Re: Why We Lost in the Super Bowl.
posted at 3/24/2012 1:33 PM EDT
In Response to Re: Why We Lost in the Super Bowl.
[QUOTE]Of course, but in SB 42 we lost with a legendary offense scoring only 14 points. You do realize that off this board, non Pats fans make fun of that, correct? And the fact is, they're right. I've got nothing to say. My all world QB and offense laid an egg the size of Mt. Everest on that day. Great job by the Giants front to sell out on a pass rush, bad job by McDaniels, Brady and BB for not adjusting far sooner, but still, the offense failed. Flash forward to SB 46: The 2011 Pats D was worse (statistically) than NE's D in 2007, but they played as well as the Pats D did in SB 42, holding down NY;s offense to a very low point total for almost the entire game. Out of the lockout, the offenses we're ahead of all defenses, unless a D was around for a long time and had great continuity (Balt, Pitt, etc). Roger Goodell has intstructed officials to call no holding, be incredibly anal calling penalties on the defense, to PROMOTE OFFENSE. He does this to easier sell the NFL in Europe. Low scoring NFL games aren't going to get tootheless wonders in England drinking Bass Ale excited about our version of football. Do you agree with this? Answer this question, first, and then we'll continue. PS The Giants won these low scoring games, why? THEY RAN THE BALL. We didn't. Also, it's not "singling out one unit" or player, it's going to the root cause of a problem. Always go to the source. Always. Again, our D will be even better since it's trending up every year now with the rebuilding movement, so this means Brady and the offense need to score more than 14 or 17 points. If they don't want to score more than 17 points in a SB next year or the year after, we need a bulldozing all round RB in here to win a low scoring game.
Posted by BassFishing[/QUOTE]
Going back to the 2007 Super Bowl, I can agree that a large part of the blame has to go on the offense in that game. The defense held the Giants at bay for the majority of the game while the offense stood around and scratched their butts.
So if we're going back to '07, yes, I can understand the greater blame on the offense in that game.
I would also agree with the notion that it appeared as if offenses were ahead of defenses coming out of the lockout.
However, I haven't read anywhere that Goodell was instructing officials to influence games to favor the offense in an attempt to appeal to Euroean viewers. I've never heard of such a thing before, so I can't say that I agree with that.
But the fact of the matter is that the Giants threw the ball just as much as we did in the 2012 Super Bowl (40 times compared to our 41). With that said, they ran it 7 more times. That's definitely a notable number, but how were they able to do that while still throwing just as much as we did? Because of time of possession -- they held the ball for longer.
But the question is why did this happen? Well, I think there are two sides to this story. One side is that the defense, in certain situations, wasn't able to get off the field on 3rd-down. The other side of this story is that the offense wasn't able to convert on 3rd down either, and this lead to the stalling of drives, and the Giants holding the ball for longer.
So I don't think it's fair to say that running the ball was why we lost and why the Giants won. New York held the ball for 37 minutes, while we held it for 22 minutes. Had those numbers been reversed, we likely would have run the ball at least as much as New York, if not more.
Basically what I'm saying is that we ran it less because we had the ball less. We had the ball less because the defense couldn't get off the field on 3rd down, and because the offense couldn't execute on 3rd down.
The Giants threw it plenty of times, and to say that they came into the game with the intent to run the ball often is dispelled when you look at the stats. The disparity is because of the time of possession stat, which is largely irrelevant in my opinion.
The game was close late -- the Giants made crucial plays and we didn't.