnt have the adverts in between plays, and thats half the fun of the superbowl. Ill post when i have a stream and you can PM me for it if you want. Assuming thats allowed by the mods.
I really want to see Ochocinco catch the game winning touchdown, just for his celebration. Also looking forward to the commercials. Too bad Madonna sucks though.
On February 06 2012 04:01 OneOther wrote: Flacco played superbly in the first three quarters (better than Tom) and he's certainly above average. What the fuck are you talking about? Can you name 16 quarterbacks who are better than Flacco?
Denver relies on low scoring games with defense playing well and grinding out the clock with its running game. Well, its defense failed so they got destroyed.
Lol that is a pretty epic comeback. You've even got 1 QB to spare!
Epic comeback? Are you like...serious? I thought you just made a point earlier about statistics being a bad measurement. This is the worst example possible. I don't understand how you make a statistical argument one way then use the same thing the other way hahaha. Ironic much.
You have guys like Moore, Kolb and Cutler (who is a good quarterback but got injured halfway) up there with fewer than 200 passes attempted than Flacco. Vick? 100 fewer passes, fewer touchdowns and more interceptions than Flacco. Same story for Hasselback.
you use numbers to fight numbers? you ignore flacco's dinky ass 6.6 YPA which means that he has those mediocre TD/INT and 57.6% completion rate even while playing the bus driver? that means he plays safer than even alex fucking smith...and still sucks.
and any team would be stark raving mad to take flacco over andy dalton
okay, then we can agree that the quarterback ratings are terrible. how else would i point out that the statistics are a bad measurement other than pointing out why they are a bad measurement? how do you talk about the sky being blue without talking about sky and blue? what the fuck lol
and i would take his TD-INT ratio and total yards above the QBs I mentioned. So he's still above average.
On February 06 2012 04:01 OneOther wrote: Flacco played superbly in the first three quarters (better than Tom) and he's certainly above average. What the fuck are you talking about? Can you name 16 quarterbacks who are better than Flacco?
Denver relies on low scoring games with defense playing well and grinding out the clock with its running game. Well, its defense failed so they got destroyed.
Lol that is a pretty epic comeback. You've even got 1 QB to spare!
Epic comeback? Are you like...serious? I thought you just made a point earlier about statistics being a bad measurement. This is the worst example possible. I don't understand how you make a statistical argument one way then use the same thing the other way hahaha. Ironic much.
You have guys like Moore, Kolb and Cutler (who is a good quarterback but got injured halfway) up there with fewer than 200 passes attempted than Flacco. Vick? 100 fewer passes, fewer touchdowns and more interceptions than Flacco. Same story for Hasselback.
Obviously QB rating is somewhat flawed. But you made it sound like it was impossible to consider Flacco average, like "lol you'll never name 16 QBs better than him" and then the NFLs own rating system has him at number 18. We're miles off topic now.
Because NFL rating system doesn't care about how many games a QB plays or how many passes he throws. Then where do you draw the arbitrary line of what's considered enough of a sample size? Based on NFL's QB rating, Matt Flynn would be the top quarterback in the league. This is obviously a clear statistical flaw and I am not sure how you manage to skip right over that onto your "epic comeback." Talk about being a statistician when it favors you lol
On February 06 2012 04:01 OneOther wrote: Flacco played superbly in the first three quarters (better than Tom) and he's certainly above average. What the fuck are you talking about? Can you name 16 quarterbacks who are better than Flacco?
Denver relies on low scoring games with defense playing well and grinding out the clock with its running game. Well, its defense failed so they got destroyed.
Lol that is a pretty epic comeback. You've even got 1 QB to spare!
Epic comeback? Are you like...serious? I thought you just made a point earlier about statistics being a bad measurement. This is the worst example possible. I don't understand how you make a statistical argument one way then use the same thing the other way hahaha. Ironic much.
You have guys like Moore, Kolb and Cutler (who is a good quarterback but got injured halfway) up there with fewer than 200 passes attempted than Flacco. Vick? 100 fewer passes, fewer touchdowns and more interceptions than Flacco. Same story for Hasselback.
you use numbers to fight numbers? you ignore flacco's dinky ass 6.6 YPA which means that he has those mediocre TD/INT and 57.6% completion rate even while playing the bus driver? that means he plays safer than even alex fucking smith...and still sucks.
and any team would be stark raving mad to take flacco over andy dalton
okay, then we can agree that the quarterback ratings are terrible. how else would i point out that the statistics are a bad measurement other than pointing out why they are a bad measurement? how do you talk about the sky being blue without talking about sky and blue? what the fuck lol
and i would take his TD-INT ratio and total yards above the QBs I mentioned. So he's still above average.
QBR is a collection of all the stats you talked about, that's why, including TD-INT. TD-INT doesn't mean shit if you complete 4 yards an attempt. you can cherry pick the stats within QBR all you want, but TD-INT is not a valid criticism of the QB ratings, that's what i mean. unless you are complaining about how it is weighted, in which case you probably have no idea how much weight it gets.
and no, QBR is fine. there's no better way to talk about stats besides HURR DURR TD-INT IS THE ONLY THING THAT MATTERS (or hurr durr, YPA is the only thing that matters).
On February 06 2012 04:01 OneOther wrote: Flacco played superbly in the first three quarters (better than Tom) and he's certainly above average. What the fuck are you talking about? Can you name 16 quarterbacks who are better than Flacco?
Denver relies on low scoring games with defense playing well and grinding out the clock with its running game. Well, its defense failed so they got destroyed.
Lol that is a pretty epic comeback. You've even got 1 QB to spare!
Epic comeback? Are you like...serious? I thought you just made a point earlier about statistics being a bad measurement. This is the worst example possible. I don't understand how you make a statistical argument one way then use the same thing the other way hahaha. Ironic much.
You have guys like Moore, Kolb and Cutler (who is a good quarterback but got injured halfway) up there with fewer than 200 passes attempted than Flacco. Vick? 100 fewer passes, fewer touchdowns and more interceptions than Flacco. Same story for Hasselback.
Obviously QB rating is somewhat flawed. But you made it sound like it was impossible to consider Flacco average, like "lol you'll never name 16 QBs better than him" and then the NFLs own rating system has him at number 18. We're miles off topic now.
Because NFL rating system doesn't care about how many games a QB plays or how many passes he throws. Then where do you draw the arbitrary line of what's considered enough of a sample size? Based on NFL's QB rating, Matt Flynn would be the top quarterback in the league. This is obviously a clear statistical flaw and I am not sure how you manage to skip right over that onto your "epic comeback." Talk about being a statistician when it favors you lol
um which is why flynn is not on that list? as well as anyone who attempted less than 200 passes?
On February 06 2012 04:01 OneOther wrote: Flacco played superbly in the first three quarters (better than Tom) and he's certainly above average. What the fuck are you talking about? Can you name 16 quarterbacks who are better than Flacco?
Denver relies on low scoring games with defense playing well and grinding out the clock with its running game. Well, its defense failed so they got destroyed.
Lol that is a pretty epic comeback. You've even got 1 QB to spare!
Epic comeback? Are you like...serious? I thought you just made a point earlier about statistics being a bad measurement. This is the worst example possible. I don't understand how you make a statistical argument one way then use the same thing the other way hahaha. Ironic much.
You have guys like Moore, Kolb and Cutler (who is a good quarterback but got injured halfway) up there with fewer than 200 passes attempted than Flacco. Vick? 100 fewer passes, fewer touchdowns and more interceptions than Flacco. Same story for Hasselback.
Obviously QB rating is somewhat flawed. But you made it sound like it was impossible to consider Flacco average, like "lol you'll never name 16 QBs better than him" and then the NFLs own rating system has him at number 18. We're miles off topic now.
Because NFL rating system doesn't care about how many games a QB plays or how many passes he throws. Then where do you draw the arbitrary line of what's considered enough of a sample size? Based on NFL's QB rating, Matt Flynn would be the top quarterback in the league. This is obviously a clear statistical flaw and I am not sure how you manage to skip right over that onto your "epic comeback." Talk about being a statistician when it favors you lol
um which is why flynn is not on that list? as well as anyone who attempted less than 200 passes?
That's what I mean when I say 200 is just an arbitrary number. There's guys who have attempted half the passes Flacco has. Flynn is an extreme example of the arbitrary line I am talking about. No shit he's not on the list
QBR is shit and always has been. Trying to quantify everything just doesn't work out. Quite frankly statistics themselves are just overrated. Watch the games, you will see who the best players are. QBR tells us that Tony Romo is the 4th best QB in the league. I'm sorry, but thats just not true. Anyone who knows anything about football knows this.
On February 06 2012 04:31 Slardar wrote: Although I'm not a massive fan, I'll go with what seems to be the safe bet (Pats). Hosting the SB Party at my place this year, I wonder if I randomly switch the game to LiquiD vs EG they would kill me or not.
1) When does this start? (TL time) 2) Why is everyone hating Giants? (I know nothing about american football) 3) Anyone knows a good hype video for someone who has never watched a minute of american football?
On February 06 2012 05:08 ondik wrote: 1) When does this start? (TL time) 2) Why is everyone hating Giants? (I know nothing about american football) 3) Anyone knows a good hype video for someone who has never watched a minute of american football?
3 hours, 15 minutes from this post
I'd think more people hate on the patriots. That said, go giants.
On February 06 2012 05:08 ondik wrote: 1) When does this start? (TL time) 2) Why is everyone hating Giants? (I know nothing about american football) 3) Anyone knows a good hype video for someone who has never watched a minute of american football?
1) In about 3 hours. So 8:30 TL time. 2) IDK, more pats fans I guess? 3)
On February 06 2012 05:08 ondik wrote: 1) When does this start? (TL time) 2) Why is everyone hating Giants? (I know nothing about american football) 3) Anyone knows a good hype video for someone who has never watched a minute of american football?
Unfortunately, they are not playing in the Super Bowl...
Hey guys, I'm an extreme giants fan here, just wanting to add my 2 cents here. While the Ravens did get to the playoffs, in my eyes, they got there on the way of riding Ray Rice and the Defense. Joe Flacco is in a similar situation as Mark Sanchez, where the defense and run game are dominant. However, Joe Flacco in my opinion is a lot better than Mark Sanchez, but I feel that he isn't a great QB. If anything, he is just mediocre, and having a mediocre QB post great numbers against your defense doesn't help how the defense looks. To me, a good quarterback is one who can lead his team within a 2 minute drill and successfully win the game numerous times, and if I Joe Flacco as my QB, I wouldn't trust him at all. To have him beat your defense and post very good numbers, I can't think that Eli won't absolutely destroy it.
On the other hand, the giants Defense has its share as well. The giants had lost numerous cbs throughout the season, even one point losing 5 cbs. Because of this, their secondary was trash during the regular season, but now its pulling itself together. Look at the game vs Green Bay. Aaron Rodgers, the leagues MVP, didn't post huge numbers, and the giants defense held the packers to a mere 20 points. Impressive? i believe so, when the average points per game scored by the packers is way higher. I believe that the giants D is picking itself up at this time, and even Tom Brady won't have a good day. IMO, the giants win the defense discussion hands down, although the pats do have a superior offence.
I have no idea what will be going on etc ... i shall be watching it but i've been informed by my american friends to support the giants so ... "go giants woooo!"
Can't stand the Giants or the Pats, personally (GO LIONS). I'd rather see the Giants take the win over the Pats, although I'd like to see Brady play a solid game because he's a former U of M player.
Whoever takes it, it should be a good game tonight.
Sadly... I don't believe I'll stay up to watch this year (living in EET). I'm just not interested enough in either team (undoubtedly this will result in me missing one of the bests superbowls ever...).
It's nice as a Lions fan to see people jumping on the bandwagon
On February 06 2012 07:20 holy_war wrote: Where the hell are all of these Lions fans coming from? Finally took off the paper bags off your heads lol?
lol they took em off after week 1 i thought heh
On February 06 2012 07:44 On_Slaught wrote: If the Pats are to win, imo, they have to play a perfect game and hope the giants make mistakes. If both teams play anywhere close to their best, I don't think it is close in the Giants favor. The MU is just horrible for the Pats. Worst defense in the history of superbowls and 2 of your offensive weapons are fucked up.
thus far pat's d during the playoffs much better than one would expect considering how bad it was in the regular season (then again one game was vs. the broncos). plus it's not like the giants d is that much better. but yea i feel like this one is the giants(specifically manning's) SB to lose.
Sad how many injuries the Pats have. It's like a perfect storm of shit against the Pats and for the Giants in terms of who is ready to go (giants getting healthy at the right time).
If the Pats are to win, imo, they have to play a perfect game and hope the giants make mistakes. If both teams play anywhere close to their best, I don't think it is close in the Giants favor. The MU is just horrible for the Pats. Worst defense in the history of superbowls and 2 of your offensive weapons are fucked up.
9:00 Penalty on Tom Brady, Intentional Grounding In Own End Zone. NE 0 - 2 NY 3:29 Victor Cruz 2 Yard Pass From Eli Manning (Lawrence Tynes Kick is Good) NE 0 - 9 NY
13:52 Stephen Gostkowski 29 Yard Field Goal is Good NE 3 - 9 NY 0:15 Danny Woodhead 4 Yard Pass From Tom Brady (Stephen Gostkowski Kick is Good) NE 10 - 9 NY
11:25 Aaron Hernandez 12 Yard Pass From Tom Brady (Stephen Gostkowski Kick is Good) NE 17 - 9 NY 6:47 Lawrence Tynes 38 Yard Field Goal is Good NE 17 - 12 NY 0:40 Lawrence Tynes 33 Yard Field Goal is Good NE 17 - 15 NY
I don't get it why they show this outside of the usa. Its a 4hrs ad-break with some wirred handegg throwing between. 99.98% outside the usa doesn't know any player of this "sport". Only reason to tune in is: its 1am and there is absolutly nothing else to do.
On February 06 2012 08:20 Aela wrote: I don't get it why they show this outside of the usa. Its a 4hrs ad-break with some wirred handegg throwing between. 99.98% outside the usa doesn't know any player of this "sport". Only reason to tune in is: its 1am and there is absolutly nothing else to do.
Have you not heard? It's the greatest show on earth.
On February 06 2012 08:20 Aela wrote: I don't get it why they show this outside of the usa. Its a 4hrs ad-break with some wirred handegg throwing between. 99.98% outside the usa doesn't know any player of this "sport". Only reason to tune in is: its 1am and there is absolutly nothing else to do.
I'm glad you decided to contribute to this thread. Your opinion is highly valued. I respect you.
On February 06 2012 08:20 Aela wrote: I don't get it why they show this outside of the usa. Its a 4hrs ad-break with some wirred handegg throwing between. 99.98% outside the usa doesn't know any player of this "sport". Only reason to tune in is: its 1am and there is absolutly nothing else to do.
Why? Because people watch it. Nfl games sell out quite quickly in london every year.
The only NFL game of the year that I watch! 4th or 5th Superbowl in a row I have stayed up for. I would love this sport if it wasn't so stop and start! Think I am rooting for the Giants as they are supposedly the underdogs but as I don't really follow throughout the year I don't really care as long as it is a good game. Enjoy the game everyone!
Why is it that they only play 16 (it's 16 isnt it? Or do I remember wrong?) matches each season, why do they play so few matches, isnt it boring that it's already over in february?
On February 06 2012 08:37 MadNeSs wrote: Why is it that they only play 16 (it's 16 isnt it? Or do I remember wrong?) matches each season, why do they play so few matches, isnt it boring that it's already over in february?
Used to only play 12 matches per season.
Football is very hard on the players, playing more games will increase injuries.
If you get a proxy service you can watch the stream from any country. I am not really sure if I can link to the one I am using here. But I can watch the stream from Sweden without any problem.
On February 06 2012 09:26 ondik wrote: really, can anyone tell me if it's normal to have fat players on the team like patriot's 75 and what's their purpose?
To take up space, and force double teams from the offensive line.
On February 06 2012 09:30 sleepyguy wrote: sorry if this is a noob question, but what is constituted as a pass interference call on defense? can anyone explain the details?
defenders are not allowed to attack a receiver when he is about to catch.
On February 06 2012 09:33 Weson wrote: I am a noob. Is 9 -3 a huge lead?
As a rule of thumb, touchdowns are worth 7 points and field goals are worth 3. This is not absolute (safety, going for 2 point after touchdown, etc), but 95 percent of the time, this is how it works. So, just think in multiples of 7 and/or 3 in order to get an idea as to how each team is doing.
On February 06 2012 09:26 ondik wrote: really, can anyone tell me if it's normal to have fat players on the team like patriot's 75 and what's their purpose?
if you're up for some history/strategy reading, i thought this blog was very insightful about vince wilfork's role in the patriot's defense.
On February 06 2012 09:30 sleepyguy wrote: sorry if this is a noob question, but what is constituted as a pass interference call on defense? can anyone explain the details?
defenders are not allowed to attack a receiver when he is about to catch.
Cannot make contact with an eligible reciever before they make contact with the ball other than incidental contact. Incidental contact is light contact that doesn't significantly interfere with the eligible reciever's ability to catch the ball, or contact that occurs if two eligible receivers are attempting to both catch the ball. Eligible receiver is typically any defensive player and WRs, TEs, and backs on offense. Also, the pass must be deemed "catchable", i.e. Pass interference won't be called on a pass that is underthrown, overthrown, or thrown out of bounds to the point the reciever couldn't have caught it regardless of contact.
even while knowing 80% of the rules,im bored out of my ass and since were not getting the commercials here but some lame espn eu presentation,we probably wont get the halftime show either.ill have to settle for handegg then
On February 06 2012 09:30 sleepyguy wrote: sorry if this is a noob question, but what is constituted as a pass interference call on defense? can anyone explain the details?
defenders are not allowed to attack a receiver when he is about to catch.
Cannot make contact with an eligible reciever before they make contact with the ball other than incidental contact. Incidental contact is light contact that doesn't significantly interfere with the eligible reciever's ability to catch the ball, or contact that occurs if two eligible receivers are attempting to both catch the ball. Eligible receiver is typically any defensive player and WRs, TEs, and backs on offense. Also, the pass must be deemed "catchable", i.e. Pass interference won't be called on a pass that is underthrown, overthrown, or thrown out of bounds to the point the reciever couldn't have caught it regardless of contact.
Damn... that drive. Thought Giants were going to stay up when that awesome punt dropped the ball at the 4. But nope, guess one better not underestimate Tom Brady and the Patriots o.o
On February 06 2012 09:53 Titorelli wrote: First time I watch American football in my life. So exciting and awesome even though I am a giant noob and its 2 am here :D
Same here. I dont really understand much but you can feel that it's something big going on.
On February 06 2012 09:58 Titorelli wrote: How long is the half time break?
I think they said earlier its 7 or 8 mins to assemble the stage, 15 mins or so for the show with Madonna, and another 8-10 mins to disassemble everything.
9:00 Penalty on Tom Brady, Intentional Grounding In Own End Zone. NE 0 - 2 NY 3:29 Victor Cruz 2 Yard Pass From Eli Manning (Lawrence Tynes Kick is Good) NE 0 - 9 NY
13:52 Stephen Gostkowski 29 Yard Field Goal is Good NE 3 - 9 NY 0:15 Danny Woodhead 4 Yard Pass From Tom Brady (Stephen Gostkowski Kick is Good) NE 10 - 9 NY
11:25 Aaron Hernandez 12 Yard Pass From Tom Brady (Stephen Gostkowski Kick is Good) NE 17 - 9 NY 6:47 Lawrence Tynes 38 Yard Field Goal is Good NE 17 - 12 NY 0:40 Lawrence Tynes 33 Yard Field Goal is Good NE 17 - 15 NY
On February 06 2012 10:02 Al Bundy wrote: Unless you're living in the 80's AND you're on LSD, this show is terrible.
if you were on lsd you would probably loose your sight forever due to so much light the only good thing about watching madonna on lsd is you feel you brain melting.
She's clearly much better than the BEP were and I like LFMAO. Tbh, this performance is better than The Who's was too. Maybe not Prince, but this was alright.
It's too bad I can't get the stream to work, nor can I find a stream elsewhere that stays up for longer than 3 minutes... even with the DNS changes etc etc etc.
On February 06 2012 10:26 jcarlson08 wrote: Calling it now. Pat's won't trail for the rest of the game. I don't think the Giants have an answer for the Pat's offense once it's rolling like this.
But the Giants' offense is still very potent vs a very mediocre Pats defense. Long game still.
Ok I've got a question: who is better: brady or manning? I had a friend at school who used to say manning was better but brady seems to be breaking a lot of records so now I'm confused.
On February 06 2012 10:31 dmnum wrote: Ok I've got a question: who is better: brady or manning? I had a friend at school who used to say manning was better but brady seems to be breaking a lot of records so now I'm confused.
Brady is better than Eli, there is a little more discussion necessary when talking about Eli's brother compared to Brady though.
Personally I feel Brady is better than either Manning, but I am a little biased.
On February 06 2012 10:31 dmnum wrote: Ok I've got a question: who is better: brady or manning? I had a friend at school who used to say manning was better but brady seems to be breaking a lot of records so now I'm confused.
He was probably referring to Peyton Manning (Colts QB, Eli's older brother). But Brady is much more accomplished than Eli Manninng.
On February 06 2012 10:31 dmnum wrote: Ok I've got a question: who is better: brady or manning? I had a friend at school who used to say manning was better but brady seems to be breaking a lot of records so now I'm confused.
He was probably referring to Peyton Manning (Colts QB, Eli's older brother). But Brady is much more accomplished than Eli Manninng.
Yep I meant peyton manning. Sorry I didn't know that his brother is also a quarterback.
I find it amusing coke used different movements of beethoven's 5th symphony for each of their dif commercials, but they sped up the end of the 3rd mov. way too much, makes me sad =(
So I'm watching on BBC Iplayer before NASL comes on and they just explained the play sheet(?), pretty interesting, I have no fucking clue how the game works and I prefer rugby so it's interesting to me. The way that the strategy during the game changes and how that is communicated to the team on the fly is pretty cool. I still wish the game didn't pause every damn minute though >< I might enjoy it then.
On February 06 2012 10:31 dmnum wrote: Ok I've got a question: who is better: brady or manning? I had a friend at school who used to say manning was better but brady seems to be breaking a lot of records so now I'm confused.
He was probably referring to Peyton Manning (Colts QB, Eli's older brother). But Brady is much more accomplished than Eli Manninng.
Peyton's got more regular season MVP awards but Brady's got so much bling.... I dunno, tough call. In ten seasons as a starter he's made it to a Super Bowl in HALF OF THEM, which is rediculous, and won it 3 times. You could say that the rings aren't entirely because of him, which is true, but he was named MVP in 2 of the 3 games so....
On February 06 2012 10:49 s3rp wrote: Now i remember why i don't watch alot of footbal too many commercial breaks / timeouts way more then the actual sports.
9:00 Penalty on Tom Brady, Intentional Grounding In Own End Zone. NE 0 - 2 NY 3:29 Victor Cruz 2 Yard Pass From Eli Manning (Lawrence Tynes Kick is Good) NE 0 - 9 NY
13:52 Stephen Gostkowski 29 Yard Field Goal is Good NE 3 - 9 NY 0:15 Danny Woodhead 4 Yard Pass From Tom Brady (Stephen Gostkowski Kick is Good) NE 10 - 9 NY
11:25 Aaron Hernandez 12 Yard Pass From Tom Brady (Stephen Gostkowski Kick is Good) NE 17 - 9 NY 6:47 Lawrence Tynes 38 Yard Field Goal is Good NE 17 - 12 NY 0:40 Lawrence Tynes 33 Yard Field Goal is Good NE 17 - 15 NY
9:00 Penalty on Tom Brady, Intentional Grounding In Own End Zone. NE 0 - 2 NY 3:29 Victor Cruz 2 Yard Pass From Eli Manning (Lawrence Tynes Kick is Good) NE 0 - 9 NY
13:52 Stephen Gostkowski 29 Yard Field Goal is Good NE 3 - 9 NY 0:15 Danny Woodhead 4 Yard Pass From Tom Brady (Stephen Gostkowski Kick is Good) NE 10 - 9 NY
11:25 Aaron Hernandez 12 Yard Pass From Tom Brady (Stephen Gostkowski Kick is Good) NE 17 - 9 NY 6:47 Lawrence Tynes 38 Yard Field Goal is Good NE 17 - 12 NY 0:40 Lawrence Tynes 33 Yard Field Goal is Good NE 17 - 15 NY
9:00 Penalty on Tom Brady, Intentional Grounding In Own End Zone. NE 0 - 2 NY 3:29 Victor Cruz 2 Yard Pass From Eli Manning (Lawrence Tynes Kick is Good) NE 0 - 9 NY
13:52 Stephen Gostkowski 29 Yard Field Goal is Good NE 3 - 9 NY 0:15 Danny Woodhead 4 Yard Pass From Tom Brady (Stephen Gostkowski Kick is Good) NE 10 - 9 NY
11:25 Aaron Hernandez 12 Yard Pass From Tom Brady (Stephen Gostkowski Kick is Good) NE 17 - 9 NY 6:47 Lawrence Tynes 38 Yard Field Goal is Good NE 17 - 12 NY 0:40 Lawrence Tynes 33 Yard Field Goal is Good NE 17 - 15 NY
Why are the Giants zerg?
I don't really have a preference as to why I chose the races I chose.
But if you want to me make something up then:
NE because they're OP and not very liked NY because they have so much potential and yet don't really get recognized.
but like I said, I don't really have preferences, I just went with it
Oh man if the pats lose the game after all of this it will haunt their nightmares forever. Chance to end the game and your best WR drops a wide open pass into your terrible defense being the potential punching bag for Elis legacy.
That's the game. Just have to run a few times and kick the 30yarder. Pats D and O share the blame. Pats had the chance drive to win the game and Brady failed misrably. Defense had chances all games and mistakes ruined everything.
Belichick deserves A LOT of blame for this. Team made a lot of mistakes and clearly wasn't ready enough.
On February 06 2012 11:43 GTR wrote: i think it would have been better to let them take a td, and put your marbles in brady making the comeback with 2 timeouts.
Well, at least the discussions about Brady being better than Montana will finally die. The offense lost this game. The D, while it made some mistakes, played better than you would have expected.
On February 06 2012 11:53 On_Slaught wrote: Well, at least the discussions about Brady being better than Montana will finally die. The offense lost this game. The D, while it made some mistakes, played better than you would have expected.
WOOT Go giants! Great game by both sides, and super damn clutch by Mario Manningham ^^ The two mannings (manning and manningham) are the two mvps in my book, as well as justin tuck being well... justin tuck. :D
9:00 Penalty on Tom Brady, Intentional Grounding In Own End Zone. NE 0 - 2 NY 3:29 Victor Cruz 2 Yard Pass From Eli Manning (Lawrence Tynes Kick is Good) NE 0 - 9 NY
13:52 Stephen Gostkowski 29 Yard Field Goal is Good NE 3 - 9 NY 0:15 Danny Woodhead 4 Yard Pass From Tom Brady (Stephen Gostkowski Kick is Good) NE 10 - 9 NY
11:25 Aaron Hernandez 12 Yard Pass From Tom Brady (Stephen Gostkowski Kick is Good) NE 17 - 9 NY 6:47 Lawrence Tynes 38 Yard Field Goal is Good NE 17 - 12 NY 0:40 Lawrence Tynes 33 Yard Field Goal is Good NE 17 - 15 NY
On February 06 2012 11:53 On_Slaught wrote: Well, at least the discussions about Brady being better than Montana will finally die. The offense lost this game. The D, while it made some mistakes, played better than you would have expected.
Belichick deserves so much blame.
Brady and the WRs deserve the rest.
How are the discussions going to finally die? Gronkowski was playing on one leg and Welker dropped a pivotal pass. Give Brady Montana's or Eli's receivers and it's a win.
That INT would've been a catch if Gronkowski's ankle isn't busted.
On February 06 2012 11:59 red4ce wrote: Yessss! Giants win, and more importantly Tom Brady loses. The question of who is the best quarterback ever is still left unsettled.
Welker's and Branch's drops were both game changing. You cannot drop passes in football. Plain and simple. Those two guys are never going to get over it, just how big those mistakes were.
On February 06 2012 11:53 On_Slaught wrote: Well, at least the discussions about Brady being better than Montana will finally die. The offense lost this game. The D, while it made some mistakes, played better than you would have expected.
Belichick deserves so much blame.
Brady and the WRs deserve the rest.
How are the discussions going to finally die? Gronkowski was playing on one leg and Welker dropped a pivotal pass. Give Brady Montana's or Eli's receivers and it's a win.
Switch the receivers and it's like 49-3. I wouldn't have wanted to watch that.
On February 06 2012 11:59 red4ce wrote: Yessss! Giants win, and more importantly, Tom Brady loses. The question of who is the best quarterback ever is still left unsettled.
On February 06 2012 11:59 JudicatorHammurabi wrote: Welker's and Branch's drops were both game changing. You cannot drop passes in football. Plain and simple. Those two guys are never going to get over it, just how big those mistakes were.
Agreed, the giants played well but those drops were pivotal.
On February 06 2012 11:59 JudicatorHammurabi wrote: Welker's and Branch's drops were both game changing. You cannot drop passes in football. Plain and simple. Those two guys are never going to get over it, just how big those mistakes were.
On February 06 2012 11:59 JudicatorHammurabi wrote: Welker's and Branch's drops were both game changing. You cannot drop passes in football. Plain and simple. Those two guys are never going to get over it, just how big those mistakes were.
Agreed, the giants played well but those drops were pivotal.
The same could be said about Bradshaw going into the endzone. If he had stopped, Brady wouldn't have gotten the chance.
On February 06 2012 11:59 red4ce wrote: Yessss! Giants win, and more importantly, Tom Brady loses. The question of who is the best quarterback ever is still left unsettled.
No
This settles that Montana will not be dethroned.
Though Peyton/Tom will never end
He will never be dethroned montana played the game that was alot less friendly to passing qb's and thrived. Just like settings records in dome stadiums doesn't mean as much. It's a problem every changing sport has with records, doesn't mean they aren't great players it's just different then how it used to be and they aren't quite as comparable.
On February 06 2012 11:59 JudicatorHammurabi wrote: Welker's and Branch's drops were both game changing. You cannot drop passes in football. Plain and simple. Those two guys are never going to get over it, just how big those mistakes were.
Agreed, the giants played well but those drops were pivotal.
The same could be said about Bradshaw going into the endzone. If he had stopped, Brady wouldn't have gotten the chance.
On February 06 2012 11:59 JudicatorHammurabi wrote: Welker's and Branch's drops were both game changing. You cannot drop passes in football. Plain and simple. Those two guys are never going to get over it, just how big those mistakes were.
Agreed, the giants played well but those drops were pivotal.
The same could be said about Bradshaw going into the endzone. If he had stopped, Brady wouldn't have gotten the chance.
4 drops on the last 2 drives isn't quite the same as a RB scoring a TD.
Honestly, I don't mind anyone else winning besides Eli and Dirty Sanchez. Both can suck it.
On February 06 2012 11:59 JudicatorHammurabi wrote: Welker's and Branch's drops were both game changing. You cannot drop passes in football. Plain and simple. Those two guys are never going to get over it, just how big those mistakes were.
Agreed, the giants played well but those drops were pivotal.
The same could be said about Bradshaw going into the endzone. If he had stopped, Brady wouldn't have gotten the chance.
Doing that with 15-17 would have taken balls of steel though. Even if the resulting FG-attempt is 99.99% good.
On February 06 2012 12:05 SoLaR[i.C] wrote: Can somebody please explain why the Giants went for 2 points instead of the standard PAT?
If the score had ended as Giants 22 - Pats 17, then I would've won $1250 from the office number pool....
For some reason unknown to me, the Giants decided to go for 2 points when the score was 21-17...
FUCK ME
If the score was 23-17 with the 2 point conversion, there would be the chance to block a patriots extra point kick if they scored another TD, going into overtime instead of losing 23-24.
On February 06 2012 12:08 MaestrO_ wrote: That game was terrible
care to elaborate?
Not that many outstanding plays, besides a couple of runs and Manningham's catch. But neither offense was explosive and the defenses (at least NYG's) didn't play to their potential. Even before the injuries, Brady was getting a lot of time but just wasn't making much of it.
On February 06 2012 12:05 SoLaR[i.C] wrote: Can somebody please explain why the Giants went for 2 points instead of the standard PAT?
If the score had ended as Giants 22 - Pats 17, then I would've won $1250 from the office number pool....
For some reason unknown to me, the Giants decided to go for 2 points when the score was 21-17...
FUCK ME
Because the difference between being 5 points up and 6 is that if the Pats get a touchdown, you still have a slim chance to go to OT by blocking the PAT.
The difference between being 4 points up and 5 doesn't really mean anything, on the other hand.
All the Brady haters lol. The guy is either tied as the best or is the second best quarterback of all time, and there wouldn't even be an argument if it weren't for Welker dropping that ball on the possession before the Giants scored. Looks like Manning and the lucky horseshoe wedged up his ass have lucked into another championship, although I have to admit, there was no doubt in mind that the Giants would score when Eli got the ball down 17-15. That's something I couldn't say about any other QB in the league.
Not that many outstanding plays, besides a couple of runs and Manningham's catch. But neither offense was explosive and the defenses (at least NYG's) didn't play to their potential. Even before the injuries, Brady was getting a lot of time but just wasn't making much of it.
Unfortunately the secret of the NFL is that 85% of any given game is boring as hell
All the Brady haters lol. The guy is either tied as the best or is the second best quarterback of all time, and there wouldn't even be an argument if it weren't for Welker dropping that ball on the possession before the Giants scored. Looks like Manning and the lucky horseshoe wedged up his ass have lucked into another championship, although I have to admit, there was no doubt in mind that the Giants would score when Eli got the ball down 17-15. That's something I couldn't say about any other QB in the league.
Yeah okay.
QBs better than brady:
Montana Bradshaw Aikman Staubach
And there's probably 3 or 4 more from the pre-SB era.
On February 06 2012 12:11 hunger wrote: All the Brady haters lol. The guy is either tied as the best or is the second best quarterback of all time, and there wouldn't even be an argument if it weren't for Welker dropping that ball on the possession before the Giants scored. Looks like Manning and the lucky horseshoe wedged up his ass have lucked into another championship, although I have to admit, there was no doubt in mind that the Giants would score when Eli got the ball down 17-15. That's something I couldn't say about any other QB in the league.
Yea Patriots didn't have lucky charms, they had cameras working for them. Haaaaaaa.
On February 06 2012 12:11 hunger wrote: All the Brady haters lol. The guy is either tied as the best or is the second best quarterback of all time, and there wouldn't even be an argument if it weren't for Welker dropping that ball on the possession before the Giants scored. Looks like Manning and the lucky horseshoe wedged up his ass have lucked into another championship, although I have to admit, there was no doubt in mind that the Giants would score when Eli got the ball down 17-15. That's something I couldn't say about any other QB in the league.
Yea Patriots didn't have lucky charms, they had cameras working for them. Haaaaaaa.
or Giselle didn't have enuf people praying for Tom kekekeke
LOL Ok. Clearly this discussion is not worth having.
Yeah clearly not. All 4 of them better clutch QBs and superior at winning titles, sorry. None of them were dink-and-dunk QBs either, unlike Brady. Not saying that Tom can't air it out but that's not where he gets his stats from.
If Staubach hadn't had to go head to head with Bradshaw and the Steel Curtain he'd probably be on par with Montana. Also if Jackie hadn't dropped that TD in the end zone... but shit happens.
LOL Ok. Clearly this discussion is not worth having.
Yeah clearly not. All 4 of them better clutch QBs and superior at winning titles, sorry. If Staubach hadn't had to go head to head with Bradshaw and the Steel Curtain he'd probably be on par with Montana. Also if Jackie hadn't dropped that TD in the end zone... but shit happens.
LOL Ok. Clearly this discussion is not worth having.
Yeah clearly not. All 4 of them better clutch QBs and superior at winning titles, sorry. If Staubach hadn't had to go head to head with Bradshaw and the Steel Curtain he'd probably be on par with Montana. Also if Jackie hadn't dropped that TD in the end zone... but shit happens.
LOL Ok. Clearly this discussion is not worth having.
Yeah clearly not. All 4 of them better clutch QBs and superior at winning titles, sorry. If Staubach hadn't had to go head to head with Bradshaw and the Steel Curtain he'd probably be on par with Montana. Also if Jackie hadn't dropped that TD in the end zone... but shit happens.
Yeah? And how many of his games did you watch? Did you review tapes from those pre-SB QBs who are better than Brady too?
LOL Ok. Clearly this discussion is not worth having.
Yeah clearly not. All 4 of them better clutch QBs and superior at winning titles, sorry. None of them were dink-and-dunk QBs either, unlike Brady. Not saying that Tom can't air it out but that's not where he gets his stats from.
If Staubach hadn't had to go head to head with Bradshaw and the Steel Curtain he'd probably be on par with Montana. Also if Jackie hadn't dropped that TD in the end zone... but shit happens.
Yea if only Tom Brady had the best receiver ever to play the game like Montana.
Yea if only Tom Brady had the best receiver ever to play the game like Montana.
Don't be so mean to Wes Welker, he's a great WR as has been duly pointed out many times over the years. Not his fault he isn't Jerry Rice.
Additionally, Tom Brady also had Randy Moss for a few years as well. I seem to recall they set a few records that season. Maybe Jerry Rice great, but completely passing over his talent is dumb as hell.
Edit - On topic of the game I expected a much higher score. But gg to the Giants for pulling out a victory as I thought they would.
On February 06 2012 12:14 VGhost wrote: Bogus MVP award. Eli was solid, but in a game that close I think it goes to the D... I said Tuck before and I stand by that.
Always been a Giants fan, always will be a Giants fan. Born and raised in Jersey, and i'm going to college in Pat's territory, and I love standing up for the G-Men!
As a Dolphins/Giants fan nothing makes me happier than seeing the Pats lose.
However, the shot of Robert Kraft at the end of the game kills me inside. I do not care about anything related to the Patriots one bit but i felt really bad for that man at that point.
Grats now its only 8 months until we get to the start again :|
eagles are gunnin for you giants. nfc east next year is gonna be one tough division, and if washington gets a qb aswell they soon gotta swap some teams around lol.
Aikman and Bradshaw were absolutely, 100% products of the team around them (and even Bradshaw wasn't that great WITH a great team). Neither of those guys are in the top 10, much less top 4 above Brady.
If you want to talk championship winners, then you didn't even mention Graham or Starr. So basically you just looked at a list of starting quarterbacks with superbowl wins and listed them off. Inane.
On February 06 2012 12:32 Mania[K]al wrote: As a Dolphins/Giants fan nothing makes me happier than seeing the Pats lose.
However, the shot of Robert Kraft at the end of the game kills me inside. I do not care about anything related to the Patriots one bit but i felt really bad for that man at that point.
I missed it. I was too busy Tebowing in the middle of the apartment. Link to it?
On February 06 2012 12:32 Mania[K]al wrote: As a Dolphins/Giants fan nothing makes me happier than seeing the Pats lose.
However, the shot of Robert Kraft at the end of the game kills me inside. I do not care about anything related to the Patriots one bit but i felt really bad for that man at that point.
The Patriots were letting Bradshaw score. This would give NE much needed additional time in hopes of putting together a game winning drive (The Pats had 57 seconds after that score). Bradshaw realized they were letting him score and tried to kneel down on the 1/2 yard line so the Giants could run more time off the clock before scoring (The Giants could have easily run an additional 30 seconds off the clock and left Brady with 25 or less seconds to score a TD). However, he was running so hard that when he tried to kneel down, his momentum carried him into the end zone.
On February 06 2012 12:36 Gann1 wrote: could be amended to
QBs better than Brady:
Montana
...and I don't even like Brady.
I'd put P. Manning, Starr, Montana, and maybe Otto Graham above him. Brady wasn't king of his team for those first two superbowl runs the way he was for the third.
The Patriots were letting Bradshaw score. This would give NE much needed additional time in hopes of putting together a game winning drive (The Pats had 57 seconds after that score). Bradshaw realized they were letting him score and tried to kneel down on the 1/2 yard line so the Giants could run more time off the clock before scoring (The Giants could have easily run an additional 30 seconds off the clock and left Brady with 25 or less seconds to score a TD). However, he was running so hard that when he tried to kneel down, his momentum carried him into the end zone.
The Patriots were letting Bradshaw score. This would give NE much needed additional time in hopes of putting together a game winning drive (The Pats had 57 seconds after that score). Bradshaw realized they were letting him score and tried to kneel down on the 1/2 yard line so the Giants could run more time off the clock before scoring (The Giants could have easily run an additional 30 seconds off the clock and left Brady with 25 or less seconds to score a TD). However, he was running so hard that when he tried to kneel down, his momentum carried him into the end zone.
The Patriots were letting Bradshaw score. This would give NE much needed additional time in hopes of putting together a game winning drive (The Pats had 57 seconds after that score). Bradshaw realized they were letting him score and tried to kneel down on the 1/2 yard line so the Giants could run more time off the clock before scoring (The Giants could have easily run an additional 30 seconds off the clock and left Brady with 25 or less seconds to score a TD). However, he was running so hard that when he tried to kneel down, his momentum carried him into the end zone.
i seriously dont know if you are being serious; but i can say for sure, i am lol'ing so hard at the thought of that
The Patriots were letting Bradshaw score. This would give NE much needed additional time in hopes of putting together a game winning drive (The Pats had 57 seconds after that score). Bradshaw realized they were letting him score and tried to kneel down on the 1/2 yard line so the Giants could run more time off the clock before scoring (The Giants could have easily run an additional 30 seconds off the clock and left Brady with 25 or less seconds to score a TD). However, he was running so hard that when he tried to kneel down, his momentum carried him into the end zone.
Oh... that really really sucks for NY
Considering NY still won no one really cares anymore. They still got the points they needed and were able to stop Tom Brady for the win.
The Patriots were letting Bradshaw score. This would give NE much needed additional time in hopes of putting together a game winning drive (The Pats had 57 seconds after that score). Bradshaw realized they were letting him score and tried to kneel down on the 1/2 yard line so the Giants could run more time off the clock before scoring (The Giants could have easily run an additional 30 seconds off the clock and left Brady with 25 or less seconds to score a TD). However, he was running so hard that when he tried to kneel down, his momentum carried him into the end zone.
i seriously dont know if you are being serious; but i can say for sure, i am lol'ing so hard at the thought of that
The Patriots were letting Bradshaw score. This would give NE much needed additional time in hopes of putting together a game winning drive (The Pats had 57 seconds after that score). Bradshaw realized they were letting him score and tried to kneel down on the 1/2 yard line so the Giants could run more time off the clock before scoring (The Giants could have easily run an additional 30 seconds off the clock and left Brady with 25 or less seconds to score a TD). However, he was running so hard that when he tried to kneel down, his momentum carried him into the end zone.
Oh... that really really sucks for NY
only if they had lost
i'm gonna buy a five dollar footlong tomorrow in honor of Justin Tuck's sack
/yawn. I don't get this sport. Its just not that interesting. I had fun with Madden 02/03 back when it was still released on PC - but other than that this game is not that interesting compared to NBA/Football(not handegg) World Cup. Especially if you absolutly don't care who wins anyways.
On February 06 2012 13:19 Aela wrote: /yawn. I don't get this sport. Its just not that interesting. I had fun with Madden 02/03 back when it was still released on PC - but other than that this game is not that interesting compared to NBA/Football(not handegg) World Cup. Especially if you absolutly don't care who wins anyways.
wow, that's really interesting. feel free to keep us updated in all the other various threads about all manner of things you personally don't find interesting, it will help immensely with the biography we're working on.
On February 06 2012 13:19 Aela wrote: /yawn. I don't get this sport. Its just not that interesting. I had fun with Madden 02/03 back when it was still released on PC - but other than that this game is not that interesting compared to NBA/Football(not handegg) World Cup. Especially if you absolutly don't care who wins anyways.
Excellent input, we will definitely consider your advice and better ourselves next time. Thank you.
Game actually got more interesting towards the end.
I'm a fan of Danny Woodhead as he's a Nebraska native as I am, sucks for him =/ still, good game Giants and I was glad to see Prince Amukamara out there in the final, first year in the NFL and already has a ring ^^
On February 06 2012 13:19 Aela wrote: /yawn. I don't get this sport. Its just not that interesting. I had fun with Madden 02/03 back when it was still released on PC - but other than that this game is not that interesting compared to NBA/Football(not handegg) World Cup. Especially if you absolutly don't care who wins anyways.
If you don't like it, stop posting here then. No one gives a damn if you don't like it.
I'm glad NY won, but this super bowl game wasn't as exciting as 42 in my opinion. Maybe I think it was because the Patriots were undefeated back then until they lost. Damn, I really wanted to see Victor Cruz get more catches, but they definitely double teamed him with coverage after the first touchdown.
On February 06 2012 13:19 Aela wrote: /yawn. I don't get this sport. Its just not that interesting. I had fun with Madden 02/03 back when it was still released on PC - but other than that this game is not that interesting compared to NBA/Football(not handegg) World Cup. Especially if you absolutly don't care who wins anyways.
Regardless of the intention this is the most epic moment of the game
I can just imagine him telling his grandchildren, "I won the superbowl by sitting down", to which they will respond "of course grampa" :D
On the other hand, did anyone else notice that there were about 3 seconds where the clock kept running after Brady spiked the ball? It probably wouldn't have made a difference, but I thought someone should have noticed and corrected that considering there was less than 30 seconds left in the Super Bowl.
This game was really boring to me. Even the final drive for the giants was not that exciting. THey got all the yardage they needed in 2 plays and then just kinda tried to run the clock out
Regardless of the intention this is the most epic moment of the game
I can just imagine him telling his grandchildren, "I won the superbowl by sitting down", to which they will respond "of course grampa" :D
On the other hand, did anyone else notice that there were about 3 seconds where the clock kept running after Brady spiked the ball? It probably wouldn't have made a difference, but I thought someone should have noticed and corrected that considering there was less than 30 seconds left in the Super Bowl.
Timekeeping in football games is always a bit wonky and slightly off for quite a few plays. We only really notice these issues on key plays and I suppose that resetting time on the clock was something that nobody thought of at that moment.
This was a hard hitting super bowl, I felt much more so than in 2007.
My heart broke inside seeing Ballard trying to run on the sideline to (presumably) prove to his trainers he could still go, only to see him hit the turf in agony as he knee gave way. Also that final clip they showed of Robert Kraft as the game ended was unbelievably depressing. You could tell how beaten the man was, it was really sad.
The Giants were the better team.
Brady got little to no help from his receiving core. There were several drops late in the game that you just don't want to see. Welker had one, Branch had a couple. Eli's receivers stepped up and made the plays.
Hakeem Nicks has excellent hands.
Eli Manning is an excellent quarterback. He may not be as cerebral as Peyton, but he can make every throw.
For the people commenting on Tom Brady being a top quarterback/clutch quarterback etc, it should be noted: On the NFL Network pregame today Aaron Rodgers was being interviewed and was asked what he thought of Tom Brady. He said that in the off-season prior to the 2008 season (his first season starting for Green Bay) he went over tape and watched every single snap Tom Brady had in the 2007 season to prepare and see the game played at its highest level. Food for thought.
On February 06 2012 13:45 DannyJ wrote: Yeah it was pretty boring game overall, very much like the first superbowl between them.
The Mrs. (who doesn't even like FB) said that was probably the most boring super bowl she's seen. It was up there. It was not that good. Even near the end, wasn't even as good as the last time (which I agree was a little overhyped).
I'm glad that NY won, because I like Eli and happen to believe that Peyton is one of the more overrated QBs of our time, and it's nice to see that his unloved brother now has more rings.
As for NE, what can you say? Brady's looked pretty bad in playoff games for the last 3 years.
Wonder what kind of super bowl we would have had with Baltimore and SanFran...
My heart broke inside seeing Ballard trying to run on the sideline to (presumably) prove to his trainers he could still go, only to see him hit the turf in agony as he knee gave way.
Oh, I yelled at the TV and impulsively called him an idiot. When you saw him go down on the field, you could tell it was bad. So a couple minutes later, he tests himself not by walking, not by trotting, but full on running. He probably made it a hell of a lot worse. Yeah, I know it's the super bowl and all, but that was just... derpy.
On February 06 2012 13:45 DannyJ wrote: Yeah it was pretty boring game overall, very much like the first superbowl between them.
The Mrs. (who doesn't even like FB) said that was probably the most boring super bowl she's seen. It was up there. It was not that good. Even near the end, wasn't even as good as the last time (which I agree was a little overhyped).
I'm glad that NY won, because I like Eli and happen to believe that Peyton is one of the more overrated QBs of our time, and it's nice to see that his unloved brother now has more rings.
As for NE, what can you say? Brady's looked pretty bad in playoff games for the last 3 years.
Wonder what kind of super bowl we would have had with Baltimore and SanFran...
Ever since Brady and the Patriots were caught cheating in Spygate, they haven't been the same.
Spygate Brady - 3-0 in SBs Postspygate Brady - 0-2
My heart broke inside seeing Ballard trying to run on the sideline to (presumably) prove to his trainers he could still go, only to see him hit the turf in agony as he knee gave way.
Oh, I yelled at the TV and impulsively called him an idiot. When you saw him go down on the field, you could tell it was bad. So a couple minutes later, he tests himself not by walking, not by trotting, but full on running. He probably made it a hell of a lot worse. Yeah, I know it's the super bowl and all, but that was just... derpy.
On February 06 2012 15:10 xXFireandIceXx wrote: Pats imploded and gave up huge plays in the end. But I can't imagine them not being back here next year.
If the Texans can stay healthy I'd take them over the Patriots. Other than those 2 and the Ravens the AFC is pretty pathetic.
I felt the game was very boring, i dunno what it was. The only exciting part was the 4th quarter. I think it could have been the announcers were terrible and i hated listening to their voices.
On February 06 2012 15:03 DannyJ wrote: Most surprising thing of the entire SB... We didn't see Peyton Manning 100 times.
ESPN commented that NBC couldn't even find him (after the first time). He was believed to be lurking in some luxury box. I'm glad he did that. Peyton, in spite of playing ZERO games this year, has received way too much attention based on his injury and the so-called war of words with management or whatever... trade rumors... blah blah blah. We don't want Peyton to become Favre 2.0
Also I read that MIA flipped off the crowd... I didn't even fucking notice. And big fuckin' deal.
On February 06 2012 14:37 MountainDewJunkie wrote:
On February 06 2012 14:16 Durp wrote:
My heart broke inside seeing Ballard trying to run on the sideline to (presumably) prove to his trainers he could still go, only to see him hit the turf in agony as he knee gave way.
Oh, I yelled at the TV and impulsively called him an idiot. When you saw him go down on the field, you could tell it was bad. So a couple minutes later, he tests himself not by walking, not by trotting, but full on running. He probably made it a hell of a lot worse. Yeah, I know it's the super bowl and all, but that was just... derpy.
Yeah everyone should just give up.
"I think I hurt my leg bad..." "Doesn't look good man, take it easy." "Wait, let me try something here..."
On February 06 2012 15:03 DannyJ wrote: Most surprising thing of the entire SB... We didn't see Peyton Manning 100 times.
As a die hard Colt an Peyton Manning fan, even I think there has been too much focus on Peyton and not enough on the actual participants of the SB. Staying out of sight was a great move imo.
I actually found this SB to be exciting throughout the course (I had ofc also 100 dollars on giants victory which probably played a factor) and had to stand up for the last 57 seconds where I actually expected Brady to do a reverse 2008....
As a Patriots fan, this one is tough to take, but it isn't as bad as the 18-1 season. I had a bad feeling going into the game, because nothing had gone well for me today. I can't say it is alright, but being in a Super Bowl 5 out of 10 years is not bad at all.
With two first and second round picks and a lot of good defensive talent going into the draft this year, I have a feeling that the Patriots can get a good set of rookies. As long as they don't do anything stupid in the draft, I see potential in the defense, possibly top 10 material. The D-line is great with Vince Wilfork, Andre Carter, and others like Shaun Ellis. The linebacker corps is definitely their strong point on defense. Jerod Mayo, Rob Ninkovich, and Brandon Spikes are all good. Patrick Chung hits hard and that is about all he is worth. The corners are all bad for New England. I can see them taking Alfonzo Dennard from Nebraska and/or Janoris Jenkins from UF/North Alabama. They both have potential to fall outside the top 20, and New England has picks 27, 31 and 34. All defense is the best way to go.
Something else I want to say is that I hate how people are still giving crap about the "Spygate" stuff and accrediting the Patriots' three Super Bowl wins to that tactic. I saw a comment on ESPN (+ Show Spoiler +
which reminds me, the lack of moderation there makes it a terrible place to be every time anything happens
) that said the Patriots haven't won a Super Bowl since that scandal. Only four teams have won since then and you could look at pretty much any team and make some claim like that. EDIT: Oh, hey. I just found this a few posts up.
On February 06 2012 14:44 BryanSC wrote: Spygate Brady - 3-0 in SBs Postspygate Brady - 0-2
Thoughts I have regarding NFL rules throughout the game:
-That intentional grounding penalty was strange. I understand it, but the call was so weird. I have never seen intentional grounding called on a deep throw to no one before. Was it only because Brady was under duress?
-Touchbacks are stupid and boring. I really hope the NFL pushed kickoffs back to the 30. It adds another element that may be less safe for players, but I am sure they would like it back too.
-Another thing that I think is really stupid is the non-rule on penalties that result in a redo of downs. I say non-rule because there is no rule saying this is the case, but it is just that way. The game clock should be reset as well as a redo of the play in my opinion. Losing those 8 precious seconds at the end of the game like that because New York had 12 men on the field was terrible.
I don't think they are going to make it harder to hit touchbacks or make touchbacks less appealing becuase of player safety, there is talk around about removing kicks off all together in some circles becuase of player safety so without special tackling rules i doubt will see a change in the distance or placement of touchbacks. suicide squads
On February 06 2012 15:26 Rkie wrote: As a Patriots fan, this one is tough to take, but it isn't as bad as the 18-1 season. I had a bad feeling going into the game, because nothing had gone well for me today. I can't say it is alright, but being in a Super Bowl 5 out of 10 years is not bad at all.
With two first and second round picks and a lot of good defensive talent going into the draft this year, I have a feeling that the Patriots can get a good set of rookies. As long as they don't do anything stupid in the draft, I see potential in the defense, possibly top 10 material. The D-line is great with Vince Wilfork, Andre Carter, and others like Shaun Ellis. The linebacker corps is definitely their strong point on defense. Jerod Mayo, Rob Ninkovich, and Brandon Spikes are all good. Patrick Chung hits hard and that is about all he is worth. The corners are all bad for New England. I can see them taking Alfonzo Dennard from Nebraska and/or Janoris Jenkins from UF/North Alabama. They both have potential to fall outside the top 20, and New England has picks 27, 31 and 34. All defense is the best way to go.
Something else I want to say is that I hate how people are still giving crap about the "Spygate" stuff and accrediting the Patriots' three Super Bowl wins to that tactic. I saw a comment on ESPN (+ Show Spoiler +
which reminds me, the lack of moderation there makes it a terrible place to be every time anything happens
) that said the Patriots haven't won a Super Bowl since that scandal. Only four teams have won since then and you could look at pretty much any team and make some claim like that. EDIT: Oh, hey. I just found this a few posts up.
On February 06 2012 14:44 BryanSC wrote: Spygate Brady - 3-0 in SBs Postspygate Brady - 0-2
Thoughts I have regarding NFL rules throughout the game:
-That intentional grounding penalty was strange. I understand it, but the call was so weird. I have never seen intentional grounding called on a deep throw to no one before. Was it only because Brady was under duress?
-Touchbacks are stupid and boring. I really hope the NFL pushed kickoffs back to the 30. It adds another element that may be less safe for players, but I am sure they would like it back too.
-Another thing that I think is really stupid is the non-rule on penalties that result in a redo of downs. I say non-rule because there is no rule saying this is the case, but it is just that way. The game clock should be reset as well as a redo of the play in my opinion. Losing those 8 precious seconds at the end of the game like that because New York had 12 men on the field was terrible.
I've seen intentional grounding called before on deep throws. Basically, it comes down to if he was in the pocket (he was) and if there was a receiver in the vincinity. Obiously with a deep throw its tougher to be accurate, but watching that play, it wasn't near anyone, there wasn't even a giant near it, let alone a patriot.
I agree with the touchbacks. The problem is, when they kicked off from the 30, there was a much higher % of concussions, as kickoffs/punts create collusions at high speeds. Its one of my favourite things to watch, but they made the change for safety and thats about it.
I see your point on the 12 man call. But the patriots also get a free play to heave a hail mary there. if they compelte it they take the lead. if its intercepted, they get the ball back anyways. The clock run off sucks yes, but they still got to run the play. Also remember a game cant end on a defensive penalty, so if that was the last play of the game, they'd have another play.
Oh I like Eli kinda too, since I'm a fan of his big bro, but still... I think I was more rooting against Brady than anything else. But hey, look at my location and it should make sense. ;-)
I am literally depressed...Fuck. Not to Eli again. Not another miracle catch. Not another third down sack on the last drive. Not another dropped pass. Not another 3 fumbles and zero recovered. Too much of a resemblance!
On February 06 2012 16:27 TwoToneTerran wrote: That wasn't a miracle catch. It was a well thrown ball and a well made catch on a well designed route. Patriots got plain outplayed.
Any hey another Manning gets a ring. Vicariously affirm Archie Manning wooooo
What are you even talking about? That was a really even game, and it came down to a couple of plays and blown opportunities for the Pats to lose. I am not sure if you are talking about that specific play or the game in general. That play, I mean yea, the Pats had good coverage but the throw/catch were just too good obviously. It was actually thrown into two close double-coverage, if I remember correctly.
It was by all means really close. Staying in bounds by a couple of inches. But perfect throw from Eli and clearly he deserves credit. The drop by Welker is going to make me lose sleep.
On February 06 2012 14:37 MountainDewJunkie wrote:
On February 06 2012 14:16 Durp wrote:
My heart broke inside seeing Ballard trying to run on the sideline to (presumably) prove to his trainers he could still go, only to see him hit the turf in agony as he knee gave way.
Oh, I yelled at the TV and impulsively called him an idiot. When you saw him go down on the field, you could tell it was bad. So a couple minutes later, he tests himself not by walking, not by trotting, but full on running. He probably made it a hell of a lot worse. Yeah, I know it's the super bowl and all, but that was just... derpy.
Yeah everyone should just give up.
Nah, people should just be hyperbolic and dramatic.
Seriously though, I get where youre coming from but taking a break and letting yourself heal is not giving up. Its the opposite of giving up. Its called being patient and using your brain instead of acting on emotion.
On February 06 2012 16:27 TwoToneTerran wrote: That wasn't a miracle catch. It was a well thrown ball and a well made catch on a well designed route. Patriots got plain outplayed.
Any hey another Manning gets a ring. Vicariously affirm Archie Manning wooooo
What are you even talking about? That was a really even game, and it came down to a couple of plays and blown opportunities for the Pats to lose. I am not sure if you are talking about that specific play or the game in general. That play, I mean yea, the Pats had good coverage but the throw/catch were just too good obviously. It was actually thrown into two close double-coverage, if I remember correctly.
It was by all means really close. Staying in bounds by a couple of inches. But perfect throw from Eli and clearly he deserves credit. The drop by Welker is going to make me lose sleep.
I was talking about that play specifically, though I do think the Giants outplayed the Patriots in general (They had them dead to rights when Bradshaw sat down on accident in the endzone)
The thing is, you called it a miracle catch like the Tyree one -- no way, no how. He caught your safety too far underneath on a go route and placed it on a dime, right where and when Manningham was expecting it. The Tyree miracle catch was a completely broken play and a heaved up prayer that had every bit the same chance of being intercepted as caught, on a play where the Patriots had the Giants beat on both coverage and on the line. The first Pats vs Giants game was honestly a flukey win, this one was not. The game was boring but it was two good teams playing pretty well and the Giants played better.
On February 06 2012 16:27 TwoToneTerran wrote: That wasn't a miracle catch. It was a well thrown ball and a well made catch on a well designed route. Patriots got plain outplayed.
Any hey another Manning gets a ring. Vicariously affirm Archie Manning wooooo
What are you even talking about? That was a really even game, and it came down to a couple of plays and blown opportunities for the Pats to lose.
Isn't that how you can describe a lot of football games? I mean seriously, rewind back one series vs Baltimore. That was seriously Baltimore's game to lose, Pat's were pretty outplayed then too but just 1-2 key plays makes all the difference in the NFL.
On February 06 2012 16:27 TwoToneTerran wrote: That wasn't a miracle catch. It was a well thrown ball and a well made catch on a well designed route. Patriots got plain outplayed.
Any hey another Manning gets a ring. Vicariously affirm Archie Manning wooooo
What are you even talking about? That was a really even game, and it came down to a couple of plays and blown opportunities for the Pats to lose. I am not sure if you are talking about that specific play or the game in general. That play, I mean yea, the Pats had good coverage but the throw/catch were just too good obviously. It was actually thrown into two close double-coverage, if I remember correctly.
It was by all means really close. Staying in bounds by a couple of inches. But perfect throw from Eli and clearly he deserves credit. The drop by Welker is going to make me lose sleep.
I was talking about that play specifically, though I do think the Giants outplayed the Patriots in general (They had them dead to rights when Bradshaw sat down on accident in the endzone)
The thing is, you called it a miracle catch like the Tyree one -- no way, no how. He caught your safety too far underneath on a go route and placed it on a dime, right where and when Manningham was expecting it. The Tyree miracle catch was a completely broken play and a heaved up prayer that had every bit the same chance of being intercepted as caught, on a play where the Patriots had the Giants beat on both coverage and on the line. The first Pats vs Giants game was honestly a flukey win, this one was not. The game was boring but it was two good teams playing pretty well and the Giants played better.
Hmm yea I am fine with your definition of a miracle catch. I didn't really mean to suggest that it was some crazy flukey play. It was an excellent play on the Giants part, but a difficult throw and an extremely catch nonetheless. Shows how good Eli was during that drive. That's what I meant, and I was flabbergasted when that play was made.
I am going to disagree with you that the Giants outplayed the Patriots in general. It was a very even game in my eyes. The Giants played "better" in the sense that they made the right plays when it mattered the most. I can already count so many blown opportunities and dumb mistakes on the Patriots part, whereas I can't say the same for the Giants. The Ninkovich penalty after getting the stop in the fourth quarter, 12 men on the field after the fumble, Welker dropped pass, Hernandez dropped pass, and so on. So yea, like I said, Giants did a better job in terms of avoiding these mistakes and making the right plays at the right times. But when we are talking about it from a pure offensive and defensive standpoint, I would say it was even. (And why the game came down to the wire)
The Ravens really should have been playing in the SB instead of the Patriots in the first place. Lee Evans caught a touchdown pass, and the officials for some reason (I guess they were ordered to?) decided to rule it incomplete. But the Ravens are the real AFC champions, and had they been playing, the Giants wouldn't be the champions right now. I guess the NFL decided it had to intervene and make sure two big market teams were playing in the super bowl.
On February 06 2012 16:27 TwoToneTerran wrote: That wasn't a miracle catch. It was a well thrown ball and a well made catch on a well designed route. Patriots got plain outplayed.
Any hey another Manning gets a ring. Vicariously affirm Archie Manning wooooo
What are you even talking about? That was a really even game, and it came down to a couple of plays and blown opportunities for the Pats to lose.
Isn't that how you can describe a lot of football games? I mean seriously, rewind back one series vs Baltimore. That was seriously Baltimore's game to lose, Pat's were pretty outplayed then too but just 1-2 key plays makes all the difference in the NFL.
Haha yea, that's how you describe a lot of playoff games when two even teams are matched up, an even game is played and then it comes down to couple plays. We escaped right by the Ravens, I thought we were going to lose for sure. Flacco played better than Tom for three quarters (who had an awful game, in his own words).
On February 06 2012 17:00 LF9 wrote: The Ravens really should have been playing in the SB instead of the Patriots in the first place. Lee Evans caught a touchdown pass, and the officials for some reason (I guess they were ordered to?) decided to rule it incomplete. But the Ravens are the real AFC champions, and had they been playing, the Giants wouldn't be the champions right now. I guess the NFL decided it had to intervene and make sure two big market teams were playing in the super bowl.
Okay that's just false. It wasn't a touchdown, they ruled it incomplete because it says so in the rulebook. This is just a stupid argument. Stop stating your opinions (or wishes) like they are facts.
THANK GOD GIANTS WON... meanwhile its a bit wack around uri and umass watch out. I think someone is maddd lololol, if you don't know what i mean check utube for the umass riot vid. maddd funny
Officiating needs to be better, first. And second, playoffs need to be bo3 or something. Every year, at least one flukey team makes it to the super bowl and it turns into a bad game. This year, TWO flukey teams made it to the super bowl on flukey wins, and it turned out to be a joke game of a team with the worst defense in the NFL (who got there because of a blown call) playing against a 9-7 team. The playoff system needs to be changed, because the super bowl always sucks. Teams play 16 games and go through all this hooplah every year, and then it take 2 (3 at MOST) simple wins to get to the super bowl.
On February 06 2012 16:27 TwoToneTerran wrote: That wasn't a miracle catch. It was a well thrown ball and a well made catch on a well designed route. Patriots got plain outplayed.
Any hey another Manning gets a ring. Vicariously affirm Archie Manning wooooo
What are you even talking about? That was a really even game, and it came down to a couple of plays and blown opportunities for the Pats to lose. I am not sure if you are talking about that specific play or the game in general. That play, I mean yea, the Pats had good coverage but the throw/catch were just too good obviously. It was actually thrown into two close double-coverage, if I remember correctly.
It was by all means really close. Staying in bounds by a couple of inches. But perfect throw from Eli and clearly he deserves credit. The drop by Welker is going to make me lose sleep.
I was talking about that play specifically, though I do think the Giants outplayed the Patriots in general (They had them dead to rights when Bradshaw sat down on accident in the endzone)
The thing is, you called it a miracle catch like the Tyree one -- no way, no how. He caught your safety too far underneath on a go route and placed it on a dime, right where and when Manningham was expecting it. The Tyree miracle catch was a completely broken play and a heaved up prayer that had every bit the same chance of being intercepted as caught, on a play where the Patriots had the Giants beat on both coverage and on the line. The first Pats vs Giants game was honestly a flukey win, this one was not. The game was boring but it was two good teams playing pretty well and the Giants played better.
Hmm yea I am fine with your definition of a miracle catch. I didn't really mean to suggest that it was some crazy flukey play. It was an excellent play on the Giants part, but a difficult throw and an extremely catch nonetheless. Shows how good Eli was during that drive. That's what I meant, and I was flabbergasted when that play was made.
I am going to disagree with you that the Giants outplayed the Patriots in general. It was a very even game in my eyes. The Giants played "better" in the sense that they made the right plays when it mattered the most. I can already count so many blown opportunities and dumb mistakes on the Patriots part, whereas I can't say the same for the Giants. The Ninkovich penalty after getting the stop in the fourth quarter, 12 men on the field after the fumble, Welker dropped pass, Hernandez dropped pass, and so on. So yea, like I said, Giants did a better job in terms of avoiding these mistakes and making the right plays at the right times. But when we are talking about it from a pure offensive and defensive standpoint, I would say it was even. (And why the game came down to the wire)
First down run called back for holding deep that turned a field goal into a punt, 12 men on the field to keep patriots drive alive at the end, couple of fumbles that costed yardage. Probably some more I'm forgetting, but it's all moot as everything you're listing is reasons WHY the Patriots played worse. You're making my argument for me -- a team that makes a lot of mistakes played worse than a team that didn't.
The difference in the game was pretty much that Gronk got hurt directly before the game, who had carried them almost as much as Brady during the regular season (Giants had tons of injuries but had the core group that got them there). That and the ill advised prayer heave Brady had that turned into an interception.
Giants offense played similarly well and I'd say their defense was much better in the sense that they forced Tom to play a little below himself.
On February 06 2012 16:27 TwoToneTerran wrote: That wasn't a miracle catch. It was a well thrown ball and a well made catch on a well designed route. Patriots got plain outplayed.
Any hey another Manning gets a ring. Vicariously affirm Archie Manning wooooo
What are you even talking about? That was a really even game, and it came down to a couple of plays and blown opportunities for the Pats to lose.
Isn't that how you can describe a lot of football games? I mean seriously, rewind back one series vs Baltimore. That was seriously Baltimore's game to lose, Pat's were pretty outplayed then too but just 1-2 key plays makes all the difference in the NFL.
Haha yea, that's how you describe a lot of playoff games when two even teams are matched up, an even game is played and then it comes down to couple plays. We escaped right by the Ravens, I thought we were going to lose for sure. Flacco played better than Tom for three quarters (who had an awful game, in his own words).
On February 06 2012 17:00 LF9 wrote: The Ravens really should have been playing in the SB instead of the Patriots in the first place. Lee Evans caught a touchdown pass, and the officials for some reason (I guess they were ordered to?) decided to rule it incomplete. But the Ravens are the real AFC champions, and had they been playing, the Giants wouldn't be the champions right now. I guess the NFL decided it had to intervene and make sure two big market teams were playing in the super bowl.
Okay that's just false. It wasn't a touchdown, they ruled it incomplete because it says so in the rulebook. This is just a stupid argument. Stop stating your opinions (or wishes) like they are facts.
You should probably go watch the play before you say anything. He catches the ball, one foot hits, the next foot hits, then it is stripped. If you read the actual rules it would be a touchdown. Saying "they ruled it incomplete because it says so in the rulebook" doesn't make any sense. I don't think you even know what game I'm talking about, let alone what play.
Meh. If you take away the playoff scenario as it stands, you lose a lot of division drama. Also, if rules were adjusted so the better team always wins, again, it would be boring.
Don't get me wrong, IMO Ravens should be in the SB for sure over the Pats, but hell I won't complain (too much).
On February 06 2012 17:02 EvilTeletubby wrote: I'll never understand what the "Our sports team lost = WE MUST RIOT!!" mental leap is.
hey hey hey
rioters didn't give a shit about sports in vancouver. the people who initiated it didn't care about the game, they just did it for their own purposes. they were like gang members or something. people just joined in because everyone else was doing it :s
anyways im amazed people didn't talk about that last play. the ball was like 2 inches in front of gronkowski. if he didn't have that ankle i'm sure he would've caught that. i'm still happy the giants won though lol.
On February 06 2012 17:11 shawster wrote: if he didn't have that ankle i'm sure he would've caught that. i'm still happy the giants won though lol.
If he didn't have that ankle, Pats probably would have won the game much earlier.
Yeah, Giants contained him pretty easy as it is...
as for the Riots thing, college campus in the middle of Boston and they shut down parts of it right after halftime (planned). Went outside after out of curiosity and there were just dozens of cops out there waiting for shit to pop off lol.
On February 06 2012 16:27 TwoToneTerran wrote: That wasn't a miracle catch. It was a well thrown ball and a well made catch on a well designed route. Patriots got plain outplayed.
Any hey another Manning gets a ring. Vicariously affirm Archie Manning wooooo
What are you even talking about? That was a really even game, and it came down to a couple of plays and blown opportunities for the Pats to lose.
Isn't that how you can describe a lot of football games? I mean seriously, rewind back one series vs Baltimore. That was seriously Baltimore's game to lose, Pat's were pretty outplayed then too but just 1-2 key plays makes all the difference in the NFL.
Haha yea, that's how you describe a lot of playoff games when two even teams are matched up, an even game is played and then it comes down to couple plays. We escaped right by the Ravens, I thought we were going to lose for sure. Flacco played better than Tom for three quarters (who had an awful game, in his own words).
On February 06 2012 17:00 LF9 wrote: The Ravens really should have been playing in the SB instead of the Patriots in the first place. Lee Evans caught a touchdown pass, and the officials for some reason (I guess they were ordered to?) decided to rule it incomplete. But the Ravens are the real AFC champions, and had they been playing, the Giants wouldn't be the champions right now. I guess the NFL decided it had to intervene and make sure two big market teams were playing in the super bowl.
Okay that's just false. It wasn't a touchdown, they ruled it incomplete because it says so in the rulebook. This is just a stupid argument. Stop stating your opinions (or wishes) like they are facts.
You should probably go watch the play before you say anything. He catches the ball, one foot hits, the next foot hits, then it is stripped. If you read the actual rules it would be a touchdown. Saying "they ruled it incomplete because it says so in the rulebook" doesn't make any sense. I don't think you even know what game I'm talking about, let alone what play.
You should probably read the article I linked before responding.I watched the game, I know exactly what play you are talking about. Why does it not make sense? It was incomplete because it says that you need to maintain complete possession in the rulebook. No idea how you jump from that to me not knowing what game you are talking about. Good lord lol.
"He did not maintain complete possession of the ball through the entirety of his catching motion.
"That play will still be incomplete," Mara, a member of the competition committee, told Newsday, via PFT.
"If you read the rule, it's not a catch. The reason it's not a catch is you've got to control the ball when you hit the ground. It makes it easier to officiate. It's a bright line that you can draw."
Evans did not mantain complete possession of the ball before it was knocked out. Touching your feet on the ground is one thing, having a complete possession of the ball is another. He didn't have the ball in complete possession before it was knocked out.
On February 06 2012 16:27 TwoToneTerran wrote: That wasn't a miracle catch. It was a well thrown ball and a well made catch on a well designed route. Patriots got plain outplayed.
Any hey another Manning gets a ring. Vicariously affirm Archie Manning wooooo
What are you even talking about? That was a really even game, and it came down to a couple of plays and blown opportunities for the Pats to lose. I am not sure if you are talking about that specific play or the game in general. That play, I mean yea, the Pats had good coverage but the throw/catch were just too good obviously. It was actually thrown into two close double-coverage, if I remember correctly.
It was by all means really close. Staying in bounds by a couple of inches. But perfect throw from Eli and clearly he deserves credit. The drop by Welker is going to make me lose sleep.
I was talking about that play specifically, though I do think the Giants outplayed the Patriots in general (They had them dead to rights when Bradshaw sat down on accident in the endzone)
The thing is, you called it a miracle catch like the Tyree one -- no way, no how. He caught your safety too far underneath on a go route and placed it on a dime, right where and when Manningham was expecting it. The Tyree miracle catch was a completely broken play and a heaved up prayer that had every bit the same chance of being intercepted as caught, on a play where the Patriots had the Giants beat on both coverage and on the line. The first Pats vs Giants game was honestly a flukey win, this one was not. The game was boring but it was two good teams playing pretty well and the Giants played better.
Hmm yea I am fine with your definition of a miracle catch. I didn't really mean to suggest that it was some crazy flukey play. It was an excellent play on the Giants part, but a difficult throw and an extremely catch nonetheless. Shows how good Eli was during that drive. That's what I meant, and I was flabbergasted when that play was made.
I am going to disagree with you that the Giants outplayed the Patriots in general. It was a very even game in my eyes. The Giants played "better" in the sense that they made the right plays when it mattered the most. I can already count so many blown opportunities and dumb mistakes on the Patriots part, whereas I can't say the same for the Giants. The Ninkovich penalty after getting the stop in the fourth quarter, 12 men on the field after the fumble, Welker dropped pass, Hernandez dropped pass, and so on. So yea, like I said, Giants did a better job in terms of avoiding these mistakes and making the right plays at the right times. But when we are talking about it from a pure offensive and defensive standpoint, I would say it was even. (And why the game came down to the wire)
First down run called back for holding deep that turned a field goal into a punt, 12 men on the field to keep patriots drive alive at the end, couple of fumbles that costed yardage. Probably some more I'm forgetting, but it's all moot as everything you're listing is reasons WHY the Patriots played worse. You're making my argument for me -- a team that makes a lot of mistakes played worse than a team that didn't.
The difference in the game was pretty much that Gronk got hurt directly before the game, who had carried them almost as much as Brady during the regular season (Giants had tons of injuries but had the core group that got them there). That and the ill advised prayer heave Brady had that turned into an interception.
Giants offense played similarly well and I'd say their defense was much better in the sense that they forced Tom to play a little below himself.
Well yea, the Giants did enough to win so they clearly ended up being the better than the team that lost. Fewer mistakes, big plays when it matters. But all I am saying is that these two were evenly matched teams, who played an even game for the most part. Few plays go the Pats' way, and they could have been the better team standing. The game coming down to the end shows what I mean. Yes, Giants were the better team in the end but there's a difference from that and saying they simply outplayed the Pats.
Pats offensive line actually did a fine job against the Giants defense. Tom had good protection, maybe even slightly better than what Eli had today. So I wouldn't say Giants defense outplayed Pats defense based on that reasoning alone. But the Pats secondary? Horrible.
Gronk was obviously a huge difference. They played single coverage on him the entire game, which would have been a disaster if Gronk wasn't hurt. After all, Gronk makes the game a lot easier for Tom by attracting double-coverage and just being a huge, reliable target in general. Tom still played all right, obviously with the exceptions of that safety and that stupid interception (a healthy Gronk might have had a chance at that).
I actually thought this one of the best Super Bowls in the past 15 or so years alongside the first Giants/Patriots, Panthers/Patriots, Rams/Patriots, Titans/Rams and Cardinals/Steelers. People say that there wasn't offensive explosions, but the efficiency that Brady and Manning threw with was outstanding. Shit, Brady broke a record for going sixteen straight passes completed, scoring two TD's on long drives in a short amount of time. Manning started the game with a perfect 10/10 and ended the game as clutch as ever.
If you want a bad Super Bowl, go watch Steelers/Seahawks, Bears/Colts or Ravens/Giants. Those made me want to die. This game was awesome if you were interested in the story behind the game. This was Brady's chance to cement his name alongside Montana as the #1 or #2 best quarterback of all-time. With how he was going in the 3rd, with his 16 straight pass completions, it looked like it was over. Then he got injured by a pass rush and didn't look the same.
With this win, Eli is going to be a Hall-of-Famer and and is one up on his big brother. Something that no one thought would ever happen in a million years when Manning first started in New Yorkj.
I blame the Pats defense. I cringed nearly every damn play when Manning just zipped passes straight to barely covered or even uncovered receivers. It was horrible.
Epic superbowl, half-time show wasn't too bad (except Nicki Minaj showed up, I hate her with a passion), game was decided in the last minute, lots of good plays. I thought the Giants won by luck in XLII, but this one changes my opinion on them
On February 06 2012 20:29 [UoN]Sentinel wrote: Epic superbowl, half-time show wasn't too bad (except Nicki Minaj showed up, I hate her with a passion), game was decided in the last minute, lots of good plays. I thought the Giants won by luck in XLII, but this one changes my opinion on them
Yeah I thought it was a good superbowl too. There wasn't many "explosive" plays which perhaps to some people made it seem a bit dull but it was so close and precise throughout that it just felt really tense from start to finish. You never knew who was going to win until the final ball was batted down.
On February 06 2012 21:07 aLoHa wrote: where can i download a torrent of this superbowl game?
WoW. Epic first post.
On topic:
Stayed up to 4 in the morning to watch the game, and i wasnt disapointed. I'm not so much of a American Football fan, but this game was just great. It went really back and forth, lots of great play, and there was no way to tell the winner until the last minute.
On February 06 2012 16:27 TwoToneTerran wrote: That wasn't a miracle catch. It was a well thrown ball and a well made catch on a well designed route. Patriots got plain outplayed.
Any hey another Manning gets a ring. Vicariously affirm Archie Manning wooooo
What are you even talking about? That was a really even game, and it came down to a couple of plays and blown opportunities for the Pats to lose.
Isn't that how you can describe a lot of football games? I mean seriously, rewind back one series vs Baltimore. That was seriously Baltimore's game to lose, Pat's were pretty outplayed then too but just 1-2 key plays makes all the difference in the NFL.
Haha yea, that's how you describe a lot of playoff games when two even teams are matched up, an even game is played and then it comes down to couple plays. We escaped right by the Ravens, I thought we were going to lose for sure. Flacco played better than Tom for three quarters (who had an awful game, in his own words).
On February 06 2012 17:00 LF9 wrote: The Ravens really should have been playing in the SB instead of the Patriots in the first place. Lee Evans caught a touchdown pass, and the officials for some reason (I guess they were ordered to?) decided to rule it incomplete. But the Ravens are the real AFC champions, and had they been playing, the Giants wouldn't be the champions right now. I guess the NFL decided it had to intervene and make sure two big market teams were playing in the super bowl.
Okay that's just false. It wasn't a touchdown, they ruled it incomplete because it says so in the rulebook. This is just a stupid argument. Stop stating your opinions (or wishes) like they are facts.
You should probably go watch the play before you say anything. He catches the ball, one foot hits, the next foot hits, then it is stripped. If you read the actual rules it would be a touchdown. Saying "they ruled it incomplete because it says so in the rulebook" doesn't make any sense. I don't think you even know what game I'm talking about, let alone what play.
Uh, are you stupid or something? If it really was a touchdown the way you said it was, then the officials would've called it that. Obviously, it wasn't, as they reviewed the play, and you can see that the player did not maintain possession. Why are you trying to stir something up that you can't win?
This game was like a terran making one reaper and bunker rushing the zerg, while the zerg just says ok and makes speedlings, then terran makes 3 factory hellion follow up, but when the harass arrives the zerg had mutas, so terran player opts for thor, but then Eli got enough of an economic lead, and good clock positioning at the end when he hit hive tech and was able to secure a w.
Not a big Madonna fan.. but that halftime show will be remebered for a long time.
Biggest complaint... Al Michaels and Chris Collinsworth sucked the ever loving life out of the broadcast.
2nd biggest complaint... the Welker drop and the crap he was taking after the game.
That was a freaking incredible effort to go after that ball.
He had to break stride, jump off the wong foot, spin, reach behind himself and get his hands on the ball.
Brady throws the ball to Welker's front sholder and underneath his chin... it's a touchdown. Phillips is not coming over in time to get him.
The two underneath defenders had let him go.. and Phillips would have been 7-10 yards away if Welker hadn't had to basically stop/jump/spin for the ball.
Yeah. Wes welker does get paid $3 million to make that catch.
On February 06 2012 14:37 MountainDewJunkie wrote:
On February 06 2012 14:16 Durp wrote:
My heart broke inside seeing Ballard trying to run on the sideline to (presumably) prove to his trainers he could still go, only to see him hit the turf in agony as he knee gave way.
Oh, I yelled at the TV and impulsively called him an idiot. When you saw him go down on the field, you could tell it was bad. So a couple minutes later, he tests himself not by walking, not by trotting, but full on running. He probably made it a hell of a lot worse. Yeah, I know it's the super bowl and all, but that was just... derpy.
Yeah everyone should just give up.
Nah, people should just be hyperbolic and dramatic.
Seriously though, I get where youre coming from but taking a break and letting yourself heal is not giving up. Its the opposite of giving up. Its called being patient and using your brain instead of acting on emotion.
I completely understand. When you live your life for this one moment youre gonna do everything you can to make sure you sit down on the sidelane so you dont get an infection in that cut on your finger.
@RCMDVA yup, and Brady was throwing behind people all game instead of hitting them in stride. Combine that with the Gronk underthrow interception and the safety on the first play, and it's incredibly annoying when you hear his trophy wife saying "my husband can't throw the ball AND catch it!"
Hey guys, watched this last night and got really into it, never watched AF before. Is there any way to watch past games online as the new season isnt on untill september? Thanks, xccam
On February 07 2012 00:45 xccam wrote: Hey guys, watched this last night and got really into it, never watched AF before. Is there any way to watch past games online as the new season isnt on untill september? Thanks, xccam
NFL.com has something called "Game Pass" where you can watch every game of the last season for pretty cheap, like $15
On February 07 2012 00:30 BlackJack wrote: @RCMDVA yup, and Brady was throwing behind people all game instead of hitting them in stride. Combine that with the Gronk underthrow interception and the safety on the first play, and it's incredibly annoying when you hear his trophy wife saying "my husband can't throw the ball AND catch it!"
hahahaha easy with the trophy wife, she probably makes more money than he does
oh wait i guess trophy wife doesn't necessarily mean she's a digger
On February 07 2012 00:30 BlackJack wrote: @RCMDVA yup, and Brady was throwing behind people all game instead of hitting them in stride. Combine that with the Gronk underthrow interception and the safety on the first play, and it's incredibly annoying when you hear his trophy wife saying "my husband can't throw the ball AND catch it!"
Considering how he played vs the Ravens and the Giants and who makes more money in that relationship, I'd say Brady is the trophy husband.
And I can't believe wtf Michaels and Collinsworth were talking about during that interception. They were claiming that interception happened because Gronk wasn't healthy. He managed to still get behind the LB and would've had a td if Brady didn't underthrow him.
For me, what makes it SO hard to swallow as a Pats fan is that we shouldn't really have been in the final in the first place, but we put on a GREAT performance and stripped the ball 3 TIMES. We deserved at least one turnover from those strips, Giants really caught some luck there. Although, we were lucky with the way we won vs Baltimore.
On February 07 2012 00:30 BlackJack wrote: @RCMDVA yup, and Brady was throwing behind people all game instead of hitting them in stride. Combine that with the Gronk underthrow interception and the safety on the first play, and it's incredibly annoying when you hear his trophy wife saying "my husband can't throw the ball AND catch it!"
On February 06 2012 17:06 LF9 wrote: Officiating needs to be better, first. And second, playoffs need to be bo3 or something. Every year, at least one flukey team makes it to the super bowl and it turns into a bad game. This year, TWO flukey teams made it to the super bowl on flukey wins, and it turned out to be a joke game of a team with the worst defense in the NFL (who got there because of a blown call) playing against a 9-7 team. The playoff system needs to be changed, because the super bowl always sucks. Teams play 16 games and go through all this hooplah every year, and then it take 2 (3 at MOST) simple wins to get to the super bowl.
Most of your posts here are pointless, but this one is just annoying. Neither of the two teams were flukey. The patriots in the superbowl is never a fluke. (Five out of ten in the last ten years..) Mentioning the Giants regular season record as if that is a determinant of how the team played in the playoffs is just bullshit. Held the Falcons to 2 points, beat the Packers by 17, and took out the 49ers who had one of the best defenses I have seen in some time. Both teams deserved to be there, by doing what the other teams did not.. winning.
We get it, your team lost and you are personally hurt. Stop complaining. That is how the game works, and any team can come out and win on any given sunday. If you don't like that concept, watch a different sport. BO3 playoffs? LOL. Never.
The amount of injuries the sport causes to players, a bo3 playoff system would just have the two healthiest teams playing each other. It would come down to who's trainers and medical staff can keep their team's talent on the field longer than other teams. So what if the Giants got into the play-offs with a 9-7 record? They still had to go and win 4 (5 if you count the must win game against Dallas the last week of the season) strait games against 4/5 talented teams. That NFC East isn't a push over division like the AFC East.
It was total bullshit that the Patriots just gave up playing defense on that Bradshaw touchdown. It's like they took their hands off the keyboard. If that was a Korean football team out there, they would have been ran out of the stadium.
On February 07 2012 06:00 SpeaKEaSY wrote: It was total bullshit that the Patriots just gave up playing defense on that Bradshaw touchdown. It's like they took their hands off the keyboard. If that was a Korean football team out there, they would have been ran out of the stadium.
It was probably the best choice they had. It was a mistake for the Bradshaw to score and if you watch the replay, you can tell he was trying to stop himself but he fell in. Otherwise, they could have ran the clock down to next to nothing and kicked the easy field goal for the win. Instead, the Pats gave themselves a full minute to drive down the field and they got a hail marry attempt out of it.
On February 07 2012 06:00 SpeaKEaSY wrote: It was total bullshit that the Patriots just gave up playing defense on that Bradshaw touchdown. It's like they took their hands off the keyboard. If that was a Korean football team out there, they would have been ran out of the stadium.
?
Do you realize that they did it on purpose? If they had played tough defense, the Giants could have run another ~45 seconds off the clock and still scored 3 or 7 points, giving Brady absolutely no time to engineer a game-winning drive. By letting them score, you give up the 7 points, but gain a minute of game time. At that point, since the Patriots were incapable of playing defense between the 20's, it was better to just get the ball back with enough time to score.
And no, a team will never be run out of the stadium for making a choice that will ultimately improve their chances of winning. Even if it doesn't work.
Regardless of the intention this is the most epic moment of the game
Haha, most memorable moment of this SB for sure.
Initially I thought it was a show-off/celebration move. The people I was watching the game with were screaming at the TV - baffled at Bradshaw's "sit". Everyone finally settled down once they learned it was unintentional. The part where Pats were told by their coach to let Giants score reminisce about Favre's Packers letting Elway's Broncos score just to get the ball back.
On February 07 2012 06:00 SpeaKEaSY wrote: It was total bullshit that the Patriots just gave up playing defense on that Bradshaw touchdown. It's like they took their hands off the keyboard. If that was a Korean football team out there, they would have been ran out of the stadium.
?
Do you realize that they did it on purpose? If they had played tough defense, the Giants could have run another ~45 seconds off the clock and still scored 3 or 7 points, giving Brady absolutely no time to engineer a game-winning drive. By letting them score, you give up the 7 points, but gain a minute of game time. At that point, since the Patriots were incapable of playing defense between the 20's, it was better to just get the ball back with enough time to score.
And no, a team will never be run out of the stadium for making a choice that will ultimately improve their chances of winning. Even if it doesn't work.
That still doesn't explain why they allowed the Giants to make it all the way across the field so quickly and efficiently, though. Manning was on a tear the entire game, but the Pats really didn't put up a very good fight to stop him. They held decently when it was getting closed and forced turnovers, but WOW, their receiver coverage was horrible.
On February 07 2012 06:00 SpeaKEaSY wrote: It was total bullshit that the Patriots just gave up playing defense on that Bradshaw touchdown. It's like they took their hands off the keyboard. If that was a Korean football team out there, they would have been ran out of the stadium.
?
Do you realize that they did it on purpose? If they had played tough defense, the Giants could have run another ~45 seconds off the clock and still scored 3 or 7 points, giving Brady absolutely no time to engineer a game-winning drive. By letting them score, you give up the 7 points, but gain a minute of game time. At that point, since the Patriots were incapable of playing defense between the 20's, it was better to just get the ball back with enough time to score.
And no, a team will never be run out of the stadium for making a choice that will ultimately improve their chances of winning. Even if it doesn't work.
That still doesn't explain why they allowed the Giants to make it all the way across the field so quickly and efficiently, though. Manning was on a tear the entire game, but the Pats really didn't put up a very good fight to stop him. They held decently when it was getting closed and forced turnovers, but WOW, their receiver coverage was horrible.
New England's pass defense has been very leaky all year (one of the worst in terms of yardage) - they were going up against Eli Manning who has had his best season so far and one of the most explosive receiving corps of the NFL (Cruz, Nicks, Manningham). It's not too surprising that they would give up a few long drives as a result.
On another note, its extremely weird that Eli Manning has become one of the most 'clutch' quarterbacks in the NFL. 5 years ago, I was pretty sure that he would remain mediocre for his entire career.
On February 07 2012 06:00 SpeaKEaSY wrote: It was total bullshit that the Patriots just gave up playing defense on that Bradshaw touchdown. It's like they took their hands off the keyboard. If that was a Korean football team out there, they would have been ran out of the stadium.
?
Do you realize that they did it on purpose? If they had played tough defense, the Giants could have run another ~45 seconds off the clock and still scored 3 or 7 points, giving Brady absolutely no time to engineer a game-winning drive. By letting them score, you give up the 7 points, but gain a minute of game time. At that point, since the Patriots were incapable of playing defense between the 20's, it was better to just get the ball back with enough time to score.
And no, a team will never be run out of the stadium for making a choice that will ultimately improve their chances of winning. Even if it doesn't work.
They held decently when it was getting close and forced turnovers
Giants got lucky with the Cruz fumble because of the even stupider '12 on the field', but yeah.
First time watching the Super Bowl, actually pretty much any American Football at all. I really liked the game, even though i did not understand everything. Sad to see the Patriots lose, would've been a great year for Germans in American Sports otherwise. Dirk Nowitzki with the Mavericks Dennis Seidenberg with the Bruins and then Sebastian Vollmer with the Patriots.
On February 07 2012 07:48 Golgotha wrote: guys if gronk was 100 percent, he would have been closer to that tipped ball. FUCK MY LIFE! I was hoping for a miracle
As has been said many times before, I really don't think a hail mary would have been needed if Gronk was 100%. That whole situation really put a damper on the whole event, at least for me. arguably the most dangerous reciever in the NFL was relegated to decoy duty all game. I had no rooting interest i the game but it still sucked to see that.
On February 07 2012 06:00 SpeaKEaSY wrote: It was total bullshit that the Patriots just gave up playing defense on that Bradshaw touchdown. It's like they took their hands off the keyboard. If that was a Korean football team out there, they would have been ran out of the stadium.
?
Do you realize that they did it on purpose? If they had played tough defense, the Giants could have run another ~45 seconds off the clock and still scored 3 or 7 points, giving Brady absolutely no time to engineer a game-winning drive. By letting them score, you give up the 7 points, but gain a minute of game time. At that point, since the Patriots were incapable of playing defense between the 20's, it was better to just get the ball back with enough time to score.
And no, a team will never be run out of the stadium for making a choice that will ultimately improve their chances of winning. Even if it doesn't work.
The fact they did it on purpose is what makes it so bad. As professional athletes, I expect them to try their hardest all the time. Letting the opponent score is just disrespectful to the fans and the event organizers, and is unbecoming of professional "athletes"
On February 07 2012 06:00 SpeaKEaSY wrote: It was total bullshit that the Patriots just gave up playing defense on that Bradshaw touchdown. It's like they took their hands off the keyboard. If that was a Korean football team out there, they would have been ran out of the stadium.
?
Do you realize that they did it on purpose? If they had played tough defense, the Giants could have run another ~45 seconds off the clock and still scored 3 or 7 points, giving Brady absolutely no time to engineer a game-winning drive. By letting them score, you give up the 7 points, but gain a minute of game time. At that point, since the Patriots were incapable of playing defense between the 20's, it was better to just get the ball back with enough time to score.
And no, a team will never be run out of the stadium for making a choice that will ultimately improve their chances of winning. Even if it doesn't work.
The fact they did it on purpose is what makes it so bad. As professional athletes, I expect them to try their hardest all the time. Letting the opponent score is just disrespectful to the fans and the event organizers, and is unbecoming of professional "athletes"
What the hell are you even talking about? If they didn't let New York score, then the game was over because Eli takes a knee for another 50ish seconds and Tynes 99.99% makes a 30 yarder so they lose by one.
This is a STRATEGY. Are you saying that letting them score is a greater offense than not trying your best to win the game with whatever chances you have left?
On February 07 2012 07:48 Golgotha wrote: guys if gronk was 100 percent, he would have been closer to that tipped ball. FUCK MY LIFE! I was hoping for a miracle
As has been said many times before, I really don't think a hail mary would have been needed if Gronk was 100%. That whole situation really put a damper on the whole event, at least for me. arguably the most dangerous reciever in the NFL was relegated to decoy duty all game. I had no rooting interest i the game but it still sucked to see that.
gronk is the most dangerous receiver?
why didnt the pats use ocho cinco? he could have helped far more than a 50 percent gronki.
On February 07 2012 06:00 SpeaKEaSY wrote: It was total bullshit that the Patriots just gave up playing defense on that Bradshaw touchdown. It's like they took their hands off the keyboard. If that was a Korean football team out there, they would have been ran out of the stadium.
?
Do you realize that they did it on purpose? If they had played tough defense, the Giants could have run another ~45 seconds off the clock and still scored 3 or 7 points, giving Brady absolutely no time to engineer a game-winning drive. By letting them score, you give up the 7 points, but gain a minute of game time. At that point, since the Patriots were incapable of playing defense between the 20's, it was better to just get the ball back with enough time to score.
And no, a team will never be run out of the stadium for making a choice that will ultimately improve their chances of winning. Even if it doesn't work.
The fact they did it on purpose is what makes it so bad. As professional athletes, I expect them to try their hardest all the time. Letting the opponent score is just disrespectful to the fans and the event organizers, and is unbecoming of professional "athletes"
rofl dont feed this troll, let him adjust his high horse panties first.
On February 07 2012 07:48 Golgotha wrote: guys if gronk was 100 percent, he would have been closer to that tipped ball. FUCK MY LIFE! I was hoping for a miracle
As has been said many times before, I really don't think a hail mary would have been needed if Gronk was 100%. That whole situation really put a damper on the whole event, at least for me. arguably the most dangerous reciever in the NFL was relegated to decoy duty all game. I had no rooting interest i the game but it still sucked to see that.
gronk is the most dangerous receiver?
why didnt the pats use ocho cinco? he could have helped far more than a 50 percent gronki.
Because he sucks, his 1 catch for 20 yards or whatever was a shocking event. Not to mention Gronk still had to garner some attention throughout the entire field, even at 50%.
Yeah. Wes welker does get paid $3 million to make that catch.
But Brady gets $20 million to make the throw.
If you take another look at that throw, it was actually perfect. As soon as he passed the underneath defender, Welker turned back to look for the ball with his inside shoulder. Brady's pass went into the back pocket of the defense behind the underneath corner and infront of the safety. If Welker had turned with his body the other way (outside shoulder) to locate the ball, or if he'd continue to run out to the sideline, that throw would've been a perfect completion.
As it ends up, Welker misses the catch, on one that even he wants to have back.
I found it very interesting watching the pregame show when Rodney Harrison was talking about how he considered the 2008 loss his fault for not breaking up the Tyree catch, and after this game Welker blamed himself for the loss for dropping that pass. Gotta give credit to the way the Patriot players demand the best from themselves. This mentality is why I'm sure they'll be back in the big game soon.
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/0LgQH.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/HZh0p.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/9EjFA.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img864.imageshack.us/img864/7029/vslogo.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/vxinm.jpg)
NE Patriots <Lucas Oil Stadium> 
NY Giants![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/GfOP5.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Iv2z2.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/rJw0R.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/dRzmP.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://redsoxmaniac.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/tom-brady-lord-of-the-rings.jpg?w=500&h=745)
![[image loading]](http://www.eatliver.com/img/2009/3849.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/8VAFV.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/pcn1V.gif)
