Super Bowl XLVI: New England Patriots v. New York Giants

[parrot 789]

Also Baltimore's pass rush is NOT GOOD. I don't know where you got the impression that it was, but they actually had one of the lowest sack rates in each of the last two years. Suggs was good for a while but that's about it.

 

 

I don't know where you're getting your sack rate #s but according to Football Outsiders Baltimore was #2 in adjusted sack rate which "gives sacks (plus intentional grounding penalties) per pass attempt adjusted for down, distance, and opponent." They ranked third in unadjusted sack rate, generating 48 sacks on 535 opponent pass attempts, or 1 sack roughly every 11 attempts. They also were tied for second in total sacks. Suggs had a pile of sacks but they also had three other guys who had at least 5 sacks and another with 4.5.

 

[IGotWorms 3,315]

I don't know where you're getting your sack rate #s but according to Football Outsiders Baltimore was #2 in adjusted sack rate which "gives sacks (plus intentional grounding penalties) per pass attempt adjusted for down, distance, and opponent." They ranked third in unadjusted sack rate, generating 48 sacks on 535 opponent pass attempts, or 1 sack roughly every 11 attempts. They also were tied for second in total sacks. Suggs had a pile of sacks but they also had three other guys who had at least 5 sacks and another with 4.5.

 

 

I stand corrected. Baltimore's sack rate was awful last year but you're right, they were much improved this year.

 

Still, the point is they aren't much better than the Giants there, if at all. Both teams had 48 sacks during the regular season. I still think it is foolish to say that the Giants won't get much pressure on Brady because the Ravens didn't (I know that wasn't your point parrot, but it was devouredbychaos's point).

[parrot 789]

I stand corrected. Baltimore's sack rate was awful last year but you're right, they were much improved this year.

 

Still, the point is they aren't much better than the Giants there, if at all. Both teams had 48 sacks during the regular season. I still think it is foolish to say that the Giants won't get much pressure on Brady because the Ravens didn't (I know that wasn't your point parrot, but it was devouredbychaos's point).

 

I agree with you there. The pressure the Giants bring is a different beast as they do it primarily with their front four, whereas the Ravens rely on Suggs on the blitz for a good share of their pressure. Blitzing your linebackers against the Pats with Welker and those TEs roaming the middle of the field is a dangerous prospect. I expect to see plenty of pressure from the Giants.

[devouredbychaos 0]

Why is it foolish to say that? The Pats OLine has been playing exceptionally well the past few weeks and I see no reason why they can't contain the Giants front 4. Vollmer might possibly be back in time too which only makes that line stronger. After what happened in 07 and earlier this season against the Gnats you KNOW BB is scheming something to not let Brady get run over again.

[kutulu 1,548]

They kept it a secret for the most part, but Brady was playing with a bum ankle last time these two teams met in the Superbowl. Giants def pressure was playing lights out, no doubt, but Brady couldn't move around...even less than usual.

[parrot 789]

Why is it foolish to say that? The Pats OLine has been playing exceptionally well the past few weeks and I see no reason why they can't contain the Giants front 4. Vollmer might possibly be back in time too which only makes that line stronger. After what happened in 07 and earlier this season against the Gnats you KNOW BB is scheming something to not let Brady get run over again.

 

"Foolish" might be a little harsh, but I'm not sure you're giving enough credit where it's due. The Giants front four are the real deal.

[Skinny_Bastard 154]

Why is it foolish to say that? The Pats OLine has been playing exceptionally well the past few weeks and I see no reason why they can't contain the Giants front 4. Vollmer might possibly be back in time too which only makes that line stronger. After what happened in 07 and earlier this season against the Gnats you KNOW BB is scheming something to not let Brady get run over again.

 

The Pats line don't stand a chance against the Giant's front 4.

[Skinny_Bastard 154]

"Foolish" might be a little harsh, but I'm not sure you're giving enough credit where it's due. The Giants front four are the real deal.

 

The best in the league.

The last time they played, NE was held to 3 points in the first 3 quarters of play at New England.

 

The giants handed the Patriots their first lost at home in 3+ seasons.

 

Let's forget what both teams did in the regular season and focus on what they have accomplished in the playoffs. Who have NE beat? Denver? And a Raven's team that have a history of losing on the road? The Giants are battle tested and beat last year's superbowl champ. They then went into San Fran (top D) and beat them in their own game.

[redtodd 7]

One thing I feel better about is I think the Pats will be less arrogant this time around. I think there was the mentality last time that it was a forgone conclusion that they would win. While they would never admit it, I bet a good portion of them believed their own hype.

 

I think they were humbled and will do anything (cheat?) to win this time around. But then again, there are only 7 players from 2007 still on this team.

[devouredbychaos 0]

In 2001, Pats lost the regular season game to the Rams in Foxborough, 20-13, to go 5-5 on the year. The Patriots then proceeded to win their last six games of the regular season, two games in the AFC playoffs, and then beat the last team to beat them in the regular season, the Rams. This year, we lost to the Giants in Foxborough, 24-20 to go 5-3 on the year. We ended the season with eight straight regular season wins, two games in the AFC playoffs, and now we play the last team to beat us in the regular season, the Giants. Just saying …

[IGotWorms 3,315]

One thing I feel better about is I think the Pats will be less arrogant this time around. I think there was the mentality last time that it was a forgone conclusion that they would win. While they would never admit it, I bet a good portion of them believed their own hype.

 

I think they were humbled and will do anything (cheat?) to win this time around. But then again, there are only 7 players from 2007 still on this team.

 

This is a good point. Actually I think the Giants should be favored and I wish they were because the Pats would play very well as the underdogs.

[redtodd 7]

This is a good point. Actually I think the Giants should be favored and I wish they were because the Pats would play very well as the underdogs.

 

I'll be curious to hear what all the "experts" final predictions will be. Despite Vegas giving the Pats the edge, I am hearing more people talking about the Giants winning than the Pats winning.

 

In the eyes of the public, it sure seems like the Giants are the favorite (which is fine by me).

[donhaas 18]

I'll be curious to hear what all the "experts" final predictions will be. Despite Vegas giving the Pats the edge, I am hearing more people talking about the Giants winning than the Pats winning.

 

In the eyes of the public, it sure seems like the Giants are the favorite (which is fine by me).

 

I would put it at even

I think most neutral observers are having trouble picking a favorite and are expecting a great game...

 

 

On a side note: I saw a tumbleweed blow by in this thread... is this really the Super Bowl thread?

 

I guess it makes sense because New York and Boston don't really have very big rabid fanbases and there is definitely no rivalry between the two cities... Also, the teams have never played each other before either, have they?

 

 

 

You guys need an antagonizer up in here

[Mullog 12]

I think the teams are so evenly matched right now that either team could be the favorite - but the spread should not be more than 2 1/2.

[Mullog 12]

You guys need an antagonizer up in here

I think the teams are so evenly matched right now that either team could be the favorite - but the spread should not be more than 2 1/2.

 

The Giants will destroy the feeble Pats 34-17! Go G-Men!

[donhaas 18]

The Giants will destroy the feeble Pats 34-17! Go G-Men!

 

:lol:

 

There ya go!

 

 

Redtodd putts from the rough

[IGotWorms 3,315]

The Giants will destroy the feeble Pats 34-17! Go G-Men!

 

Yeah, well, that's just like, your opinion, man.

[devouredbychaos 0]

The Pats line don't stand a chance against the Giant's front 4.

 

LOL!

 

Keep talking outta your a$$ buddy.

[Mullog 12]

Keep talking outta your a$$ buddy.

I do not believe that we are dealing with a speaking sphincter. Check it out:

 

In their past two games against Brady, both victories for New York, they held him to a 59 percent rate of completion, sacked him seven times, allowed three touchdowns, had two interceptions and checked him on a passer rating of 78.87 -- or 15.5 points lower than his career average.

 

In his past five playoff starts, Brady completed 62.9 percent of his passes, with 11 touchdowns, 7 interceptions, 14 sacks and a passer rating of 85.03. Subtract this year's 45-10 defeat of Denver, and suddenly those numbers drop to 60 percent, five touchdowns, six interceptions, 14 sacks and a passer rating of 70.69.

 

The Pats are going down because Brady is the Giants' biatch.

[devouredbychaos 0]

I do not believe that we are dealing with a speaking sphincter. Check it out:

 

In their past two games against Brady, both victories for New York, they held him to a 59 percent rate of completion, sacked him seven times, allowed three touchdowns, had two interceptions and checked him on a passer rating of 78.87 -- or 15.5 points lower than his career average.

 

In his past five playoff starts, Brady completed 62.9 percent of his passes, with 11 touchdowns, 7 interceptions, 14 sacks and a passer rating of 85.03. Subtract this year's 45-10 defeat of Denver, and suddenly those numbers drop to 60 percent, five touchdowns, six interceptions, 14 sacks and a passer rating of 70.69.

 

The Pats are going down because Brady is the Giants' biatch.

 

As I said before, keep talking outta your a$$ Gnats fans. The look of shock and dismay after losing to the Pats will be quite satisfying.

[shorepatrol 1,737]

You Pats fans are focking delusional if you think your winning this game. The Giants are going to put up 40 plus on your defense. Giants DEF isn't giving that up. Ask the Packers. This is going to be epic. Bradshaw and Joe will still be the only QB's to have 4 SB's. :pointstosky:

[Matt Mueller 146]

I think the Giants are the favorites in my eyes.

 

Better D. Better run game and nearly equally good qb and wr play outside of those freakish TE's.

 

Giants dismantled Atlanta, soundly beat Green Bay and eeked out a tough one in San Fran.

 

 

Pats blew out an 8-8 team and to my eyes haven't beat a 'winning' team all year. The Ravens beat themselves. When you possess the ball longer, out gain the opponent and force more turnovers you win 99% of the time. Pats are lucky to advance and they know it.

 

All in all I think this is one of the most equally matched SuperBowls we've had in some time and I hope the Giants win in a great one.

[shorepatrol 1,737]

Nicely said, but. The Pats DEF (Or lack there of) will be the reason they lose. Giants will put pressure on Brady by scoring (On almost every possession) and Brady will turn it over trying to keep up. This is a horrible matchup for the Pats.

[devouredbychaos 0]

I love these overconfident Gnats fans. Your secondary is just as bad as the Pats, don't forget about that. The pressure on Brady won't happen, have you seen the O Line play lately? Good luck. Plus we got this guy... http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DacfECN9856o&v=acfECN9856o&gl=US

[RoadLizard 73]

I love these overconfident Gnats fans. Your secondary is just as bad as the Pats, don't forget about that. The pressure on Brady won't happen, have you seen the O Line play lately? Good luck. Plus we got this guy... http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DacfECN9856o&v=acfECN9856o&gl=US

 

The o-line hasn't played anybody either. The Ravens pass rush isn't nearly as good as the Giants. Denver isn't even an NFL team. In 2008, The Pats o-line was all world or so they thought.

[Mullog 12]

I love these overconfident Gnats fans. Your secondary is just as bad as the Pats, don't forget about that. The pressure on Brady won't happen, have you seen the O Line play lately? Good luck. Plus we got this guy... http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DacfECN9856o&v=acfECN9856o&gl=US

Just like the Patricias' offensive line, your link sucks.

[southcarolina 166]

 

Better run game and nearly equally good qb and wr play outside of those freakish TE's.

 

 

 

Regular season

New England Rushing yards per game 2011: 111.4 (19th in the NFL)

New York Giants Rushing yards per game 2011: 93.6 (29th)

 

 

New England Yards per Rush 2011 4.0 (tied 22nd)

New York Giants Yards per Rush 2011: 3.6 (dead last in the NFL)

 

 

 

In the playoffs the two teams have been essentially equal running the ball, Both teams averaging right around 120 yds per game and 4 YPC. Their opponents in the playoffs have been basically equal Baltimore and SF were the top rush defenses in the league, and cancel each other out. Denver (11th) and Atlanta (14th) are separated by the slimmest of margins and cancel each other out. That leaves the Giants an extra game vs a pretty bad Green Bay run defense. (25th in the league in YPC given up)

 

 

So, i think your assertion that the Giants run the ball better than the Patriots is false. At the very least the two teams run the ball with equal efficiency. In the regular season the Patriots held a decided statistical edge, which can probably at least partially attributed to Ahmad Bradshaw being injured. But in the playoffs, against nearly identical levels of competition, the Patriots are at the very least every bit the Giants equal running the ball as a team.

[Mullog 12]

...the Patriots are at the very least every bit the Giants equal running the ball as a team...

I agree with this - the Giants are no longer the running team they used to be. I don't think they have ever finished as the worst ranked running team during a regular season. The main reason for this is the elevation of the passing game and the ability to move the ball through the air more effectively than ever before. I believe they can still run the ball well when they have to. For example, in week 16 against the Jets they had over 100 yards rushing and two rushing TDs.

[southcarolina 166]

I agree with this - the Giants are no longer the running team they used to be. I don't think they have ever finished as the worst ranked running team during a regular season. The main reason for this is the elevation of the passing game and the ability to move the ball through the air more effectively than ever before. I believe they can still run the ball well when they have to. For example, in week 16 against the Jets they had over 100 yards rushing and two rushing TDs.

 

I agree with this. I was just arguing that Matt was dismissing the Patriots running game as clearly inferior to the Giants. And that isnt the case.

[Matt Mueller 146]

I agree with this. I was just arguing that Matt was dismissing the Patriots running game as clearly inferior to the Giants. And that isnt the case.

 

I knew someone might call me out on that. I think the Patriots have the better offensive line, and situationally run the ball great,-often because defenses will take away the pass- but I don't think there is anyone that will tell you the Patriots have the talent of Bradshaw and Jacobs in their back field.

[Matt Mueller 146]

And just for some stats I'll hit you with the Giants regular season team rushing stats since Bradshaw returned.

 

GB 100-5.0- 1 TD

Dallas 110-3.5-2 TD

Washington 91-5.1-1 TD

NYJ 115-4.4-2 TD

Dallas 106-3.4-1 TD

[southcarolina 166]

And just for some stats I'll hit you with the Giants regular season team rushing stats since Bradshaw returned.

 

GB 100-5.0- 1 TD

Dallas 110-3.5-2 TD

Washington 91-5.1-1 TD

NYJ 115-4.4-2 TD

Dallas 106-3.4-1 TD

 

In those same weeks NE ran the ball for

 

73 yds 2 TD

79 yds 0 TD

141 yds 3 TD

119 yds 2 TD

138 yds 2 TD

 

 

which makes the tally 550 yds for NE and 522 yds for NY, and 9 TDs for NE and 7 for NY.

[devouredbychaos 0]

The Pats are gonna run the ball down the Gnats throats just like they did against the Ravens, I guarantee it. Say all you want Giants homers but your D is horrible at stopping the run and THIS will play a huge part in the Gnats losing.

[Matt Mueller 146]

In those same weeks NE ran the ball for

 

73 yds 2 TD

79 yds 0 TD

141 yds 3 TD

119 yds 2 TD

138 yds 2 TD

 

 

which makes the tally 550 yds for NE and 522 yds for NY, and 9 TDs for NE and 7 for NY.

 

Against losing teams right?

 

 

I do agree with your assessment that the Giants can't stop the run-or pass- all that well. Outside of their pass rush their D is suspect and I do think the Patriots will have success moving the ball.

 

Pats can run the ball and have the better line. I just think the Giants have superior talent at the position. Ok I'm moving on from this.

[southcarolina 166]

I knew someone might call me out on that. I think the Patriots have the better offensive line, and situationally run the ball great,-often because defenses will take away the pass- but I don't think there is anyone that will tell you the Patriots have the talent of Bradshaw and Jacobs in their back field.

 

How many points do they award for "talent"?

[Mullog 12]

The Pats are gonna run the ball down the Gnats throats just like they did against the Ravens, I guarantee it. Say all you want Giants homers but your D is horrible at stopping the run and THIS will play a huge part in the Gnats losing.

You're high. 96 yards total for a game is not running the ball down a team's throat. Baltimore handed the game to the Patsies...they didn't win it. Face it chowd-ah brains you're gonna lose.

[southcarolina 166]

Against losing teams right?

 

 

 

 

 

9-2 vs teams with a .500 record or better, including the playoffs. Look it up.

 

Actually (factoring out the Redskins, since they both played them)against the 3rd, 15th, 17th and 27th rush defense (average 13th), where as the Giants did it against the 7th, 12th, 12th (Dallas twice) and 25th rush def. (average 14th)

[parrot 789]

9-2 vs teams with a .500 record or better, including the playoffs. Look it up.

 

Actually (factoring out the Redskins, since they both played them)against the 3rd, 15th, 17th and 27th rush defense (average 13th), where as the Giants did it against the 7th, 12th, 12th (Dallas twice) and 25th rush def. (average 14th)

 

You a Pats fan SC?

 

I'm hoping the Pats will get Vollmer back. I don't know that they lose a whole bunch with Solder in there, but with Vollmer at tackle they can bring Solder in at TE for their jumbo package.

[Skinny_Bastard 154]

Against losing teams right?

 

 

I do agree with your assessment that the Giants can't stop the run-or pass- all that well. Outside of their pass rush their D is suspect and I do think the Patriots will have success moving the ball.

 

Pats can run the ball and have the better line. I just think the Giants have superior talent at the position. Ok I'm moving on from this.

 

Tell that to the packers and 49ers.

[qimqam 1]

I wouldn't expect Gronk to practice yet but Pats signing a TE may be a big deal.

 

http://www.nfl.com/superbowl/story/09000d5d82657ec3/article/ankle-injury-will-keep-patriots-gronkowski-from-practicing?module=HP11_headline_stack