What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

As a Pats fan... (1 Viewer)

  • Thread starter Thread starter General Tso
  • Start date Start date
videoguy505 said:
Moss had a step on both defenders on the 3rd down pass. Even at 70 yards, it was underthrown, and Moss had to slow down. If he had hit Moss in stride he would have had the TD. Sure, asking for 75-80 yards in the air is crazy, but it would have only had to have been 55 yards if he'd been able to hit Moss at the point that Moss had gotten past the defense. Neither defender would have been able to touch it, Moss was well enough past them.
The foo said:
i agree that play was a lot closer to going to house that many people realize.
Chaka said:
Aye, and if my grandmother had wheels, she'd be a wagon.
I think we all agree that could have been a TD, but that the QB couldn't throw it far enough...
I think any play could be a touchdown if the pieces fall into place. That play was far less pivotal than choosing to forgo a makeable field goal on 4th & 13. Who thinks they have a legitimate play for 4th & 13?There were four passes where I thought Brady completely missed an open receiver and the prayer to Moss was not one of them.
Agree on all accounts...
Couldn't plant the foot due to the ankle? That would cause some of those balls to soar...
I have heard that Brady was more seriously hurt than was reported and that since early in the SD game he was slowed with annkle and shoulder injuries. IMO, in both the SD and NYG games Brady was not himself. He was less mobile than usual, less accurate, had less zip on his passes, and had less distance than usual. That still takes nothing away from the Giants pass rush which only magnified his health issues. IMO, the Pats needed to make more adjustments and much sooner in the game and they didn't.
 
videoguy505 said:
Moss had a step on both defenders on the 3rd down pass. Even at 70 yards, it was underthrown, and Moss had to slow down. If he had hit Moss in stride he would have had the TD. Sure, asking for 75-80 yards in the air is crazy, but it would have only had to have been 55 yards if he'd been able to hit Moss at the point that Moss had gotten past the defense. Neither defender would have been able to touch it, Moss was well enough past them.
The foo said:
i agree that play was a lot closer to going to house that many people realize.
Chaka said:
Aye, and if my grandmother had wheels, she'd be a wagon.
I think we all agree that could have been a TD, but that the QB couldn't throw it far enough...
I think any play could be a touchdown if the pieces fall into place. That play was far less pivotal than choosing to forgo a makeable field goal on 4th & 13. Who thinks they have a legitimate play for 4th & 13?There were four passes where I thought Brady completely missed an open receiver and the prayer to Moss was not one of them.
Agree on all accounts...
Couldn't plant the foot due to the ankle? That would cause some of those balls to soar...
I have heard that Brady was more seriously hurt than was reported and that since early in the SD game he was slowed with annkle and shoulder injuries. IMO, in both the SD and NYG games Brady was not himself. He was less mobile than usual, less accurate, had less zip on his passes, and had less distance than usual. That still takes nothing away from the Giants pass rush which only magnified his health issues. IMO, the Pats needed to make more adjustments and much sooner in the game and they didn't.
Brady has been listed as "Probable - Shoulder" every week for three consecutive seasons. If the Pats want to play shenanigans with the injury report, so be it but you get no excuses due to injury after the fact.However in the Super Bowl Brady was absolutely pasted on NE's very first offensive play from scrimmage and I noted that many of the 15 or so knockdowns/sacks on Brady got his throwing shoulder slammed in one way or another. He took an absolute beating and that had nothing to do with any undisclosed injuries.

 
videoguy505 said:
Moss had a step on both defenders on the 3rd down pass. Even at 70 yards, it was underthrown, and Moss had to slow down. If he had hit Moss in stride he would have had the TD. Sure, asking for 75-80 yards in the air is crazy, but it would have only had to have been 55 yards if he'd been able to hit Moss at the point that Moss had gotten past the defense. Neither defender would have been able to touch it, Moss was well enough past them.
The foo said:
i agree that play was a lot closer to going to house that many people realize.
Chaka said:
Aye, and if my grandmother had wheels, she'd be a wagon.
I think we all agree that could have been a TD, but that the QB couldn't throw it far enough...
I think any play could be a touchdown if the pieces fall into place. That play was far less pivotal than choosing to forgo a makeable field goal on 4th & 13. Who thinks they have a legitimate play for 4th & 13?There were four passes where I thought Brady completely missed an open receiver and the prayer to Moss was not one of them.
Agree on all accounts...
Couldn't plant the foot due to the ankle? That would cause some of those balls to soar...
I have heard that Brady was more seriously hurt than was reported and that since early in the SD game he was slowed with annkle and shoulder injuries. IMO, in both the SD and NYG games Brady was not himself. He was less mobile than usual, less accurate, had less zip on his passes, and had less distance than usual. That still takes nothing away from the Giants pass rush which only magnified his health issues. IMO, the Pats needed to make more adjustments and much sooner in the game and they didn't.
I'd be curious to hear Yudkin's source(s) about the rumblings about Brady and a sports hernia. That's what I'm hearing right now.
 
Echoing much of what has already been said, Brady took a beating. He banged his elbow directly on a defenders helmet on his follow through at least twice during the game. He obviously got knocked on his ### a lot.

The 3rd down play to Moss at the end of the game; the ball traveled 67 yards in the air to the point where Webster is the first to touch it. At the point where Moss first shows up on screen, he is at the Giant 35 and just starting to try and split the defenders. MAYBE if Brady had let it loose a second earlier Moss could have run it down but it looked like the 2 defenders were tracking the ball as well as Moss. Moss had a step on the defenders and many times that is enough but 70 yard passes are a crapshoot to begin with. I think it is a little disengenuous to blame Brady on that pass. There were plenty of other plays during the game to question Brady, I actually think that was one of his better passes of the night.

 
2. The David Tyree catch will go down in history as the greatest single play in NFL history.
Again, I think you're overshooting here. Top 10 for sure. Then you get into arguments over Dwight Clark, Franco Harris, and on and on.
You can think of 9 plays that were better? I can't think of one play that had as much excitement and demonstrations of concentration and athletic ability on both sides of the play as Manning to Tyree. It was sick on both ends.Randall Cunningham to Fred Barnett vs. the Bills is the only one that comes close on both ends of the play. It was one of the most impressive plays I have ever seen but it was not an elimination game so that takes off some of the luster. Still it was a ridiculous play. (sorry for the poor video quality).

The Immaculate Reception was maybe as impressive because of just how wild that bounce was, plus there was a great deal of significance from the fact that it was originally not ruled a TD when it happened but was changed despite not having replay. It was also an elimination game which adds to it's significance.

Lynn Swann's juggling 50 yarder vs the Cowboys in Super Bowl 10 (not the TD catch) was every bit as impressive for the concentration and agility it required and it was on the biggest stage but Bradshaw had all day to get that pass off.

"The Catch"? Big deal. The play is called Sprint-right-option and was the bread and butter go-to play for the Niners for Montana's entire career there. It was a big play, no doubt, but nothing compared to this.

I don't think any of those plays was quite as impressive as Manning to Tyree but I can see the arguments. But for the life of me I can't think of six or seven others that come close.
As an Eagles :homer: it was great to watch that Randall play again. Nice youtube find. He sure was fun to watch. Remember that 90 yard punt he had? I forget who that was against. Of course the wind helped tremendously, but his talent and athleticism were incredible.

I think the Tyree play may go down for me as the most amazing I've ever seen during a game I was watching. The energy and adrenaline of that fourth quarter were off the hook. My heart was racing like a madman, and then that play just pushed it all over the top.

Other memorable plays of recent memory:

- The 4th & 26 completion from McNabb to Freddy Mitchell in the Philly/Green Bay game

- The Music City Miracle. That was unreal

As for greatest games of all time, this one definitely ranks very high. I'll never forget the Bills/Oilers playoff game where Frank Reich came off the bench to lead them to a victory after being down something unreal like 31 points. I believe Kevin Gilbride (sp?) was the Oliers OC at the time, if I'm not mistaken.

 
The Onion sums it up perfectly.

http://www.theonion.com/content/news/patri...erfect_for_rest

"Did their team plane land safely back in Foxborough?" Colgrave asked. "It didn't happen to lose altitude over Boston, burst into a cartwheel of flames, throwing players like Roman candles across New England, and then slam into few dozen loudmouth Patriots' fans houses? It didn't? Well, I guess no football season is perfect." :thumbup:

 
I'd be curious to hear Yudkin's source(s) about the rumblings about Brady and a sports hernia. That's what I'm hearing right now.
I have not heard anything about this (and no one else I know has either). I put the word out and will report back if anything turns up.
 
switz said:
I'd be curious to hear Yudkin's source(s) about the rumblings about Brady and a sports hernia. That's what I'm hearing right now.
It's called "excuses" :bag:
Give it a rest. We get it. You hate the Pats. You've made that abundantly clear.I couldn't care less WHY the Pats lost. I'm worried about next season and possible rehab since sports hernias require surgery.
 
switz said:
I'd be curious to hear Yudkin's source(s) about the rumblings about Brady and a sports hernia. That's what I'm hearing right now.
It's called "excuses" :shrug:
Give it a rest. We get it. You hate the Pats. You've made that abundantly clear.I couldn't care less WHY the Pats lost. I'm worried about next season and possible rehab since sports hernias require surgery.
Oh please - it's okay for PAts fans to come on here and piss in the pool with their complaining, lamenting, accusing, excusing... but not for anyone to point out how pathetic their complaints, laments, accusations, and excuses are? Give me a break. :coffee: Yudkin even says "he hasn't heard it" - yet one of you PAts fans is saying that Yudkin has a source for an excuse.... pathetic, just pathetic.
 
switz said:
I'd be curious to hear Yudkin's source(s) about the rumblings about Brady and a sports hernia. That's what I'm hearing right now.
It's called "excuses" :bag:
Give it a rest. We get it. You hate the Pats. You've made that abundantly clear.I couldn't care less WHY the Pats lost. I'm worried about next season and possible rehab since sports hernias require surgery.
Oh please - it's okay for PAts fans to come on here and piss in the pool with their complaining, lamenting, accusing, excusing... but not for anyone to point out how pathetic their complaints, laments, accusations, and excuses are? Give me a break. :kicksrock: Yudkin even says "he hasn't heard it" - yet one of you PAts fans is saying that Yudkin has a source for an excuse.... pathetic, just pathetic.
So you're acknowledging that two wrongs make a right. I don't defend the blind Pats homers pissing in the Shark Pool either. But you're just as bad with your constant anti-Pats nonsense. Noise is noise, no matter which side it's on.
 
switz said:
I'd be curious to hear Yudkin's source(s) about the rumblings about Brady and a sports hernia. That's what I'm hearing right now.
It's called "excuses" :rolleyes:
Give it a rest. We get it. You hate the Pats. You've made that abundantly clear.I couldn't care less WHY the Pats lost. I'm worried about next season and possible rehab since sports hernias require surgery.
Oh please - it's okay for PAts fans to come on here and piss in the pool with their complaining, lamenting, accusing, excusing... but not for anyone to point out how pathetic their complaints, laments, accusations, and excuses are? Give me a break. :shrug: Yudkin even says "he hasn't heard it" - yet one of you PAts fans is saying that Yudkin has a source for an excuse.... pathetic, just pathetic.
The only thing that I had heard (which I posted a few posts ago) was that Brady was not himself during and after the SD game . . . including practice leading up to and in the SB. I've heard this from players and media folks alike, but at no point did any of them use this as an excuse.From what I have seen, anyone associated with the team has acknoweldged that they got beat, the Giants earned it, and the Pats did not have an answer to win that game. Brady never brought up his nagging injuries at all since losing, and I have yet to see anyone suggest that the reason they lost was because of his health.
 
switz said:
I'd be curious to hear Yudkin's source(s) about the rumblings about Brady and a sports hernia. That's what I'm hearing right now.
It's called "excuses" :bowtie:
Or analysis? We get it. You hate the pats. They've been lucky to have the best winning record over the last 7 years. Brady was lucky to have the receivers he did. Only other QB's make their players better. when a team goes from 38 in ones stadium to 14 in a neutral site, something happened. Yes, the giants pass rush was good. Not really much better than in NY. Not 24 points better. You say Brady had no arm, but he throws a ball 67 yards. Sorry you don't have to analyze why your team was 18-0 and lost in the SB to a team they had alrady beat. It's over, and whaddaya know, the Pats will likely be right bak in the mix next year.
 
switz said:
I'd be curious to hear Yudkin's source(s) about the rumblings about Brady and a sports hernia. That's what I'm hearing right now.
It's called "excuses" :blush:
Give it a rest. We get it. You hate the Pats. You've made that abundantly clear.I couldn't care less WHY the Pats lost. I'm worried about next season and possible rehab since sports hernias require surgery.
Oh please - it's okay for PAts fans to come on here and piss in the pool with their complaining, lamenting, accusing, excusing... but not for anyone to point out how pathetic their complaints, laments, accusations, and excuses are? Give me a break. :bowtie: Yudkin even says "he hasn't heard it" - yet one of you PAts fans is saying that Yudkin has a source for an excuse.... pathetic, just pathetic.
The only thing that I had heard (which I posted a few posts ago) was that Brady was not himself during and after the SD game . . . including practice leading up to and in the SB. I've heard this from players and media folks alike, but at no point did any of them use this as an excuse.From what I have seen, anyone associated with the team has acknoweldged that they got beat, the Giants earned it, and the Pats did not have an answer to win that game. Brady never brought up his nagging injuries at all since losing, and I have yet to see anyone suggest that the reason they lost was because of his health.
They lost for a multitude of reasons. First off they scored much less than anybody expected, and the Giants D, specifically the pass rush, had much to do with that. Anybody watching knows Brady missed throws he usually makes. Isn't it fair to ask why? The beating had an effect, surely. Secondly, they lost because at the end of the game the defense missed two golden opportunities to end the game with INT"S. they missed an opportunity on a 4th and inches where they got the push but not the tackle. Kudos to the giants, they capitalized on the additional opportunities. Lastly, they lost on an absolutely sick catch from a WR that rarely plays. Again, a Pat, Harrison, was in position to break up the pass, but it was just a great indifvidual effort form Tyree to get that catch. Was it a great pass? Put it another way. Was it any better of a pass than the Brady passes at the end? I don't think so. In fact, I'd call it a heave and hope. The Giants WR made the play. The Pats WR didn't. That's the way it unfolded. Crucial plays at crucial times. It defines champions in a game like this. Brady put his team up. He made the plays. Last year Switz and co were sayin gBrady was only good to come back and get in position for the kick. That's proven not to be true, so now it's something else. In this game, at crunch time the Pats O outdid the Giants D and they had the lead, regardless of what had transpired to that point. Then the Giants got the ball and the Giants O outdid the Pats D. Yes, Brady had the ball with :29 left and 3 TO's. He almost made the plays, but didn't, He gave his WR a chance to get a long ball, but it didn't happen. So, the pats are 3-1 in the last 7 superbowls and 4-1 in the last 7 AFCC games. Sad we lost, but in reality is there much to be that upset about? The other teams have professional players as well, and most years they're gettin gbetter draft picks. Regardless of what happens going forward, it's been a phenomenal run. Unprecedented in fact, for the era of free agency
 
switz said:
I'd be curious to hear Yudkin's source(s) about the rumblings about Brady and a sports hernia. That's what I'm hearing right now.
It's called "excuses" :goodposting:
switz...I wasn't using the ankle injury as an excuse. I was using it as for why Brady came off less accurate than he had been in the past. The one thing I hate about Coach Belichick and the way he uses the injury report is that you can not use it as an excuse! The Giants pass rush was awesome...no one was going to deny them.I was listening to Spagnuolo on Sirius Radio today...loved what he said about Eli's Hail Manning...as a Defensive guy, he figured it would be intercepted. He said that is the kind of throw his defense likes to see!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
switz said:
I'd be curious to hear Yudkin's source(s) about the rumblings about Brady and a sports hernia. That's what I'm hearing right now.
It's called "excuses" :popcorn:
Or analysis? We get it. You hate the pats. They've been lucky to have the best winning record over the last 7 years. Brady was lucky to have the receivers he did. Only other QB's make their players better. when a team goes from 38 in ones stadium to 14 in a neutral site, something happened. Yes, the giants pass rush was good. Not really much better than in NY. Not 24 points better. You say Brady had no arm, but he throws a ball 67 yards. Sorry you don't have to analyze why your team was 18-0 and lost in the SB to a team they had alrady beat. It's over, and whaddaya know, the Pats will likely be right bak in the mix next year.
So what happened? :shrug: . What I saw was the Giants making adjustments (like the Pats usually do) from the first game and the Pats looking confused. From a few of your posts, you apparently think there's something more to it.......
 
switz said:
I'd be curious to hear Yudkin's source(s) about the rumblings about Brady and a sports hernia. That's what I'm hearing right now.
It's called "excuses" :rolleyes:
Or analysis? We get it. You hate the pats. They've been lucky to have the best winning record over the last 7 years. Brady was lucky to have the receivers he did. Only other QB's make their players better. when a team goes from 38 in ones stadium to 14 in a neutral site, something happened. Yes, the giants pass rush was good. Not really much better than in NY. Not 24 points better. You say Brady had no arm, but he throws a ball 67 yards. Sorry you don't have to analyze why your team was 18-0 and lost in the SB to a team they had alrady beat. It's over, and whaddaya know, the Pats will likely be right bak in the mix next year.
So what happened? :) . What I saw was the Giants making adjustments (like the Pats usually do) from the first game and the Pats looking confused. From a few of your posts, you apparently think there's something more to it.......
I'd respond, but I think this was a pretty decent viewpoint from the OP you asked.Your take is OK, but I would suggest that rather than adjustments and confusion being the key, determination and domination along the Giants D line were. I don't think the Giants win was due to scheme or adjustments from the first meeting. I believe, specifically along the D line, they just played flat out better than the first game, winning 1:1 battles more frequently and getting in the QBs face.

 
PMENFAN said:
Crucial plays at crucial times. It defines champions in a game like this. Brady put his team up. He made the plays. Last year Switz and co were saying Brady was only good to come back and get in position for the kick. That's proven not to be true, so now it's something else. In this game, at crunch time the Pats O outdid the Giants D and they had the lead, regardless of what had transpired to that point. Then the Giants got the ball and the Giants O outdid the Pats D.

Yes, Brady had the ball with :29 left and 3 TO's. He almost made the plays, but didn't, He gave his WR a chance to get a long ball, but it didn't happen. So, the pats are 3-1 in the last 7 superbowls and 4-1 in the last 7 AFCC games. Sad we lost, but in reality is there much to be that upset about? The other teams have professional players as well, and most years they're gettin gbetter draft picks. Regardless of what happens going forward, it's been a phenomenal run. Unprecedented in fact, for the era of free agency
I'm wondering how that's been proven untrue. When, in crunch time, did Brady drive the team to a TD??Not in this SB... that was a 12 play drive that took 5:42 to do. There was no pressure of time expiring. There was likely going to be enough time on the clock, if they failed to score, to drive again (and in fact, there was...).

To compare, Manning had 2:07 to drive his team to score. He too took 12 plays, but completed them in 1:42, for a TD.

And while 30 seconds to make it down the field to a TD even with 3 TOs is ridiculous, it's not too short to get into FG range, especially when only 30 yards are needed (it would have been a 54 yard FG). Brady couldn't even do that this game.

In all of the games where they've needed a score at the end, they've driven 40 yards or so and kicked FGs.

Brady still, in crunch time, has not driven them for a TD needed to win.

 
PMENFAN said:
Crucial plays at crucial times. It defines champions in a game like this. Brady put his team up. He made the plays. Last year Switz and co were saying Brady was only good to come back and get in position for the kick. That's proven not to be true, so now it's something else. In this game, at crunch time the Pats O outdid the Giants D and they had the lead, regardless of what had transpired to that point. Then the Giants got the ball and the Giants O outdid the Pats D.

Yes, Brady had the ball with :29 left and 3 TO's. He almost made the plays, but didn't, He gave his WR a chance to get a long ball, but it didn't happen. So, the pats are 3-1 in the last 7 superbowls and 4-1 in the last 7 AFCC games. Sad we lost, but in reality is there much to be that upset about? The other teams have professional players as well, and most years they're gettin gbetter draft picks. Regardless of what happens going forward, it's been a phenomenal run. Unprecedented in fact, for the era of free agency
I'm wondering how that's been proven untrue. When, in crunch time, did Brady drive the team to a TD??Not in this SB... that was a 12 play drive that took 5:42 to do. There was no pressure of time expiring. There was likely going to be enough time on the clock, if they failed to score, to drive again (and in fact, there was...).

To compare, Manning had 2:07 to drive his team to score. He too took 12 plays, but completed them in 1:42, for a TD.

And while 30 seconds to make it down the field to a TD even with 3 TOs is ridiculous, it's not too short to get into FG range, especially when only 30 yards are needed (it would have been a 54 yard FG). Brady couldn't even do that this game.

In all of the games where they've needed a score at the end, they've driven 40 yards or so and kicked FGs.

Brady still, in crunch time, has not driven them for a TD needed to win.
I gotta say, that going for the deep pass with 28 seconds on the clock and three time out was insane. They could have used the whole field and drove within field goal range in that time no problem.Bad play calling and bad decisions by Brady. It's the first time I can recall thinking that about the Patriots since Brady took over.

 
I'd be curious to hear Yudkin's source(s) about the rumblings about Brady and a sports hernia. That's what I'm hearing right now.
It's called "excuses" :confused:
I wonder if this Tom Brady was 100% thing will be parroted as much as the "All the Pats had the flu :thumbup:" excuse was for last year's choke
There is little doubt it is just an "excuse."They had to mention him on the injury report if this was to be believed. They didn't and it isn't.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
And while 30 seconds to make it down the field to a TD even with 3 TOs is ridiculous, it's not too short to get into FG range, especially when only 30 yards are needed (it would have been a 54 yard FG). Brady couldn't even do that this game.
:coffee: Pats had the ball on their 26 yard line. Thirty yards brings it to the Giants 44, which would mean a 62 yard FG attempt.

 
I'd be curious to hear Yudkin's source(s) about the rumblings about Brady and a sports hernia. That's what I'm hearing right now.
It's called "excuses" :confused:
I wonder if this Tom Brady was 100% thing will be parroted as much as the "All the Pats had the flu :confused:" excuse was for last year's choke
its not like brady played with a torn ACL or something. wussbtw, NE 0-2 the last two years after very tough physical games with SD
 
And while 30 seconds to make it down the field to a TD even with 3 TOs is ridiculous, it's not too short to get into FG range, especially when only 30 yards are needed (it would have been a 54 yard FG). Brady couldn't even do that this game.
:goodposting: Pats had the ball on their 26 yard line. Thirty yards brings it to the Giants 44, which would mean a 62 yard FG attempt.
Facts are irrelevant to that guy. It's a mute point. j

ANY drive to come from behind in the 4th quarter of the SB is clutc h. I don't care if it's 3 or 7 points. Brady made the clutch plays to put his team up, after taking a pounding for the forest 3.5 quarters. I say it was clutch, Switz obsesses that Brady has never actually madde a play that wasn't the responsibility of somebody else. Brady's just been along for the ride as they've been 4-1 in the last 7 AFCC Games adn 3-1 in the last 7 Superbowls. Did Eli made plays after? Sure did. There's no need to make excuses. for a team that has been as good as they have. Their accomplishments speak for themselves. Sure, they are the first team to lost in a SB after getting to 18-0, but at the same time they're the first to get to 18-0 to have a chance to win the SB.

Anytime you lose, it sucks. But, last I checked, nobody has won them all.

Chear jpu Hater Nation. They'll be right back there next year for you to envy their success. No matter what happens in FAgency, this team will remain in contention, as they have for 7 years.

 
And while 30 seconds to make it down the field to a TD even with 3 TOs is ridiculous, it's not too short to get into FG range, especially when only 30 yards are needed (it would have been a 54 yard FG). Brady couldn't even do that this game.
:blackdot: Pats had the ball on their 26 yard line. Thirty yards brings it to the Giants 44, which would mean a 62 yard FG attempt.
I thought switz's numbers were off. It still doesn't explain why they went for low percentage long passes against a secondary playing deep, with 28 seconds left and three time outs.Poor play calling and decision making.

 
And while 30 seconds to make it down the field to a TD even with 3 TOs is ridiculous, it's not too short to get into FG range, especially when only 30 yards are needed (it would have been a 54 yard FG). Brady couldn't even do that this game.
:bag: Pats had the ball on their 26 yard line. Thirty yards brings it to the Giants 44, which would mean a 62 yard FG attempt.
Facts are irrelevant to that guy. It's a mute point. j

ANY drive to come from behind in the 4th quarter of the SB is clutc h. I don't care if it's 3 or 7 points. Brady made the clutch plays to put his team up, after taking a pounding for the forest 3.5 quarters. I say it was clutch, Switz obsesses that Brady has never actually madde a play that wasn't the responsibility of somebody else. Brady's just been along for the ride as they've been 4-1 in the last 7 AFCC Games adn 3-1 in the last 7 Superbowls. Did Eli made plays after? Sure did. There's no need to make excuses. for a team that has been as good as they have. Their accomplishments speak for themselves. Sure, they are the first team to lost in a SB after getting to 18-0, but at the same time they're the first to get to 18-0 to have a chance to win the SB.

Anytime you lose, it sucks. But, last I checked, nobody has won them all.

Chear jpu Hater Nation. They'll be right back there next year for you to envy their success. No matter what happens in FAgency, this team will remain in contention, as they have for 7 years.
:shrug: but were you drunk when you posted this? :bag:
 
Chaka said:
abrecher said:
And while 30 seconds to make it down the field to a TD even with 3 TOs is ridiculous, it's not too short to get into FG range, especially when only 30 yards are needed (it would have been a 54 yard FG). Brady couldn't even do that this game.
:lmao: Pats had the ball on their 26 yard line. Thirty yards brings it to the Giants 44, which would mean a 62 yard FG attempt.
I thought switz's numbers were off. It still doesn't explain why they went for low percentage long passes against a secondary playing deep, with 28 seconds left and three time outs.Poor play calling and decision making.
The 1st down play was the big play. If they try to hit on a clear out crossing route or something up the seam, and use the TOs available, it could have changed the complexion of that attempted drive. Seems like picking up 10-15 yards, even in the middle of the field with 3 TOs would have put them in a pretty fair spot.Once the 2nd down sack happened, the Pats were pretty much out of options. They needed about 55 or 60 yards in about 15 seconds for a reasonable FG try. And the way that sack happened, I couldn't tell you what the play call was. Brady hit his plant foot and was buried by Alford. No chance at all.

 
my two cents:

if not for the eli-tyree miracle, i think brady's final drive of the game would've cemented his place among the greatest qb's of all time.

but now he's just a goat, not the GOAT.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
my two cents:

if not for the eli-tyree miracle, i think brady's final drive of the game would've cemented his place among the greatest qb's of all time.

but now he's just a goat, not the GOAT.
It was a great catch on a great scramble play by Eli no doubt. But not of the Franco Harris miracle type. IMO, the way the Giants played that game, it would have been a shame for them not to win. But the Pats had managed to pull those out earlier this year (Balt., Philly)... it was bound to "catch" up with them eventually and the Giants had the players to pull it off.
 
Chaka said:
abrecher said:
And while 30 seconds to make it down the field to a TD even with 3 TOs is ridiculous, it's not too short to get into FG range, especially when only 30 yards are needed (it would have been a 54 yard FG). Brady couldn't even do that this game.
;) Pats had the ball on their 26 yard line. Thirty yards brings it to the Giants 44, which would mean a 62 yard FG attempt.
I thought switz's numbers were off. It still doesn't explain why they went for low percentage long passes against a secondary playing deep, with 28 seconds left and three time outs.Poor play calling and decision making.
The 1st down play was the big play. If they try to hit on a clear out crossing route or something up the seam, and use the TOs available, it could have changed the complexion of that attempted drive. Seems like picking up 10-15 yards, even in the middle of the field with 3 TOs would have put them in a pretty fair spot.Once the 2nd down sack happened, the Pats were pretty much out of options. They needed about 55 or 60 yards in about 15 seconds for a reasonable FG try. And the way that sack happened, I couldn't tell you what the play call was. Brady hit his plant foot and was buried by Alford. No chance at all.
Yes the first down play call, or more likely Brady's decision to go deep to Moss, was knuckleheaded.
 
my two cents:if not for the eli-tyree miracle, i think brady's final drive of the game would've cemented his place among the greatest qb's of all time. but now he's just a goat, not the GOAT.
You might be right, then again if "ifs" and "buts" were "candy" and "nuts" we'd all have a Merry Christmas.
 
Two days later and this still sucks big-time. I still feel like the Pats didn't give it their best effort. And I still think Brady looked like crap in the game, regardless of what others in here are saying. Lots of short dinky passes which explains the 68% rate. But he had some very bad misses on some wide open receivers. Anyone who says he had a good game just wasn't paying attention.

And I have to add another observation:

11. Why was Brady under pressure the WHOLE game????? My God - absolutely inexcusable. Bad coaching, bad O-Line play, bad game calling.... The Pats just didn't adjust. I mean, think about this - the Giants knocked Brady on his ### 18 times in addition to the sacks - and still I don't recall seeing one holding penalty on the Pats O-Line. It was obvious the refs weren't throwing flags unless someone drew blood. Yet the Giant D-Line just kept coming, seemingly unabated.

Whew. I feel a little better now. Not much...
They should have been called at least once that saved a sack and allowed a completion...if that makes you feel better.
 
Chaka said:
abrecher said:
And while 30 seconds to make it down the field to a TD even with 3 TOs is ridiculous, it's not too short to get into FG range, especially when only 30 yards are needed (it would have been a 54 yard FG). Brady couldn't even do that this game.
:goodposting: Pats had the ball on their 26 yard line. Thirty yards brings it to the Giants 44, which would mean a 62 yard FG attempt.
I thought switz's numbers were off. It still doesn't explain why they went for low percentage long passes against a secondary playing deep, with 28 seconds left and three time outs.Poor play calling and decision making.
I failed to tack on the 7 yards from scrimmage, making it a 61 yard kick.
 
I just want to bring up the Samuel "drop" that people say. Please watch this play again, in slow mo...he was tight roping the sideline (although he should be able to stay in...but it was on his mind) he jumped in the air and got his hands over his head and the ball still went off the TOP off his fingertips...To call that a drop is really unfair, especially for a CB.

Am I the only person who sees it this way?

 
Chaka said:
abrecher said:
And while 30 seconds to make it down the field to a TD even with 3 TOs is ridiculous, it's not too short to get into FG range, especially when only 30 yards are needed (it would have been a 54 yard FG). Brady couldn't even do that this game.
:goodposting: Pats had the ball on their 26 yard line. Thirty yards brings it to the Giants 44, which would mean a 62 yard FG attempt.
I thought switz's numbers were off. It still doesn't explain why they went for low percentage long passes against a secondary playing deep, with 28 seconds left and three time outs.Poor play calling and decision making.
The 1st down play was the big play. If they try to hit on a clear out crossing route or something up the seam, and use the TOs available, it could have changed the complexion of that attempted drive. Seems like picking up 10-15 yards, even in the middle of the field with 3 TOs would have put them in a pretty fair spot.Once the 2nd down sack happened, the Pats were pretty much out of options. They needed about 55 or 60 yards in about 15 seconds for a reasonable FG try. And the way that sack happened, I couldn't tell you what the play call was. Brady hit his plant foot and was buried by Alford. No chance at all.
Yes the first down play call, or more likely Brady's decision to go deep to Moss, was knuckleheaded.
You guys only commenting on where the ball went and not what caused that to happen. First, the Giants blitzed on 1st down which was kind of gutsy and NE was not expecting it, the Giants covered the short play expecting that so Brady quickly switched gears to get rid of the ball and I think he was just throwing it away.Then the sack was HUGE and forced them into crazy passes...

 
Chaka said:
abrecher said:
And while 30 seconds to make it down the field to a TD even with 3 TOs is ridiculous, it's not too short to get into FG range, especially when only 30 yards are needed (it would have been a 54 yard FG). Brady couldn't even do that this game.
:lmao: Pats had the ball on their 26 yard line. Thirty yards brings it to the Giants 44, which would mean a 62 yard FG attempt.
I thought switz's numbers were off. It still doesn't explain why they went for low percentage long passes against a secondary playing deep, with 28 seconds left and three time outs.Poor play calling and decision making.
The 1st down play was the big play. If they try to hit on a clear out crossing route or something up the seam, and use the TOs available, it could have changed the complexion of that attempted drive. Seems like picking up 10-15 yards, even in the middle of the field with 3 TOs would have put them in a pretty fair spot.Once the 2nd down sack happened, the Pats were pretty much out of options. They needed about 55 or 60 yards in about 15 seconds for a reasonable FG try. And the way that sack happened, I couldn't tell you what the play call was. Brady hit his plant foot and was buried by Alford. No chance at all.
Yes the first down play call, or more likely Brady's decision to go deep to Moss, was knuckleheaded.
You guys only commenting on where the ball went and not what caused that to happen. First, the Giants blitzed on 1st down which was kind of gutsy and NE was not expecting it, the Giants covered the short play expecting that so Brady quickly switched gears to get rid of the ball and I think he was just throwing it away.Then the sack was HUGE and forced them into crazy passes...
Fine then the decision to throw it away 67 yards down the field was knuckleheaded.Tick-tock tick-tock

 
I just want to bring up the Samuel "drop" that people say. Please watch this play again, in slow mo...he was tight roping the sideline (although he should be able to stay in...but it was on his mind) he jumped in the air and got his hands over his head and the ball still went off the TOP off his fingertips...To call that a drop is really unfair, especially for a CB.Am I the only person who sees it this way?
nope, I watched the replays of that drive recently and thats what I saw, too. It looked like he was thinking about the sideline, because he immediately looked down when he landed, but he would have needed to elevate about another 3 inches to have a fair shot at the ball, and it would have been hailed as an incredible play if he had made the catch.
 
I just want to bring up the Samuel "drop" that people say. Please watch this play again, in slow mo...he was tight roping the sideline (although he should be able to stay in...but it was on his mind) he jumped in the air and got his hands over his head and the ball still went off the TOP off his fingertips...To call that a drop is really unfair, especially for a CB.Am I the only person who sees it this way?
I agree, he's taking a ridiculous rap for this. This wasn't Jackie Smith getting hit in the numbers all alone in the end zone, this was a full extension leap on the sidelines. And the bottom line is, there is a reason these guys are D-backs, if they had hands they be wideouts.
 
And while 30 seconds to make it down the field to a TD even with 3 TOs is ridiculous, it's not too short to get into FG range, especially when only 30 yards are needed (it would have been a 54 yard FG). Brady couldn't even do that this game.
:football: Pats had the ball on their 26 yard line. Thirty yards brings it to the Giants 44, which would mean a 62 yard FG attempt.
I thought switz's numbers were off. It still doesn't explain why they went for low percentage long passes against a secondary playing deep, with 28 seconds left and three time outs.Poor play calling and decision making.
The 1st down play was the big play. If they try to hit on a clear out crossing route or something up the seam, and use the TOs available, it could have changed the complexion of that attempted drive. Seems like picking up 10-15 yards, even in the middle of the field with 3 TOs would have put them in a pretty fair spot.Once the 2nd down sack happened, the Pats were pretty much out of options. They needed about 55 or 60 yards in about 15 seconds for a reasonable FG try. And the way that sack happened, I couldn't tell you what the play call was. Brady hit his plant foot and was buried by Alford. No chance at all.
Yes the first down play call, or more likely Brady's decision to go deep to Moss, was knuckleheaded.
You guys only commenting on where the ball went and not what caused that to happen. First, the Giants blitzed on 1st down which was kind of gutsy and NE was not expecting it, the Giants covered the short play expecting that so Brady quickly switched gears to get rid of the ball and I think he was just throwing it away.Then the sack was HUGE and forced them into crazy passes...
:confused: How does that excuse such bad decision making? They rolled the pocket to give him time, and he had time on that play, and he still made a bad decision and a bad throw.I think it says a lot about NE's arrogance that they basically were unwilling to tie the game and go into OT, and went for it all. Arrogance.

 
11. Why was Brady under pressure the WHOLE game????? My God - absolutely inexcusable. Bad coaching, bad O-Line play, bad game calling.... The Pats just didn't adjust. I mean, think about this - the Giants knocked Brady on his ### 18 times in addition to the sacks - and still I don't recall seeing one holding penalty on the Pats O-Line. It was obvious the refs weren't throwing flags unless someone drew blood. Yet the Giant D-Line just kept coming, seemingly unabated.
Here's what really bothers me...pretty much every expert in the free world said for the Giants to win they needed to do exactly what they did on Sunday. There was nothing exotic about what they did. Yet, somehow, someway the Pats seemed totally surprised and unprepared for what happened. It's one thing being physically overmatched (which was also the case) but the last thing I would ever guess is that the Patriot coaching staff would contribute so much to their demise.
What is bothering me is that some people think the only way the Pats could have lost is if they did something wrong. How about this for an explanation? The Giants defensive line is really, really good and there is no shame in getting beat by them. They did lead the NFL in sacks y'know.
It's an interesting point. Didn't 12 of their 53 sacks come in one game, and in the 2nd game against Philly, they managed only 3 in their second game against the same team, or about average. Their talent is amont the best in the league, but me thinks they utillized intelligence, (how they got it is irrelevant) to figure out line calls and hit the gaps, because they knew where the coverage was rolling to. If it was the Pats who put this much pressure on to anybody, the question would be aqsked. No, the Giants haven't been caught videotaping, but I'm saying you don't beat up any line in the league to the extent they did the Pats in the SB (after 1 sack in the regular season) and the eagles, without knowing what the line is doing. Am I accusing the Giants of cheating? Not at all. they could have picked the calls up, but it's beyond coincidence to me. Twelve sacks agains one team, and five against one of the best lines in football, and huge disparity in the two games you play. Are they good? Yep, but you look a lot better when you know where the leverage is going.
I saw an interview with Spagnuolo after the game and he was asked why were the Giants able to get so much pressure in the Super Bowl compared to the week 17 game.He said that in week 17 they didn’t have all of their defensive blitz packages in that game plan because they didn’t want to show too much before the playoffs.

 
Moss had a step on both defenders on the 3rd down pass. Even at 70 yards, it was underthrown, and Moss had to slow down. If he had hit Moss in stride he would have had the TD. Sure, asking for 75-80 yards in the air is crazy, but it would have only had to have been 55 yards if he'd been able to hit Moss at the point that Moss had gotten past the defense. Neither defender would have been able to touch it, Moss was well enough past them.
i agree that play was a lot closer to going to house that many people realize.
Aye, and if my grandmother had wheels, she'd be a wagon.
I think we all agree that could have been a TD, but that the QB couldn't throw it far enough...
I think any play could be a touchdown if the pieces fall into place. That play was far less pivotal than choosing to forgo a makeable field goal on 4th & 13. Who thinks they have a legitimate play for 4th & 13?There were four passes where I thought Brady completely missed an open receiver and the prayer to Moss was not one of them.
Agree on all accounts...
Couldn't plant the foot due to the ankle? That would cause some of those balls to soar...
I have heard that Brady was more seriously hurt than was reported and that since early in the SD game he was slowed with annkle and shoulder injuries. IMO, in both the SD and NYG games Brady was not himself. He was less mobile than usual, less accurate, had less zip on his passes, and had less distance than usual. That still takes nothing away from the Giants pass rush which only magnified his health issues. IMO, the Pats needed to make more adjustments and much sooner in the game and they didn't.
Brady has been listed as "Probable - Shoulder" every week for three consecutive seasons. If the Pats want to play shenanigans with the injury report, so be it but you get no excuses due to injury after the fact.
Amen!There is no injury excuse. Brady played like poop at times. No excuses, no ankle.

Not sure how I missed this post the first time around.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
And while 30 seconds to make it down the field to a TD even with 3 TOs is ridiculous, it's not too short to get into FG range, especially when only 30 yards are needed (it would have been a 54 yard FG). Brady couldn't even do that this game.
:thumbup: Pats had the ball on their 26 yard line. Thirty yards brings it to the Giants 44, which would mean a 62 yard FG attempt.
I thought switz's numbers were off. It still doesn't explain why they went for low percentage long passes against a secondary playing deep, with 28 seconds left and three time outs.Poor play calling and decision making.
The 1st down play was the big play. If they try to hit on a clear out crossing route or something up the seam, and use the TOs available, it could have changed the complexion of that attempted drive. Seems like picking up 10-15 yards, even in the middle of the field with 3 TOs would have put them in a pretty fair spot.Once the 2nd down sack happened, the Pats were pretty much out of options. They needed about 55 or 60 yards in about 15 seconds for a reasonable FG try. And the way that sack happened, I couldn't tell you what the play call was. Brady hit his plant foot and was buried by Alford. No chance at all.
Yes the first down play call, or more likely Brady's decision to go deep to Moss, was knuckleheaded.
You guys only commenting on where the ball went and not what caused that to happen. First, the Giants blitzed on 1st down which was kind of gutsy and NE was not expecting it, the Giants covered the short play expecting that so Brady quickly switched gears to get rid of the ball and I think he was just throwing it away.Then the sack was HUGE and forced them into crazy passes...
:confused: How does that excuse such bad decision making? They rolled the pocket to give him time, and he had time on that play, and he still made a bad decision and a bad throw.I think it says a lot about NE's arrogance that they basically were unwilling to tie the game and go into OT, and went for it all. Arrogance.
IIRC, they didn't roll the pocket on the 1st down play, but rather on the 3rd down play. At that point, it was desperation mode, as they 1st down incompletion and 2nd down sack removed all but hail mary type plays from their available options.
 
Road Warriors said:
switz said:
And while 30 seconds to make it down the field to a TD even with 3 TOs is ridiculous, it's not too short to get into FG range, especially when only 30 yards are needed (it would have been a 54 yard FG). Brady couldn't even do that this game.
:tumbleweed: Pats had the ball on their 26 yard line. Thirty yards brings it to the Giants 44, which would mean a 62 yard FG attempt.
I thought switz's numbers were off. It still doesn't explain why they went for low percentage long passes against a secondary playing deep, with 28 seconds left and three time outs.Poor play calling and decision making.
The 1st down play was the big play. If they try to hit on a clear out crossing route or something up the seam, and use the TOs available, it could have changed the complexion of that attempted drive. Seems like picking up 10-15 yards, even in the middle of the field with 3 TOs would have put them in a pretty fair spot.Once the 2nd down sack happened, the Pats were pretty much out of options. They needed about 55 or 60 yards in about 15 seconds for a reasonable FG try. And the way that sack happened, I couldn't tell you what the play call was. Brady hit his plant foot and was buried by Alford. No chance at all.
Yes the first down play call, or more likely Brady's decision to go deep to Moss, was knuckleheaded.
You guys only commenting on where the ball went and not what caused that to happen. First, the Giants blitzed on 1st down which was kind of gutsy and NE was not expecting it, the Giants covered the short play expecting that so Brady quickly switched gears to get rid of the ball and I think he was just throwing it away.Then the sack was HUGE and forced them into crazy passes...
:) How does that excuse such bad decision making? They rolled the pocket to give him time, and he had time on that play, and he still made a bad decision and a bad throw.I think it says a lot about NE's arrogance that they basically were unwilling to tie the game and go into OT, and went for it all. Arrogance.
IIRC, they didn't roll the pocket on the 1st down play, but rather on the 3rd down play. At that point, it was desperation mode, as they 1st down incompletion and 2nd down sack removed all but hail mary type plays from their available options.
At the time that play began there were 19 seconds on the clock. More than enough for a 20-30 yard pass, which would have been a first down. Then even if the WR had not been able to get out of bounds, a spike. Still there would have been time to make another pass for 20 yards and attempt a FG. It would have been tight on time, but it was the smarter football decision.Just to give you an idea, on the Giants TD drive, 7 of their plays took 5 seconds each. So the Pats had time for at least 3 plays, maybe 4 at the 19 second mark. If they hadn't tried the long balls they likely could have gotten into FG range. Especially since the Giants had left the mid-range open expecting the hail mary's.

 
Road Warriors said:
switz said:
And while 30 seconds to make it down the field to a TD even with 3 TOs is ridiculous, it's not too short to get into FG range, especially when only 30 yards are needed (it would have been a 54 yard FG). Brady couldn't even do that this game.
:confused: Pats had the ball on their 26 yard line. Thirty yards brings it to the Giants 44, which would mean a 62 yard FG attempt.
I thought switz's numbers were off. It still doesn't explain why they went for low percentage long passes against a secondary playing deep, with 28 seconds left and three time outs.Poor play calling and decision making.
The 1st down play was the big play. If they try to hit on a clear out crossing route or something up the seam, and use the TOs available, it could have changed the complexion of that attempted drive. Seems like picking up 10-15 yards, even in the middle of the field with 3 TOs would have put them in a pretty fair spot.Once the 2nd down sack happened, the Pats were pretty much out of options. They needed about 55 or 60 yards in about 15 seconds for a reasonable FG try. And the way that sack happened, I couldn't tell you what the play call was. Brady hit his plant foot and was buried by Alford. No chance at all.
Yes the first down play call, or more likely Brady's decision to go deep to Moss, was knuckleheaded.
You guys only commenting on where the ball went and not what caused that to happen. First, the Giants blitzed on 1st down which was kind of gutsy and NE was not expecting it, the Giants covered the short play expecting that so Brady quickly switched gears to get rid of the ball and I think he was just throwing it away.Then the sack was HUGE and forced them into crazy passes...
:confused: How does that excuse such bad decision making? They rolled the pocket to give him time, and he had time on that play, and he still made a bad decision and a bad throw.I think it says a lot about NE's arrogance that they basically were unwilling to tie the game and go into OT, and went for it all. Arrogance.
IIRC, they didn't roll the pocket on the 1st down play, but rather on the 3rd down play. At that point, it was desperation mode, as they 1st down incompletion and 2nd down sack removed all but hail mary type plays from their available options.
At the time that play began there were 19 seconds on the clock. More than enough for a 20-30 yard pass, which would have been a first down. Then even if the WR had not been able to get out of bounds, a spike. Still there would have been time to make another pass for 20 yards and attempt a FG. It would have been tight on time, but it was the smarter football decision.Just to give you an idea, on the Giants TD drive, 7 of their plays took 5 seconds each. So the Pats had time for at least 3 plays, maybe 4 at the 19 second mark. If they hadn't tried the long balls they likely could have gotten into FG range. Especially since the Giants had left the mid-range open expecting the hail mary's.
You are a piece of work. I have no problem with the 3rd down throw. Moss had a step on the defenders and although it was underthrown, Moss had a chance to make a play. That play very nearly was completed.So far you have said that the ball was barely thrown 55 yards. In fact it was thrown 67 yards.

You have said that the Pats only needed 30 yards to attempt a 54 yard FG (Gostkowski's career long was 52 yards). They in fact needed closer to 40 yards in 30 seconds.

The first down deep throw to Gaffney was ill advised but as with much of the game, it was forced by the pass rush of the Giants. Then the pass rush of the Giants got a sack on 2nd down. The game was won by the Giants pass rush and the inability of the Pats offensive line to win their battles.

 
Road Warriors said:
switz said:
And while 30 seconds to make it down the field to a TD even with 3 TOs is ridiculous, it's not too short to get into FG range, especially when only 30 yards are needed (it would have been a 54 yard FG). Brady couldn't even do that this game.
:confused: Pats had the ball on their 26 yard line. Thirty yards brings it to the Giants 44, which would mean a 62 yard FG attempt.
I thought switz's numbers were off. It still doesn't explain why they went for low percentage long passes against a secondary playing deep, with 28 seconds left and three time outs.Poor play calling and decision making.
The 1st down play was the big play. If they try to hit on a clear out crossing route or something up the seam, and use the TOs available, it could have changed the complexion of that attempted drive. Seems like picking up 10-15 yards, even in the middle of the field with 3 TOs would have put them in a pretty fair spot.Once the 2nd down sack happened, the Pats were pretty much out of options. They needed about 55 or 60 yards in about 15 seconds for a reasonable FG try. And the way that sack happened, I couldn't tell you what the play call was. Brady hit his plant foot and was buried by Alford. No chance at all.
Yes the first down play call, or more likely Brady's decision to go deep to Moss, was knuckleheaded.
You guys only commenting on where the ball went and not what caused that to happen. First, the Giants blitzed on 1st down which was kind of gutsy and NE was not expecting it, the Giants covered the short play expecting that so Brady quickly switched gears to get rid of the ball and I think he was just throwing it away.Then the sack was HUGE and forced them into crazy passes...
:confused: How does that excuse such bad decision making? They rolled the pocket to give him time, and he had time on that play, and he still made a bad decision and a bad throw.I think it says a lot about NE's arrogance that they basically were unwilling to tie the game and go into OT, and went for it all. Arrogance.
IIRC, they didn't roll the pocket on the 1st down play, but rather on the 3rd down play. At that point, it was desperation mode, as they 1st down incompletion and 2nd down sack removed all but hail mary type plays from their available options.
At the time that play began there were 19 seconds on the clock. More than enough for a 20-30 yard pass, which would have been a first down. Then even if the WR had not been able to get out of bounds, a spike. Still there would have been time to make another pass for 20 yards and attempt a FG. It would have been tight on time, but it was the smarter football decision.Just to give you an idea, on the Giants TD drive, 7 of their plays took 5 seconds each. So the Pats had time for at least 3 plays, maybe 4 at the 19 second mark. If they hadn't tried the long balls they likely could have gotten into FG range. Especially since the Giants had left the mid-range open expecting the hail mary's.
You are a piece of work. I have no problem with the 3rd down throw. Moss had a step on the defenders and although it was underthrown, Moss had a chance to make a play. That play very nearly was completed.So far you have said that the ball was barely thrown 55 yards. In fact it was thrown 67 yards.

You have said that the Pats only needed 30 yards to attempt a 54 yard FG (Gostkowski's career long was 52 yards). They in fact needed closer to 40 yards in 30 seconds.

The first down deep throw to Gaffney was ill advised but as with much of the game, it was forced by the pass rush of the Giants. Then the pass rush of the Giants got a sack on 2nd down. The game was won by the Giants pass rush and the inability of the Pats offensive line to win their battles.

 
So the Pats had time for at least 3 plays, maybe 4 at the 19 second mark. If they hadn't tried the long balls they likely could have gotten into FG range. Especially since the Giants had left the mid-range open expecting the hail mary's.
OK, this is now officially one big :blackdot: . :goodposting:
 
So the Pats had time for at least 3 plays, maybe 4 at the 19 second mark. If they hadn't tried the long balls they likely could have gotten into FG range. Especially since the Giants had left the mid-range open expecting the hail mary's.
OK, this is now officially one big :hot: . :bye:
Don't even bother with that guy. He disregards facts all the time. He's just a pure hater.......
 
For the record, Brady had 29 seconds and 3 timeouts at the end, not 35 seconds. The kickoff return drained 6 seconds off of the clock.

Crucial plays at crucial times. It defines champions in a game like this. Brady put his team up. He made the plays. Last year Switz and co were saying Brady was only good to come back and get in position for the kick. That's proven not to be true, so now it's something else. In this game, at crunch time the Pats O outdid the Giants D and they had the lead, regardless of what had transpired to that point. Then the Giants got the ball and the Giants O outdid the Pats D.

Yes, Brady had the ball with :29 left and 3 TO's. He almost made the plays, but didn't, He gave his WR a chance to get a long ball, but it didn't happen. So, the pats are 3-1 in the last 7 superbowls and 4-1 in the last 7 AFCC games. Sad we lost, but in reality is there much to be that upset about? The other teams have professional players as well, and most years they're gettin gbetter draft picks. Regardless of what happens going forward, it's been a phenomenal run. Unprecedented in fact, for the era of free agency
I'm wondering how that's been proven untrue. When, in crunch time, did Brady drive the team to a TD??Not in this SB... that was a 12 play drive that took 5:42 to do. There was no pressure of time expiring. There was likely going to be enough time on the clock, if they failed to score, to drive again (and in fact, there was...).

To compare, Manning had 2:07 to drive his team to score. He too took 12 plays, but completed them in 1:42, for a TD.

And while 30 seconds to make it down the field to a TD even with 3 TOs is ridiculous, it's not too short to get into FG range, especially when only 30 yards are needed (it would have been a 54 yard FG). Brady couldn't even do that this game.

In all of the games where they've needed a score at the end, they've driven 40 yards or so and kicked FGs.

Brady still, in crunch time, has not driven them for a TD needed to win.
I don't even like the Patriots, but you are ridiculous. You are saying that NE's TD drive wasn't crunch time because there was too much time left, but if Brady had thrown an INT on that 3rd down play instead of the TD, and then the Giants ran the clock out, you would be ripping Brady for failing in crunch time, saying, "It was their last drive, and he failed!" You are so predictable.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't even like the Patriots, but you are ridiculous. You are saying that NE's TD drive wasn't crunch time because there was too much time left, but if Brady had thrown an INT on that 3rd down play instead of the TD, and then the Giants ran the clock out, you would be ripping Brady for failing in crunch time, saying, "It was their last drive, and he failed!" You are so predictable.
No, I wouldn't. I would say that the Giants shut down the Pats all day long, which they did anyway. IMO, all the tremendous game winning, crunch time drives, happen within the last five minutes, and most within the least 3 minutes or so. Just go through the history of the great games in your mind... all the "crunch time" drives are LATE in the 4th quarter...And either way, Brady didn't lead them to a game winning TD... there's no refuting that.And whether Brady threw an INT instead of scoring on their 4th quarter drive wouldn't have made a difference in the world. Either way he failed to lead the #1 offense in the NFL to a win, even though his opponent scored only 17 points.All you Pats fans (and supposed non-Pats fans) can disregard me all you want. It doesn't change that you have to live with your team giving probably the WORST choke job in the history of the Super Bowl.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top