Time to Take My Medicine

eflow24

eflow24

1,000+ Posts
Well, I will go ahead and take my medicine. Although I am not a Patriot fan, I have touted them as the best ever and that there was no chance of them losing to any NFC opponent. I also was on the Tom Brady bandwagon as one of the best ever.

Although, I still think it was a great season clearly I was wrong. I admit it and I am thankful I did not bet it. Time for me a my predictions to go on a long winter nap.
blush.gif
 
I think if the two teams played ten times, the Patriots would win more than the Giants. They are a better team. But they were not by a big margin, not in this league and day. Especially not this Sunday. No med's for you needed. Virtually nobody predicted the Giants to win and really believed it.

I knew there was a chance IF the Giants defensive front played the game of their season. This game was not what the Patriots did not do or what Brady did not do. It was what the Giants did not allow them to do with a consistent basis. They are a good team that nobody gave a chance to and made it vocal. This pumped them up. They had nothing to lose.
 
I predicted the Giants to win and meant it. NYG have a lot more talent on D than does NE. Offense is not really that far behind either, although NE is much better in the passing game.
 
I'm with you on this one eflow. Outwardly I gave the Giants no chance, but inside I thought an upset was possible, but highly unlikely. The only reason I had any doubt that the Pats would roll was their play in the last few weeks.

Like the Cowboys, NE seemed to have lost their edge while the Giants were gaining theirs. I still thought the Pats were too good to lose this game. It certainly was a testimony to the significance of hitting one's stride at the right time.
 
Thanks for the mention of NFC vs AFC.

It just donged on me that the only team to beat the Patriots was an NFC team, not a glorified AFC team.

And a wild card team at that. Like, a 5th seeded wild card team even. A team that didn't even win their division.

Somewhere in the Pats' minds it probably just did not seem possible this was going to be that big of a contest -- not compared to getting out of the AFC.
 
I really think Randy Moss was more important to this offense than anyone thought. During the beginning of the season, when the Pats were winning 56-7/etc, Moss was running wild in secondaries. However, once teams began double covering him, the Pats offensive production dropped drastically. One of the main reasons Welker had so many YAC was because an extra defensive back was always around Moss. I think that the second half of the season is indicative to just how much better a receiver Moss is than anyone else is on the Pats roster.
 
The Giants also were consistent for the entire game. They were focused and executed all the time. They did not have the late game hiccups that other teams including them have had and they made the crucial plays when they had to. No late turnovers, no mistakes that were not tixed. That is key.

Their D line was a major part of it in that they kept it up all night long. But this mythical blueprint does not exist. Teams game plan and tweak all the time. If there is a blueprint it is to keep up your intensity and gameplan for an entire four quarters. Few teams can do that to keep up with a team like the Patriots...who have the 7th pick in the NFL Draft. Good lord.
 
I don't think the Giants' front four played any better than they did against Dallas. They're just good and they played like it once again.
 
I really don't understand the virulent criticism some people have for the concept that the better team sometimes loses. I was routing hard against the Pats. But I think they'd win that game maybe 7 out of 10 times.

The Giants played a great game, peaked at the right time, and just maybe caught Brady with a bit of a lingering anke injury. Despite that, that last drive was at least a little bit improbable and had a few lucky bounces.

The Giants lost 6 games this year. The Pats lost 1. Unquestionably, the Giants won when it mattered the most. But the idea that the better team invariably wins every game is absurd to me. Is it poor sportsmanship for the loser to say it right after a game? Sure. But for someone on a message board? Uh, no.
 
I agree with you that sometimes the better team does not win. That's the nature of sports. But that wasn't the case here. There was nothing that I saw in either of the games between these two teams that suggested to me that the Patriots were significantly better than the Giants. I thought (and continue to think) they are pretty evenly matched, with perhaps the slight edge going to the Giants due to the strength of their line play.

By the way, while it is obviously true that the Giants lost six games to the Patriots' one, look at who the Giants lost to--Cowboys, Packers, Cowboys, Redskins, Vikings, Patriots. Five of those loses, in other words, were to playoff teams and the sixth was to the last team eliminated from the playoff race. The Patriots, meanwhile, feasted on the AFC East, which outside of them was a terrible division.

Mind you, I'm not saying that the Patriots would have gone 10-6 had the played the Giants' schedule. But I am saying that the Giants had a much better team than their record might indicate.
 
LL:

Shrug, I disagree - but I don't really care so much about whether you think the Pats or the Giants are better. I just dislike the notion that the playoffs somehow always select the best team in the NFL/MLB/NCAA, whatever, as the champion.

Of course, I like the way they do it in European soccer where you have the league and the cups, and they're totally separate. And nobody pretends that the winner of the cup (knock-out competition) is actually best. I guess I'm a communist, or something.
 
NE was not the same team the last 5-6 games of the year as they were in the first ~ 2/3 of the season; they became a very good team instead of one of the all time greats but fans continued to feed into the myth which of course was created by the media and the lack of study.

NE had very competitive playoff games and had 2 or 3 close calls in the regular season (eagles, ravens, Giants).

NE was not a brutally dominant team towards the end of the year and many predicted a NYGiant win here on this board (just look at the prediction thread!!).

If they played 10 times, NE wins 5 or 6 at the most and same goes for NYGiants who are slightly more physical overall, have a better running game, better TE game, better DLine, better LBs, better DBs (yes) and even a better coaching staff. NE has the QB and WRs, and a better OL (although the Giants may have the best DL in the world right now).
 
I won't jump on anybody that said they were the greatest ever but I do like the fact you made this thread to point out that you may have made that prediction. I didn't really know that you had and I don't really know who else has as well. Just a general comment there.

My problem when we started hearing greatest ever talk was that it was after 6-7 games. You heard the talking heads mention it and then you started seeing threads and comments on here about it. They played very easy defenses for the 1st half of the season and for about 75-80% of the season in total....and when I say easy defenses, I mean defenses ranked generally lower than 20-25 in the league.

They finally got a few tests against Indy, Baltimore, Pitt, Phily, etc, and found ways through those games but they didn't exactly dominate those games either. However you could start to understand 'at that point' why the talk might start about them be the greatest team ever b/c they had the scoring record on track and were still undefeated. However, IMO, they still were not a very balanced team offensively and did not run the ball very effectively. They used short passing schemes to serve as a run game. This caused some obvious problems down the stretch and certainly against the Giants in the Superbowl. Also their defense was very good but certainly not the best defense they have fielded during their dynasty. Thus to me when I look at it all together I see a team that had a good defense, but not great, and an offense that wasn't as balanced as it needed to be. B/c of the many weapons in the pass offense and the very good defense it will go down as one of the top 10 teams of all-time but certainly you put it in the best all-time or even top 5 category since they lost the Super bowl.
 
^^^

NO BLUFFING IN FOOTBALL AT ALL

The odds were against the Patriots completely running the table. They dodged three big bullets in the regular season (Ravens, Eagles, Giants). When a nearly depleted Chargers team almost beat them, you could hear the Football Gods lining up to destroy the Patriots season. The Giants had what it took.

Sure, the Pats might beat the Giants 6-7 out of 10 times. But it doesn't matter. You play one game. The Pats lost. **** 'em.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Recent Threads

Back
Top