Who deserves the most blame for the Patriots loss?

[Kodos]

Poll to come.

[MJ4H]

The Giants.

[spleen1015]

The Giants.

+1

[Rizon]

The Giants.

/thread

[NorvTurnerOverdrive]

The Giants.

rizon beat me

edit: the jews (i blame them for everything)

[Rizon]

/thread

Jinx

[cartman]

I blame:

Navin R. Johnson
235 1/8 Elm Street

[BillJasper]

Brady. Gave the Giants two points and the ball which became seven points then killed a potential drive with a 'WTF?' interception.

[Autumn]

Other than the Giants, I think the next pile of blame comes on Tom Brady. He made several huge mental mistakes and threw poorly. The defense as a unit is right up there with him, but I can't see blaming the receivers. Brady was missing them a lot. I still wonder if his shoulder was bothering him. Even so he made bad choices, including of course that intentional grounding.

[stevew]

Dowling/Vareen/Ridley/Mallet all seem like really horrible choices when you could really use a few more impact bodies on defense.

[RendeR]

Honestly the real culprit here was Brady. He pulled a few WTF moments out of his ass in this game in ways he's never done in the past. I voted Belichek because he didn't seem to adjust for shit at any time during the game.

Either way it was the best result in a poor selection of options ;)

[gstelmack]

I think it goes:

- Giants, for not making very many mistakes and playing a generally clean game. They didn't beat themselves and were there to take advantage of the Patriots mistakes.
- Brady, for some questionable decision making: not doing a better throw away on the safety, throwing deep to Gronk on the pick when they needed to burn clock and didn't need a deep ball that had little chance of working anyway, much like the pick on the conference championship game. All year long, whenever that shoulder got hurt, he turned into a very average quarterback.
- Branch, for bringing back bad memories of the Colts comeback win in the conference championship game a few years back where a bad drop killed a Pats drive and gave Manning the ball back, by dropping an in-his-hands 25 yard completion to start the final drive.
- Whoever screwed up and caused the 12th man to be on the field on the early fumble.
- The football gods, who prevented the Patriots from recovering at least one of the other two fumbles, and put Gronkowski within a foot but no closer of grabbing the Hail Mary, and thus kept the Patriots from getting that one lucky bounce that would have overcome pretty much everything else above.
- Hernandez, for dropping the pass right after Branch's and not picking the team back up when they needed it.

[Suburban Rhythm]

Gronk's ankle

(which, would be an OK, but not great, name for a band)

[spleen1015]

Giselle since she is sucking the man out of Tom?

[JPhillips]

Bernard Pollard

[JediKooter]

I blame:

Navin R. Johnson
235 1/8 Elm Street

Die, you random son of a bitch.

[molson]

Tough to assign "blame" where you had a less than 50/50 shot going in, but if I had to vote, then Welker as most blameworthy. If he catches a pass he usually makes then they win the super bowl. Brady and Bellichick and just about everyone else could have done better earlier and overcome that drop, but the Welker drop is so direct and clear and had a higher % of success than many things Brady/Bellichick tried and failed to do earlier.

[Logan]

Tough to assign "blame" where you had a less than 50/50 shot going in, but if I had to vote, then Welker as most blameworthy. If he catches a pass he usually makes then they win the super bowl. Brady and Bellichick and just about everyone else could have done better earlier and overcome that drop, but the Welker drop is so direct and clear and had a higher % of success than many things Brady/Bellichick tried and failed to do earlier.

I'm amazed that anyone blames Welker. Brady floated that ball...it was high, away, and behind the guy it was intended for.

[Fidatelo]

I don't like the idea of assigning blame at all. Why blame anyone? Did someone not prepare hard enough or take it seriously? Did someone do something egregiously dumb/selfish?

A bunch of super athletes went and played their hearts out against another bunch of equally motivated super athletes. One team had to win.

[Passacaglia]

Tough to assign "blame" where you had a less than 50/50 shot going in, but if I had to vote, then Welker as most blameworthy. If he catches a pass he usually makes then they win the super bowl. Brady and Bellichick and just about everyone else could have done better earlier and overcome that drop, but the Welker drop is so direct and clear and had a higher % of success than many things Brady/Bellichick tried and failed to do earlier.

He doesn't just usually catch it. He catches it 100 out of 100 times. Right, CC?

[spleen1015]

I'm amazed that anyone blames Welker. Brady floated that ball...it was high, away, and behind the guy it was intended for.

This is how I feel. The guy jumped and was stretched out as much as possible for him. The guy has made many great catches of poor throws. Hit him in the chest and he catches it.

[molson]

But if you agree that Welker "usually" catches that pass, then wouldn't that be easier, in the theory, than Brady throwing a perfect or excellent pass in that situation? If Welker (or a great WR generally) makes that catch, let's say 80% of the time, and Brady (or a great QB generally) makes the perfect throw there 50% of the time, isn't Welker more at fault? (Obviously the numbers are made up, but that's just my thinking on that....either could have completed the play with a better execution, but Welker had a better chance to, and didn't.)

If you disagree that Welker had such a high probability to catch the past, or maybe think that 80+% of QBs make that perfect or excellent throw, than that's a different story.

[Matthean]

Gronk's ankle

(which, would be an OK, but not great, name for a band)

Random fact. He and teammates went out dancing after the game.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/only-dance-heal-wounded-souls-matt-light-rob-212551396.html;_ylt=A0PD2CwMfzFPonwAKwFYYsp_;_ylu=X3oDMTE5aTF0cTUxBG1pdANCbG9ncyBJbmRleARwb3MDNzEEc2VjA01lZGlhQmxvZ0luZGV4;_ylg=X3oDMTFvcGs0cnBnBGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDBHBzdGNhdANibG9nBHB0A3NlY3Rpb25zBHRlc3QD;_ylv=3

[molson]

Random fact. He and teammates went out dancing after the game.

Only dance can heal the wounded souls of Matt Light and Rob Gronkowski | Shutdown Corner - Yahoo! Sports (http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/only-dance-heal-wounded-souls-matt-light-rob-212551396.html;_ylt=A0PD2CwMfzFPonwAKwFYYsp_;_ylu=X3oDMTE5aTF0cTUxBG1pdANCbG9ncyBJbmRleARwb3MDNzEEc2VjA01lZGlhQmxvZ0luZGV4;_ylg=X3oDMTFvcGs0cnBnBGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDBHBzdGNhdANibG9nBHB0A3NlY3Rpb25zBHRlc3QD;_ylv=3)

A lot of Pats fans are upset that they weren't, I guess, sadly and quietly reflecting on their defeat in the solitude of their hotel rooms, but whatever, a long season is finally over, they have the right to enjoy themselves and booze and dance away the stress and sorrows of a lost game and long season. I bet Brady banged his wife a few times too.

[Matthean]

A lot of Pats fans are upset that they weren't, I guess, sadly and quietly reflecting on their defeat in the solitude of their hotel rooms, but whatever, a long season is finally over, they have the right to enjoy themselves and booze and dance away the stress and sorrows of a lost game and long season.

I think the issue here is a bad ankle and dancing. I understand releasing stress, but dancing on a bad ankle seems odd.

[BillJasper]

I bet Brady banged his wife a few times too.

You sure she didn't pull out the strap-on and bang him? :lol:

[Logan]

But if you agree that Welker "usually" catches that pass, then wouldn't that be easier, in the theory, than Brady throwing a perfect or excellent pass in that situation? If Welker (or a great WR generally) makes that catch, let's say 80% of the time, and Brady (or a great QB generally) makes the perfect throw there 50% of the time, isn't Welker more at fault? (Obviously the numbers are made up, but that's just my thinking on that....either could have completed the play with a better execution, but Welker had a better chance to, and didn't.)

If you disagree that Welker had such a high probability to catch the past, or maybe think that 80+% of QBs make that perfect or excellent throw, than that's a different story.

I know you said your numbers are made up but IMO you're looking at it way wrong. Welker was wide open because of a terrible defensive assignment. Brady didn't need to make an excellent or perfect throw. He just needed to put some zip on the ball instead of floating it to the outside shoulder when Welker was running inside the numbers.

[Matthean]

Bad pass or not, Welker had the ball between both hands.

[jbergey22]

I don't like the idea of assigning blame at all. Why blame anyone? Did someone not prepare hard enough or take it seriously? Did someone do something egregiously dumb/selfish?

A bunch of super athletes went and played their hearts out against another bunch of equally motivated super athletes. One team had to win.

+1.

Hard to blame Brady for having an unlike Brady like game when he is one of the best of all time and certainly wanted to win that game.

[Matthean]

+1.

Hard to blame Brady for having an unlike Brady like game when he is one of the best of all time and certainly wanted to win that game.

And many QBs would like to have that bad of a game in the Super Bowl.

[Suburban Rhythm]

Random fact. He and teammates went out dancing after the game.

Only dance can heal the wounded souls of Matt Light and Rob Gronkowski | Shutdown Corner - Yahoo! Sports (http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/only-dance-heal-wounded-souls-matt-light-rob-212551396.html;_ylt=A0PD2CwMfzFPonwAKwFYYsp_;_ylu=X3oDMTE5aTF0cTUxBG1pdANCbG9ncyBJbmRleARwb3MDNzEEc2VjA01lZGlhQmxvZ0luZGV4;_ylg=X3oDMTFvcGs0cnBnBGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDBHBzdGNhdANibG9nBHB0A3NlY3Rpb25zBHRlc3QD;_ylv=3)

A lot of Pats fans are upset that they weren't, I guess, sadly and quietly reflecting on their defeat in the solitude of their hotel rooms, but whatever, a long season is finally over, they have the right to enjoy themselves and booze and dance away the stress and sorrows of a lost game and long season. I bet Brady banged his wife a few times too.

I think the issue here is a bad ankle and dancing. I understand releasing stress, but dancing on a bad ankle seems odd.

Proof that the players let go of these things way quicker than fans do.

I can understand if they were out the night before the game, but after? Would them sulking and sitting in their rooms drinking straight from the bottle before passing out change the outcome of anything? No.

[Logan]

Bad pass or not, Welker had the ball between both hands.

So did Brady, then he threw a shitty pass.

Could it have been caught? Of course. But a good throw and Welker possibly scores. Just like on the last drive with the throw to Branch over the middle that was also late and behind him.

[Autumn]

Bad pass or not, Welker had the ball between both hands.

Well, I think there's a difference between "blame" for a bad game, and who could have most easily changed the outcome of the game. Sure, Welker making that catch would make a huge difference in the game. But the "blame", by which I mean who is most responsible for how the game turned out, lies more on Brady who made a large number of gaffes that led to their loss. As far as I know, Welker otherwise played well.

[Matthean]

I can understand if they were out the night before the game, but after? Would them sulking and sitting in their rooms drinking straight from the bottle before passing out change the outcome of anything? No.

So you completely missed my point about the ankle and went for something I had no issue with.

[Logan]

Well, I think there's a difference between "blame" for a bad game, and who could have most easily changed the outcome of the game. Sure, Welker making that catch would make a huge difference in the game. But the "blame", by which I mean who is most responsible for how the game turned out, lies more on Brady who made a large number of gaffes that led to their loss. As far as I know, Welker otherwise played well.

I'm with you..I'm only picking on Brady for that throw because I don't think Welker should be blamed on that particular play. For him to earn the overall title of goat is absurd.

[DanGarion]

It's the FANS fault of course.

[bulletsponge]

I'm amazed that anyone blames Welker. Brady floated that ball...it was high, away, and behind the guy it was intended for.

agreed. that was an extreamly hard pass to catch. much higher degree of difuculty than the manningham catch was that he got praise for. you rarely see a reciever catch a pass thrown over the wrong shoulder when hes backpedling. that was a bad pass to an open reciever. if Tebow threw that it would be made case 1 as to why he cant play qb

[Bad-example]

I shouted out who lost the Super Bowl
When after all it was you and me

[Suburban Rhythm]

So you completely missed my point about the ankle and went for something I had no issue with.

I agree dancing on the ankle is odd...and can understand fans reaction if it was the night prior to the game, and then being unable to perform. After the game...people just want something to complain about, and want to see the players to sulk at home, just like they are.

Maybe he got another shot in the locker room after the game so he'd be able to bust a move on the dance floor?

[jbergey22]

Ochocinco for not being able to figure out the Pats offense and Gronk for getting hurt and Bellicheks defense for getting old so he had to rebuild. That is where my blame would go.

[spleen1015]

Ochocinco for not being able to figure out the Pats offense and Gronk for getting hurt and Bellicheks defense for getting old so he had to rebuild. That is where my blame would go.

Ochocinco is something I can't figure out. This guys was supposed to be a top 10 WR in the NFL. Has he lost a step? Is the Patriots offense complicated and he couldn't figure it out? I find that hard to believe. Did he just not fit in with the Patriots?

[PilotMan]

The Giants

[bhlloy]

Brady missed too many throws down the stretch including the Welker one and the interception was something Rex Grossman would do on a bad day. If we have to blame someone it's not a hard choice IMO.

Ochocinco hasn't just lost one step he's lost three. At least Underwood would have given them some speed out there. Strange decision.

[bulletsponge]

Giselle since she is sucking the man out of Tom?

that poor poor bastard. nothing worse that one of the Giselle sisters sucking the "life" out of a man to make you appreciate a battle axe of a woman that makes a man never to want to leave work and come home

[DougW]

The Giants.

/thread

Pow.

[Kodos]

Tough to assign "blame" where you had a less than 50/50 shot going in

Weren't the Patriots favored to win?

[EagleFan]

I blame Obama... Brady hasn't won since he started campaigning for President.

[Suburban Rhythm]

Tough to assign "blame" where you had a less than 50/50 shot going in, but if I had to vote, then Welker as most blameworthy. If he catches a pass he usually makes then they win the super bowl. Brady and Bellichick and just about everyone else could have done better earlier and overcome that drop, but the Welker drop is so direct and clear and had a higher % of success than many things Brady/Bellichick tried and failed to do earlier.

Weren't the Patriots favored to win?

Yes...and outside of that, how did they have a less than 50% chance of winning?

[Logan]

Yes...and outside of that, how did they have a less than 50% chance of winning?

Always a chance of a nuclear disaster.

[Lathum]

I would obviously say the Gians. Aside from that I go with Welker. There were some bad drops in there and Welkers was the most critical. Would it have been a tough catch, yes, but it hit him in the hands and I am a believer that as an NFL receiver if it hits you in the hands you have to make the catch. The Manningham catch was equally as difficule, if not harder since Manningham knew he was going to get blasted and he still made the play. You can look at those 2 plays as the difference in the game.

[Lathum]

dola- As for the dancining thing, alcohol is a great temporary cure for a lot of aches and pains.

[OldGiants]

As usual, the screenname 'Kodos' has the wrong end of the stick.

The Patriots did not lose by making mistakes, the Giants won by making plays.

[Raiders Army]

Bernard Pollard

I'd say this is pretty accurate.

[Lathum]

Steve Weatherford

[Daimyo]

I blame Brady. When he was merely an above average quarterback the Pats won three Super Bowls in four years. Since developing into a top 2-3 guy they haven't won any. He should really regress for the sake of the team.

[SirFozzie]

The Giants.

This.

Two teams played, one team made plays at the end of the game to win the game. That's all.

[molson]

Yes...and outside of that, how did they have a less than 50% chance of winning?

They were favored in Vegas, which of course is just based on the gambling money coming in, but there was a strong consensus that the Giants would win the game, and most media types did predict that they would win. That of course doesn't guarantee anything, but at the very least, it was the consensus that the Giants had a better than 50% chance of winning.

[TroyF]

agreed. that was an extreamly hard pass to catch. much higher degree of difuculty than the manningham catch was that he got praise for. you rarely see a reciever catch a pass thrown over the wrong shoulder when hes backpedling. that was a bad pass to an open reciever. if Tebow threw that it would be made case 1 as to why he cant play qb

I think it was Brady and above is why I think it.

Brady threw three consecutive passes that were terrible. At a time when he needed to convert. The pass to Welker was terrible. The next play on third down he threw it a good 4 feet behind Branch. Then after the Giants got the winning TD, he again threw it 3 to 4 feet behind Branch. If any one of those three passes are complete, I think the Patriots win the football game. All three were horribly thrown balls.

Forget Tebow, if any QB who hadn't won the big one threw those passes, it would be used to show he wasn't good enough to win it all. Nobody can say that about Brady, but they can say he sucked when it counted most Sunday night.

The Giants caught huge breaks with the fumbles ending up back in their hands (once after a penalty) The Pats defense didn't step up. But at the end of the day, those three throws are what makes people fear the Patriots. If it is close, Brady is going to kill you in the end. Last night, he didn't. The Pats lost the game because of it.

[JediKooter]

I really hope that losing two Super Bowls doesn't hurt Brady's chances of getting into the HOF.

[Autumn]

I think it was Brady and above is why I think it.

Brady threw three consecutive passes that were terrible. At a time when he needed to convert. The pass to Welker was terrible. The next play on third down he threw it a good 4 feet behind Branch. Then after the Giants got the winning TD, he again threw it 3 to 4 feet behind Branch. If any one of those three passes are complete, I think the Patriots win the football game. All three were horribly thrown balls.

Forget Tebow, if any QB who hadn't won the big one threw those passes, it would be used to show he wasn't good enough to win it all. Nobody can say that about Brady, but they can say he sucked when it counted most Sunday night.

The Giants caught huge breaks with the fumbles ending up back in their hands (once after a penalty) The Pats defense didn't step up. But at the end of the day, those three throws are what makes people fear the Patriots. If it is close, Brady is going to kill you in the end. Last night, he didn't. The Pats lost the game because of it.

Yes, exactly this. The patriots D sucked, but the Patriots gameplan worked in that it handed the ball to Brady two times in the fourth quarter with the ability to put this game away. Historically, he makes those throws and wins that game. He was just off.

[stevew]

It is very odd swing Brady not be infallible anymore. There was a 4-5 year stretch where he made every single play. Now he's just very very good. But you can frustrate him with center pressure. And they don't have as many strike capabilities.

[Matthean]

Thousands of Butterfingers Sent to Copley Square to Mock Wes Welker [PHOTOS] | BostInno (http://bostinno.com/2012/02/07/1000s-of-butterfingers-sent-to-copley-square-to-mock-wes-welker-photos/)

[CrimsonFox]

Kathy Griffin

[CrimsonFox]

I blame:

Navin R. Johnson
235 1/8 Elm Street

he hates these cans

[molson]

It is very odd swing Brady not be infallible anymore. There was a 4-5 year stretch where he made every single play. Now he's just very very good. But you can frustrate him with center pressure. And they don't have as many strike capabilities.

I'd say he was "very very good" the first 6 years of his career - he had a lot of post-season success, but he was kind of the Troy Aikman-like durable leader rather than a top-elite QB. He exploded in 2007, and just last season he had 36 TDs and 4 interceptions. And his 2011 was pretty clearly his third best season, after 2007 and 2010. I agree with the sentiment that he was overrated early but probably underrated now. He had some bad throws last night but he also put together the longest Super Bowl TD drive, and set the record for consecutive completions. He started the game with a bad mistake, and wasn't great on the last drive, but I don't think that's enough to mark an overall career decline. If Welker catches that pass (or if Brady throws a better pass there), it's a completely different dialogue today.

[TroyF]

I'd say he was "very very good" the first 6 years of his career - he had a lot of post-season success, but he was kind of the Troy Aikman-like durable leader rather than a top-elite QB. He exploded in 2007, and just last season he had 36 TDs and 4 interceptions. And his 2011 was pretty clearly his third best season, after 2007 and 2010. I agree with the sentiment that he was overrated early but probably underrated now. He had some bad throws last night but he also put together the longest Super Bowl TD drive, and set the record for consecutive completions. He started the game with a bad mistake, and wasn't great on the last drive, but I don't think that's enough to mark an overall career decline. If Welker catches that pass (or if Brady throws a better pass there), it's a completely different dialogue today.

Nobody is saying he had a horrific full game (though he was not as good as the numbers showed either) I agree 100% that if Welker catches the ball or Brady throws a better pass that the Patriots win the Super Bowl. (I said as much above)

The point is he didn't make a good pass. He followed that up with two more. Even in the early years when he was overrated, when it came to the KEY play, he killed you. No, that's not right. First he'd emasculate the entire defense, then he'd gash them and by the time he finally finished them off they would be begging for death. (as would anyone who cheered against the Patriots)

He hasn't done that in the playoffs for a few years now. He destroyed an overmatched Broncos team. He got very lucky his mistakes didn't cost him the Ravens game. Then he simply yakked on the three biggest passes he threw this season. Doesn't take away from the titles, doesn't mean he's not a HOF, it does mean that when he gets a lions share of the credit for the wins, he can take the heat when he plays horrible.

[gstelmack]

When Brady gets hurt, like with the shoulder this year, he has these stretches of horrible accuracy. He had a similar stretch last year. This Super Bowl when he reinjured his left shoulder, he started misfiring. Not by much, but enough to not be the Brady of old. You can tell watching a game, and I commented on it earlier this season, when he's not 100% because he starts missing by a few feet on lots of key throws.

[jbergey22]

They were favored in Vegas, which of course is just based on the gambling money coming in, but there was a strong consensus that the Giants would win the game, and most media types did predict that they would win. That of course doesn't guarantee anything, but at the very least, it was the consensus that the Giants had a better than 50% chance of winning.

Im really not sure where this comes from. The computer projection systems(football outsiders, sagarin, etc) all had the Pats favored along with Vegas. I guess if ESPN is the "consensus" perhaps you are correct.

Most legit projection systems are going to use larger sample sizes in which the Giants were outscored in the regular season(1st super bowl champ to be outscored in the regular season).

Lets not try to pretend the Giants were favored in that game. The Pats were favored coming in for a lot of different reasons. Clearly they didnt deliver.

With that being said its hard to put a value on momentum(if the Giants even had that advantage).

When I say this I dont say it as it I think the Pats were a lot better team and choked or that I think the Giants were lucky. I say it as who the general public would have thought was favored in this game. Vegas is usually the best at figuring that one out.

[JediKooter]

Anyone blame Drew Bledsoe yet?

[Passacaglia]

I do.

I am a Zizzer-Zazzer-Zuzz, as you can plainly see.

[molson]

Im really not sure where this comes from. The computer projection systems(football outsiders, sagarin, etc) all had the Pats favored along with Vegas. I guess if ESPN is the "consensus" perhaps you are correct.

Most legit projection systems are going to use larger sample sizes in which the Giants were outscored in the regular season(1st super bowl champ to be outscored in the regular season).



I don't know what a "legit prediction system is", but the Giants were favored beyond ESPN.

CBS Sportsline: 7 out of 9 writers pick the Giants.
CBSSports.com's Super Bowl XLVI predictions - CBSSports.com (http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/22475988/34690992)

Fox Sports: 8 out of 12 writers pick the Giants
Expert predictions: New York Giants vs. New England Patriots in Super Bowl XLVI - NFL News | FOX Sports on MSN (http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/NFL-Super-Bowl-XLVI-New-York-Giants-New-England-Patriots-expert-predictions-020212)

NFL Network: 12 out of 19 writers pick the Giants
NFL.com news: Super Bowl XLVI predictions from analysts, players, more (http://www.nfl.com/superbowl/story/09000d5d8268c5b8/article/super-bowl-xlvi-predictions-from-analysts-players-more)

Maybe they were all wrong, the simulation was right, and the game was an upset, it's just my perception that the most were picking the Giants, combined my own belief that the Giants are a better team. I'm not saying the Giants win 90% of the time, but I'm comfortable saying somewhere modestly north of 50%. And wouldn't those systems using larger sample sizes and full-season data be flawed, when, in recent years, the most important factor to super bowl success is how you're playing this minute, as opposed to week 3? It didn't matter at all that they were outscored in the regular season, they were clearly a better team at the end of the season then they were during it.

[Julio Riddols]

The way I look at it, the Giants just went out and beat them. Brady was good enough that if he had a supporting cast (Running game, WR besides Welker to throw to) and a quality defense, the Pats would have won easily. It ended up being a perfect storm with the way Weatherford was punting - the Giants were able to control field position by moving the ball well on offense even when they didn't score, and I don't think there is any QB who will get you much more than the Pats got when they have to go 85-95 yards all the time. The Pats average drive start was on their own 16 yard line. On the two drives they started beyond their own 20 they put up 10 points. The Giants got at least 33 yards on all but one of their drives and held the ball for 37 minutes.

[stevew]

Watched some different angles on inside the NFL. I know a hail mary is a long shot, but both Gronk and Welker were just too far off of Hernandez. I think that one of them should have been able to grab that rebound possibly.

And the "Welker Drop" was a garbage throw. He got turned around and at 5'9 he never would make that play.

[jbergey22]

I don't know what a "legit prediction system is", but the Giants were favored beyond ESPN.

CBS Sportsline: 7 out of 9 writers pick the Giants.
CBSSports.com's Super Bowl XLVI predictions - CBSSports.com (http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/22475988/34690992)

Fox Sports: 8 out of 12 writers pick the Giants
Expert predictions: New York Giants vs. New England Patriots in Super Bowl XLVI - NFL News | FOX Sports on MSN (http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/NFL-Super-Bowl-XLVI-New-York-Giants-New-England-Patriots-expert-predictions-020212)

NFL Network: 12 out of 19 writers pick the Giants
NFL.com news: Super Bowl XLVI predictions from analysts, players, more (http://www.nfl.com/superbowl/story/09000d5d8268c5b8/article/super-bowl-xlvi-predictions-from-analysts-players-more)

Maybe they were all wrong, the simulation was right, and the game was an upset, it's just my perception that the most were picking the Giants, combined my own belief that the Giants are a better team. I'm not saying the Giants win 90% of the time, but I'm comfortable saying somewhere modestly north of 50%. And wouldn't those systems using larger sample sizes and full-season data be flawed, when, in recent years, the most important factor to super bowl success is how you're playing this minute, as opposed to week 3? It didn't matter at all that they were outscored in the regular season, they were clearly a better team at the end of the season then they were during it.

So you are using the sports media to decide the consensus, gotcha! I think we can probably just say it was a coin flip and be satisfied. Polling millions of people sounds like a lot of work;)

[Blackadar]

The Giants were the better team because the Patsies weren't that good. They had the easiest road to the Super Bowl in NFL history. They faced only two teams with winning records in the regular season and lost both games. They faced only one team with a winning record in the playoffs and were handed that game (dropped TD, missed chip shot FG). No other team in NFL history has won only 1 game all year against a team with a winning record and made it to the Super Bowl. It's never happened. As such, this was not a particularly battle tested New England team and it showed when they couldn't pull away from New York.

So that they lost is no big surprise. The Giants were simply the better team.

[Suburban Rhythm]

They were favored in Vegas, which of course is just based on the gambling money coming in, but there was a strong consensus that the Giants would win the game, and most media types did predict that they would win. That of course doesn't guarantee anything, but at the very least, it was the consensus that the Giants had a better than 50% chance of winning.

I get what your saying, but betting lines and "expert" picks have about the same impact as halftime show selection. They didn't change the odds of the Giants winning. Still 50/50.

[RendeR]

Good Defense almost always beats good Offense.

Giants Good Defense Good Offense

Pats Ok Defense Good Offense

Honestly the only reason this game was that tight is because the Patriots Defense played an unreal game. They played so far above their heads it wasn't even funny. They should give the defensive players in NE a special award for not letting the Giants crush them. I hate the pats but i was IMPRESSED by how the Defense stepped up their game.

[jbergey22]

Hindsight is always 20/20 isnt it?

I didnt hear many people talking about the Giants being this good when they were 7-7 and fighting to make the playoffs.

FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | 2011 DEFENSIVE EFFICIENCY RATINGS (http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef)

Giants regular season defense wasnt anything special either. Ranked 20th DVOA 22nd weighted.

I just find it funny that suddenly so many knew the Giants were clearly the better team after the results came in.

[stevew]

As a pats hater, this weeks Inside the NFL was a must watch. Beli talking about making Manningham beat them on the sidelines. Insisting on doubling Cruz and Nicks. Oof.

[NorvTurnerOverdrive]

Anyone blame Drew Bledsoe yet?
i blame drew henson.

[stevew]

I blame Drew Peterson. We had a right to know why they call him big daddy.

[jbergey22]

When Brady gets hurt, like with the shoulder this year, he has these stretches of horrible accuracy. He had a similar stretch last year. This Super Bowl when he reinjured his left shoulder, he started misfiring. Not by much, but enough to not be the Brady of old. You can tell watching a game, and I commented on it earlier this season, when he's not 100% because he starts missing by a few feet on lots of key throws.

I have noticed this as well. Do you suppose this has something to do with him not wanting to throw the deep ball much these days?

Brady from a few years ago seemed to make a lot more big plays. Current version of Brady just does the smart thing(which he does very well) without taking many risks or making very many difficult plays.

[spleen1015]

I have noticed this as well. Do you suppose this has something to do with him not wanting to throw the deep ball much these days?

Brady from a few years ago seemed to make a lot more big plays. Current version of Brady just does the smart thing(which he does very well) without taking many risks or making very many difficult plays.

Maybe it is because he doesn't have Randy Moss to throw to anymore?

[CrimsonFox]

can we still blame T.O.?

[molson]

So you are using the sports media to decide the consensus, gotcha! I think we can probably just say it was a coin flip and be satisfied. Polling millions of people sounds like a lot of work;)

You said it was only ESPN had them as a consensus winner and I showed you others did too. I believe they were the consensus here as well. That doesn't prove anything, but I think it's pretty good evidence. Better than a simulation that weighs the regular season as opposed to the team the Giants were by the end of the playoffs (and it's not like every simulation had the Patriots either).

[molson]

Hindsight is always 20/20 isnt it?

I didnt hear many people talking about the Giants being this good when they were 7-7 and fighting to make the playoffs.

FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | 2011 DEFENSIVE EFFICIENCY RATINGS (http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef)

Giants regular season defense wasnt anything special either. Ranked 20th DVOA 22nd weighted.

I just find it funny that suddenly so many knew the Giants were clearly the better team after the results came in.

No, people just recognized that the Giants were playing better, that they had momentum, and were peaking at the perfect time. Similar with the Packers last year. How many times have we seem a championship go not to the best team over the course of a season, but the team that peaked at the end?

The people who picked the Giants to win the Super Bowl aren't claiming that they knew that would happen when they were 7-7. They were basing it on what the Giants had done since then, how their team was playing recently, and the way they matched up with the Patriots.

Especially in a sport like football, where coaching and gameplanning is so important and can change, and where there's a lot of injuries and changing of players' responsibilities, you can't just look at a team in a vacuum and view them as having the same relative chance of winning weeks 1-17 and every playoff game.

[LastWhiteSoxFanStanding]

Steve Grogan wouldn't have let this happen.

[jbergey22]

No, people just recognized that the Giants were playing better, that they had momentum, and were peaking at the perfect time. Similar with the Packers last year. How many times have we seem a championship go not to the best team over the course of a season, but the team that peaked at the end?

The people who picked the Giants to win the Super Bowl aren't claiming that they knew that would happen when they were 7-7. They were basing it on what the Giants had done since then, how their team was playing recently, and the way they matched up with the Patriots.

Especially in a sport like football, where coaching and gameplanning is so important and can change, and where there's a lot of injuries and changing of players' responsibilities, you can't just look at a team in a vacuum and view them as having the same relative chance of winning weeks 1-17 and every playoff game.

Of course they knew. It was so obvious they had more momentum than the team that had won 10 in a row.

[jbergey22]

Maybe it is because he doesn't have Randy Moss to throw to anymore?

I am sure that has a lot to do with it but even when teams started overplaying the short crossing routes he didnt seem very willing to throw deep.

[jbergey22]

You said it was only ESPN had them as a consensus winner and I showed you others did too. I believe they were the consensus here as well. That doesn't prove anything, but I think it's pretty good evidence. Better than a simulation that weighs the regular season as opposed to the team the Giants were by the end of the playoffs (and it's not like every simulation had the Patriots either).

Football Outsiders nor Jeff Sagarin are "simulations" FYI. They are ranking systems that take the season as a whole and base it off of data rather than "gut feeling".

[molson]

Football Outsiders nor Jeff Sagarin are "simulations" FYI. They are ranking systems that take the season as a whole and base it off of data rather than "gut feeling".

So they're using data from week 1 and considering it in their super bowl prediction? No wonder the media was more accurate in predicting the game.

Victor Cruz didn't even play week 1, and that's just the one obvious example of a way in which the Giants were a better team late.

I think that's where the disagreement here is. If the Giants of week 1 could play the exact same team 100 times week 1, and then somehow play that exact same team 100 times at the end of season, I think they'd win more of the 100 games at the end of the season. I think they were a better team at the end of the season.

[jbergey22]

So they're using data from week 1 and considering it in their super bowl prediction? No wonder the media was more accurate in predicting the game.

Yeah, smaller sample sizes are usually far more accurate than larger sample sizes. Any scientist I am sure would agree with you.

If Albert Pujols went 2-3 games without a hit would you bench him?

[Lathum]

When a team has as many injuries as the Giants did you really can't use the regular season as a barometer for how good they are. They got healty at the right time and gelled when it mattered.

[molson]

Yeah, smaller sample sizes are usually far more accurate than larger sample sizes. Any scientist I am sure would agree with you.

If Albert Pujols went 2-3 games without a hit would you bench him?

Sample size has to be balanced against how a team changes. I mean we could use 50 years of Giants data, that would give us a HUGE sample to predict the super bowl with.

[jbergey22]

Sample size has to be balanced against how a team changes. I mean we could use 50 years of Giants data, that would give us a HUGE sample to predict the super bowl with.

You try to keep it as balanced as you can obviously that isnt possible in sports so they add plenty to make it an efficient tool. A lot of which Vegas uses and they seem to make quite a bit more money than joe public with his random predictions.

Maybe you are just smarter than the people of Vegas. Them fools actually had the Pats in a lot of places as an entire field goal favorite. With how apparently obvious it was that the Giants were the better team Id expect Vegas took a beating last weekend.

This is just stupid anyway. The sharps were probably taking the Giants +3 and the public was probably backing the Pats -3. The way the line moved/didnt move it would appear that was the case. You were apparently on the sharp(smart money) side of things which isnt the consensus.

[molson]

You try to keep it as balanced as you can obviously that isnt possible in sports so they add plenty to make it an efficient tool. A lot of which Vegas uses and they seem to make quite a bit more money than joe public with his random predictions.

Maybe you are just smarter than the people of Vegas. Them fools actually had the Pats in a lot of places as an entire field goal favorite. With how apparently obvious it was that the Giants were the better team Id expect Vegas took a beating last weekend.

It was an odd split, I don't remember another underdog having such a media consensus behind them. There is conflicting evidence, definitely. All I can say is me personally, if I'm balancing the vegas line v. media opinions v. my own observations - I think the Giants had a more than 50% chance of winning. Not a lot more than 50%, but I think they win that game more than they lose it.

[jbergey22]

It was an odd split, I don't remember another underdog having such a media consensus behind them. There is conflicting evidence, definitely. All I can say is me personally, if I'm balancing the vegas line v. media opinions v. my own observations - I think the Giants had a more than 50% chance of winning. Not a lot more than 50%, but I think they win that game more than they lose it.

I added this to my previous statement

The sharps were probably taking the Giants +3 and the public was probably backing the Pats -3. The way the line moved/didnt move it would appear that was the case. You were apparently on the sharp(smart money) side of things which isnt the consensus. Maybe people have gotten smart enough to ignore media predictions?

I think Vegas probably liked the result. It was an under and the dog covered.

[JediKooter]

i blame drew henson.

He definitely deserves a portion of the blame.

[Blackadar]

Of course they knew. It was so obvious they had more momentum than the team that had won 10 in a row.

The team that won 10 in a row was given the only game against a team with a winning record at home. Otherwise, they hadn't beaten any team of substance all year. The Giants had just beaten the Saints, the Packers and the Falcons - three of the best teams in the league, two of those on the road. It's not that hard to figure out why many people felt that the Giants would win.

[jbergey22]

The team that won 10 in a row was given the only game against a team with a winning record at home. Otherwise, they hadn't beaten any team of substance all year. The Giants had just beaten the Saints, the Packers and the Falcons - three of the best teams in the league, two of those on the road. It's not that hard to figure out why many people felt that the Giants would win.

I dont even know what that is suppose to mean. Should the Pats have lost 3-4 of them games making the 8 win teams become 9 win teams which could add some "substance" to their schedule?

USATODAY.com (http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/nfl11.htm?loc=interstitialskip)

Pats were 8-3 vs top 16 teams while the Giants were 10-4. Giants were 5-4 vs top 10 teams. Patriots were 2-3. This is including the playoffs.

Your point would be better made this way. Records without anything else doesnt really say much.

Patriots did play a very weak schedule and the Giants did lose some regular season games to some good teams. Pats did however play some 8-8 teams and beat them convincingly.

Its done and over with the Giants beat 4 top 10 teams in 5 weeks and deserve to be called the best. They like to save their best for the end of the season apparently.

[Racer]

Also voted other (i.e. Giants).

[Blackadar]

I dont even know what that is suppose to mean. Should the Pats have lost 3-4 of them games making the 8 win teams become 9 win teams which could add some "substance" to their schedule?

USATODAY.com (http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/nfl11.htm?loc=interstitialskip)

Pats were 8-3 vs top 16 teams while the Giants were 10-4. Giants were 5-4 vs top 10 teams. Patriots were 2-3. This is including the playoffs.

Your point would be better made this way. Records without anything else doesnt really say much.

Patriots did play a very weak schedule and the Giants did lose some regular season games to some good teams. Pats did however play some 8-8 teams and beat them convincingly.

Its done and over with the Giants beat 4 top 10 teams in 5 weeks and deserve to be called the best. They like to save their best for the end of the season apparently.

Cut it any way you want, the Patsies beat only one team with a winning record on their way to the Super Bowl. That's never happened before. Ultimately, they were overrated and weren't battle tested, both of which showed up on Sunday in the 2nd half of the game. There's something to be said for a difficult schedule - either teams crumble or get better when they play better competition. The Patriots didn't have that opportunity and either that enabled them to sneak into the Super Bowl or held them back once they got there. Personally, I think it's the former, but that's just my opinion.

FYI, there were 10 teams other than the Patriots with winning records. The Patsies went 1-3 against those teams, not 2-3.

[jbergey22]

FYI, there were 10 teams other than the Patriots with winning records. The Patsies went 1-3 against those teams, not 2-3.

I was using the Sagarin ratings for the top 10.