Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner

Archived Thread

This team can win the Super Bowl.

bigGMENblue0891 : 11/14/2013 10:17 am
Call me crazy. But we can do it.

We did it in 2007. We did it in 2011. And how did we do it?

Both seasons our defense was mediocre all year, then all of a sudden, they came together and dominated. I think (and hope) that's what we are seeing now. I love Perry Fewell as a coach, and I'm so happy he is having success right now.

Yes, we haven't exactly played the tops of the league, but I mean come on, look at what we have done the last three weeks. No offensive points for Minnesota. No offensive points for the Eagles, who are now surging. Our offense tried so hard to hand Oakland the game and the defense held them to just 13 points! That's less than 5 points per game the last three games! In the NFL, that is damn impressive. Not to mention, we have SHUT DOWN premier running backs. Forte, AP, McCoy TWICE, and McFadden. I'm very happy with that, and you all should be too.

You might say, oh but our O-line is so bad and Eli isn't the way he used to be etc. As long as Andre Brown can stay healthy and run like he did Sunday, I think our offense is in great shape. Eli loves play action, and he can go back to dominating. I think this week we tear Green Bay apart. 38-10 approximately.

Flame away. But let's f'ing do this!
No offensive points for the Eagles ...  
Mike in Raleigh : 11/14/2013 10:19 am : link
No Foles ... was the BIG REASON for that, my friend!!! Rose-colored glasses much??? ;)
No  
mrvax : 11/14/2013 10:19 am : link
No they can't.
I know!  
bigGMENblue0891 : 11/14/2013 10:21 am : link
Feeling quite optimistic this morning. We obviously haven't played elite QB's, but I'm confident enough in our secondary right now.

In years past, this team has been GREAT at making mediocre QB's look like Pro Bowlers. Not happening anymore this season!
Im with you.  
Fast Adam : 11/14/2013 10:21 am : link
ALL IN.
Pass the peyote  
endwerc : 11/14/2013 10:22 am : link
Hey dog, did you see the size of that chicken?
all  
AJ23 : 11/14/2013 10:22 am : link
in!
.  
Bill in UT : 11/14/2013 10:23 am : link
:)
Let's get to .500 first  
Big Blue '56 : 11/14/2013 10:23 am : link
.
Im hoping  
gmen9892 : 11/14/2013 10:27 am : link
The reverse can happen to what happened in 2011. That year, our offense had a great year and kept us around just long enough for the defense to finally step up and hold up their end of the bargain.

This year, the opposite seems to be happening. Defense has been good all year and they are keeping us in this thing. Just gotta hope the offense wakes up, because that is the only chance we have to make anything out of this season.
RE: Pass the peyote  
Curtis in VA : 11/14/2013 10:29 am : link
In comment 11337118 endwerc said:
Quote:
Hey dog, did you see the size of that chicken?


Nice Young Guns reference.
We Got Some Cowboys and Eagles to lasso.  
spike : 11/14/2013 10:29 am : link
Go Rope!
Despite 3 wins in a row  
cjac : 11/14/2013 10:30 am : link
this is not a good football team. they are making the same mistakes they made in the first 6 games just against bad opponents. I'll admit the defense is playing better, but they havent faced a good QB in quite a while. Lets see how they do against Romo and co.
Also  
spike : 11/14/2013 10:30 am : link
McFadden didn't play last week due to injuries. But yeah anyways
Love the spirit but not sure the Giants shut down McFadden  
Jimmy Googs : 11/14/2013 10:31 am : link
On the other hand, maybe he was just too scared to suit up.

They still have a big hole to climb out of just to make the playoffs  
steve in ky : 11/14/2013 10:37 am : link
Nothing will be more disappointing and frustrating for them to go 9-7 after a 0-6 start and missing the playoffs. I am still just focused on them pulling that off at this point.

Even when they were 0-6 I never gave up on them, but even I am not looking that far ahead (Super Bowl). IF they can win their division they obviously will be entering the playoffs as one of the hottest teams for the second half, and momentum is an important thing to have at that point so lets just hope they can pull that off.

Can the Giants beat the Cowboys and Redskins  
nybeast : 11/14/2013 11:12 am : link
first before we even talk playoffs, much less Super bowl? Shoot, this team could definitely lose this game if they adopt the attitude of fans, looking pass opponents. This is not the time for this talk at all! This is going to be a week to week battle. Every opponent on our schedule from here on out can beat us including the Packers!

So keep perspective and keep rooting, but cancel the Super Bowl talk until we win the NFC East. Even then, the road to the Super Bowl would likely require road wins in New Orleans and Seattle. That's much, much, much more a tougher row to hoe than any of the runs we had before. Let's be hopeful, but realistic! Giants winning on Sunday is the most I'm hoping for at this point.
PARTIALLY  
Randy in CT : 11/14/2013 11:13 am : link
IN!!!
.  
arcarsenal : 11/14/2013 11:14 am : link
Staahhhhhhhpppppppp.

I'm usually the type to say "who cares what we say, the team doesn't have to share that mentality.. they can take it one game at a time while we look way ahead, it makes no difference"..

But in this case.. seriously. Take it one week at a time. Let's just worry about getting to that Dallas game with everything to play for. There are no guaranteed wins in this league.
I have never understood why some fans tell other fans  
steve in ky : 11/14/2013 11:19 am : link
that they need to take it one game at a time.

Everyone knows why the players should but what harm is there if a fan wants to look ahead and dream a little? Fans are exactly the people that don't need to take it one game at a time if they desire not to.
.  
arcarsenal : 11/14/2013 11:22 am : link
Because there's a difference between a semi-plausible situation and an extreme long shot. This falls under the latter by a pretty wide margin.

Should I start a thread about the Giants getting Calvin Johnson? Let a fan dream, right? The odds are probably about the same as the Giants winning the Super Bowl this year.
Agree, steve.  
Stu : 11/14/2013 11:22 am : link
Also, when I first saw the thread title I just figured the OP left the NGT off.
If the way a fan derives the most enjoyment from his team  
steve in ky : 11/14/2013 11:27 am : link
is to look ahead and dream of the possibilities good for him. If a fan derives the most fun thinking about only the upcoming game equally good for him. There is not right or wrong way to root for your team as the season unfolds and for some fans to try and place rules on other fans about how to do so make no sense to me.
Stu  
steve in ky : 11/14/2013 11:28 am : link
LOL
the offense  
MookGiants : 11/14/2013 11:30 am : link
is a huge issue. They can't win the super bowl with this dink and dunk version of offense. Defense is not nearly good enough to win like that, the defense has faced some real awful offenses recently lets be honest
I guess  
bigGMENblue0891 : 11/14/2013 11:33 am : link
I should have brought up in the main post a bit more about the league itself this year. Is there really one team that makes you go, "Wow, those guys are amazing. I would be shocked if they didn't win the Super Bowl." This year I don't think it's reasonable to even say that there's an NFC team OR an AFC team that is a lock to be playing in it. This is as wide open as I can remember the NFL.

I am keeping this streak in perspective as much as possible. We are still three under .500. We have tough, tough games remaining. This mentality is more of a "why not us" than anything else. I've also considered the SB being in our house as a factor of additional motivation for our guys.

Missed the game Sunday and didn't know McFadden sat out. My bad.
.  
arcarsenal : 11/14/2013 11:33 am : link
Welp, the beauty (or whatever) of a message board is that everyone's entitled to their opinion.

The OP thinks we can win the Super Bowl. I think it's silly to even think about at this juncture. Neither opinion is really any more valid than the other.

I've been more optimistic than most that this team can turn it around and really get back into it.. I just don't see the point in getting that far ahead. I guess anything can happen, though.
the new york giants most difficult  
Les in TO : 11/14/2013 11:37 am : link
opponent this season has been and will continue to be......the new york giants.

aside from the o-line and running back weakness early in the season, they have made so many mental errors - both the big ones (pick sixes, botched punt snaps, special teams returns, not clearing away from an errant punt) and more subtle ones (delays of game, alignment penalties, dropped passes), that they made it easy for opponents to beat us.

if the giants can clean up their mental act, and at least (1) know their assignments (2) not gift their opponents easy points/field position through sloppy decisions, they can compete against every team in the league.

but nothing i have seen in the last three weeks has shown me that they've cleaned up their mental issues. everyone from eli to deossie needs to start playing sharper, smarter football.

it's one thing to be overwhelmed by a stronger, faster, more athletic team, it's another thing to kill yourself with unforced errors and make mickey mouse plays.
This team can win the game this week. Superbowl? Little early  
Patrick77 : 11/14/2013 11:43 am : link
This offense is ugly and the team has had the luck of going against some awful QBs recently. Looking past this week is foolish for us, the team is in a huge hole and is slowly cralwing out of it. Even if the Giants start playing well I fully expect teams like the 49ers, Seahawks, and Panthers to beat the living shit out of this team. And that's just the NFC. The Chiefs, Broncos, and Bengals would make short work of this team.

The only way this changes is if there is a huge turnaround in blocking (in every aspect and position), Nicks plays much better, and Eli plays much better. But anything can happen.
if they have any shot  
MookGiants : 11/14/2013 11:44 am : link
to get to the playoffs and actually do something in the playoffs, the offensive line needs to stop getting their asses kicked and we need to return to being a vertical passing team.

I really, really hate watching this version of the Giants offense. Dink and dunk shit becasue the interior offensive line is a train wreck. The line really isn't playing any better, they are just hiding how awful it is with the offensive play design. And they are getting away with it because they've faced teams who can't score
Playoffs?  
George : 11/14/2013 12:01 pm : link
PLAYOFFS?!?

- Jim Mora





One of the worst parts about...  
FatMan in Charlotte : 11/14/2013 12:04 pm : link
today's NFL for me is that MOST teams have a shot at winning the Super Bowl each year. Whether fans want to acknowledge it or not, the Giants are one of those teams.

Now, we just have to see if the 0-6 start was too steep of a hole to climb out of.

For some reason, people seem to overlook the recent history that has shown the eventual Super Bowl winner needing help/luck just to get into the playoffs. The Ravens needed Ray Rice to pick up a 4th and 19 last year just to make the playoffs and then had a Denver CB completely fall asleep on a Hail Mary.

The Packers never get to the playoffs if we don't collapse against the Eagles in epic fashion. The Giants don't get to the playoffs if Romo hits a wide open Austin to seal the game or if JPP doesn't block a FG attempt. The list goes on and on and often hinges on one key play or sequence of events.

THAT'S how razor thin the line is today between also-ran and Champ. I think it is unlikely we will even make the playoffs, but it is a possibility, which would make a Super Bowl run also a possibility. An NFL season isn't a sprint, no matter how many power ranking followers and knee-jerk reactors try to make it that way.
RE: One of the worst parts about...  
Go Terps : 11/14/2013 12:19 pm : link
In comment 11337341 FatMan in Charlotte said:
Quote:
today's NFL for me is that MOST teams have a shot at winning the Super Bowl each year. Whether fans want to acknowledge it or not, the Giants are one of those teams.

Now, we just have to see if the 0-6 start was too steep of a hole to climb out of.

For some reason, people seem to overlook the recent history that has shown the eventual Super Bowl winner needing help/luck just to get into the playoffs. The Ravens needed Ray Rice to pick up a 4th and 19 last year just to make the playoffs and then had a Denver CB completely fall asleep on a Hail Mary.

The Packers never get to the playoffs if we don't collapse against the Eagles in epic fashion. The Giants don't get to the playoffs if Romo hits a wide open Austin to seal the game or if JPP doesn't block a FG attempt. The list goes on and on and often hinges on one key play or sequence of events.

THAT'S how razor thin the line is today between also-ran and Champ. I think it is unlikely we will even make the playoffs, but it is a possibility, which would make a Super Bowl run also a possibility. An NFL season isn't a sprint, no matter how many power ranking followers and knee-jerk reactors try to make it that way.


Absolutely. Look at the last two champions:

'12 Ravens: Dropped from 9-2 to to 10-6 between Thanksgiving and the end of the season. Think about that related to where we are this year...we haven't even yet reached the point in the season where last year's champs completely hit the skids. They had the 9th best record in the NFL.

'11 Giants: At this point in the calendar the '11 Giants were in the midst of a streak that saw them lose 5 out of 6 games. We look at the '13 Giants as having no chance because they started 0-6, but this very same team went 1-5 much later in the calendar only 2 years ago and won the Super Bowl anyway. They had the 10th best record in the league.

This year's team can absolutely win the Super Bowl. The roulette wheel is still spinning, and their chances aren't all that far off from Denver's or Kansas City's. Hell, I'd argue they have a better shot than Kansas City...who's going to bet on that team in the playoffs?

This is the NFL the people wanted, and they got it.

Well said FatMan  
Mike L. : 11/14/2013 12:24 pm : link
in addition, this group has proven - twice - that they are capable of good football after playing lousy for a significant stretch. Seems to me the TC/Eli lead Giants are not down and out when it appears that they are. Also, we've seen where they look like they are cruising to a division title and the wheels fall off. If they beat GB this Sunday, and they are a 7 point favorite, they will be favored to beat Dallas and be tied with them at 5-6. Winning the division is still very plausible.
RE: if they have any shot  
Andy in Halifax : 11/14/2013 12:25 pm : link
In comment 11337300 MookGiants said:
Quote:
to get to the playoffs and actually do something in the playoffs, the offensive line needs to stop getting their asses kicked and we need to return to being a vertical passing team.

I really, really hate watching this version of the Giants offense. Dink and dunk shit becasue the interior offensive line is a train wreck. The line really isn't playing any better, they are just hiding how awful it is with the offensive play design. And they are getting away with it because they've faced teams who can't score


Mook's right. We gotta fix the Oline, interior in particular. If we can't throw the ball downfield, we're sunk.
LOL  
ZogZerg : 11/14/2013 12:40 pm : link
Some of you guy live in a dream world...
Is it the same...  
FatMan in Charlotte : 11/14/2013 12:48 pm : link
dream world where a 3-6 team made the playoffs just last year or where a 7-9 team won a division AND actually won a playoff game, because I'm pretty sure that is simply a figment of my imagination.
This has been a refreshingly different thread...  
T-Bone : 11/14/2013 12:58 pm : link
thanks bigGMENblue0891!

Do I, and most of us (including yourself), think it's likely? Hell no.

But if there's anything good ole Coach Coughlin and Easy E has shown us throughout the years, they specialize in doing the opposite of what's 'likely'! Both good and bad. At least it'll be fun to watch (for the next few weeks, at least, anyway)!

OK, let me be the first:  
Doomster : 11/14/2013 1:08 pm : link
"YOU'RE, CRAZY!"
If  
NJGiantFan84 : 11/14/2013 1:12 pm : link
Eli becomes a top 5 QB again this week, yes, we have a chance at the playoffs. I don't see that happening until he gets time off in the off-season and the pressure dwindles. I still say we go 5-11.
Just not enough on the OL to win it all  
SGMen : 11/14/2013 1:13 pm : link
I just don't see it this year. I mean, anything can happen but we'd need some NFC teams to fade with injuries or age or the like as we enter the playoffs.

If we had a healthy Baas, Snee and JPP then maybe but we don't.

If we win the next two games - must wins - well, maybe I'll begin to see some light.
RE: Also  
NJGiantFan84 : 11/14/2013 1:18 pm : link
In comment 11337145 spike said:
Quote:
McFadden didn't play last week due to injuries. But yeah anyways


Well, he was scared to be shut down so he didn't play. It's basically the same thing!!!
The defense can't carry this team...  
silverfox : 11/14/2013 1:52 pm : link
For there to be any chance to even make the playoffs, the special teams and offense have to shape the hell up...and FAST. I haven't seen any evidence of that yet. Same mistakes over and over.
I agree with the poster.  
Geeman : 11/14/2013 2:04 pm : link
I never lost confidence and feel confident that they can take this division. Especially in light of what's transpired on this team over the past month. From the acquisitions of Conners, Beason to Hill retuning to the simplifying of the defense. We are just better then we were defensively.
Got Brown back along with Peyton and Jacobs to stabilize the backfield. We got a healthy Nicks, Cruz and Randle. Now we only need to get the passing game which has historically been a strength back on track down the stretch really. I like our chances. Once in the playoffs anybody has a shot.
The key is to get in the position  
BayRidgeBlue : 11/14/2013 2:06 pm : link
to have a shot at doing so.

To say the defense can't carry the team or that our offense isn't good enough is somewhat true at the moment (although, I love our defense) but could change over the course of the next few weeks. Look at 11' and compare our defense at week 11 to what it looked like vs Atlanta, Green Bay, SF and NE.

As long as we take care of business this week and beat Dallas then I think it's fair to say that we're as much in the mix as anybody. That's not to say that there aren't better teams but I think we are a very dangerous team if we can block upfront (a big "if", I know).
In order for the Giants to start beatng other teams,  
Geeman : 11/14/2013 2:15 pm : link
they had to first stop beating themselves. They have cut down on the TO's, but need to cut down on them further.
I anticiapte Cox taking over the return duties from Jernigan, that was a careless TO to start the game that we cannot afford. Ball security is the #1 priority and play to the strengths of the team which is defense and the run game.
Hoepfully the passing game gets going soon. Nobody is running away with the East so we still have a good shot at this.
It's called scheming.  
Geeman : 11/14/2013 2:19 pm : link
The Giants have had to scheme around an average Oline. They cannot play a vertical game without solid protection, which they don't have right now. However they can run the rock and take the short passes down the field. I don't care as long as they win. the 91 team had an ugly offense too, but they won, that's all that matters at the end of the day.
RE: RE: One of the worst parts about...  
MetsAreBack : 11/14/2013 2:55 pm : link
In comment 11337371 Go Terps said:

Quote:

Absolutely. Look at the last two champions:

'12 Ravens: Dropped from 9-2 to to 10-6 between Thanksgiving and the end of the season. Think about that related to where we are this year...we haven't even yet reached the point in the season where last year's champs completely hit the skids. They had the 9th best record in the NFL.



This is a little misleading I think. The Ravens lost 3 straight games last year after starting 9-2... a point in the year when mass injuries temporarily hit them... and lost two of those by 3 points, one of them in heartbreaking fashion at Washington... and then wiped the floor of us with both of our seasons on the line.

Their week 17 "loss" they had already locked in a #4 seed and rested every single starter on their team in preparation for their Wild Card game. That exhibition game should obviously be thrown out of any analysis.

I dont view last year's Ravens team as some mediocre 'got hot at the right time' team. Their 9-2 start actually tells you they were legit - hit a brief rough patch with some tough injuries - then righted the ship.

And they beat Denver easily in that playoff game if their special teams isnt giving up big plays left and right to Trindon Holliday.
I think the core point...  
FatMan in Charlotte : 11/14/2013 3:09 pm : link
is that for most of the recent SB winners - they have all gone through a stretch where they don't appear to be SB calibre.

That's certainly true of both Giants teams. It is true of the two Steelers teams. It was true for Green Bay and Baltimore. Perhaps one can make a case that New Orleans was the only recent team to have won where they seemed like it for most of the year and didn't look like crap.

In the 80's and 90's you could reasonably make a guess at 4 teams in week 8 and probably hit a SB winner 75% of the time. Doing that today isn't easy.
I agree with that  
MetsAreBack : 11/14/2013 3:11 pm : link
but the reality is the Ravens had a 3 week stretch of poor play... we played 6 straight weeks of terrible football.. and i would argue we're still not doing the things in recent weeks that would give you confidence that we could hang with a Seattle or even Carolina if we were to play them in two weeks.

There's a better chance we lose Eli for the year because the line missed yet another block... then we run off 6 wins in our next 7 to make the playoffs.
The league has pretty much  
Sneakers O'toole : 11/14/2013 3:12 pm : link
achieved it's goal of parity. To some that's good, to others bad. But it's certainly evident that it's here.
To me its a little less about parity  
MetsAreBack : 11/14/2013 3:14 pm : link

and more about health

No way the Colts get clobbered at home by the Rams on sunday if they're healthy

No way Packers are 5-4 if Rodgers, Cobb, Finley, Matthews and others are healthy

49ers have a better record if Vernon Davis isnt in-and-out of their lineup all year

Etc
MAB  
Go Terps : 11/14/2013 3:20 pm : link
The point holds, though. No one...NO ONE...had Baltimore winning the Super Bowl from Thanksgiving onward. They were a TD+ dog in Denver and again in New England. They lost to Charlie Batch at home when they had a shot to put the Steelers away.

And it boils down to something deeper...would anyone make the argument that any of the last three champs (none better than 10-6) was a great team? Even the 2009 Saints went into the playoffs on a 3 game losing streak before going on a run.

The point is this: the Giants are 1.5 games out of first place with 7 games to play. Making up such a deficit would be far from unprecedented, and it is PROVEN in the past three seasons that all you have to do is basically make the playoffs.

This is not a great Giants team, but you don't have to be great or even very good (none of the last three teams have been) to win the Super Bowl.
RE: To me its a little less about parity  
Go Terps : 11/14/2013 3:22 pm : link
In comment 11337783 MetsAreBack said:
Quote:

and more about health

No way the Colts get clobbered at home by the Rams on sunday if they're healthy

No way Packers are 5-4 if Rodgers, Cobb, Finley, Matthews and others are healthy

49ers have a better record if Vernon Davis isnt in-and-out of their lineup all year

Etc


Health is a big part of the parity equation. A HUGE part, actually. It's impossible to have good backups...the gulf between backups and starters is larger, probably, than ever before.
Agreed  
Sneakers O'toole : 11/14/2013 3:24 pm : link
depth and parity go hand in hand.
You make good points  
MetsAreBack : 11/14/2013 3:28 pm : link
but I cant recall a Giants team that had line play this poor - on both sides of the ball - since before Eli got here.

The '11 team had a ton of warts - but at least then, the o-line could hold a passing block... and Eli was playing well and in sync with his receivers. Even when we were losing big in New Orleans, our offense was showing signs of moving the ball at will against their defense.

Our Defense today may be a little better than that '11 team (will never understand how that defense gelled in January) - but the offense cant hold a candle to the '11 team.

The '07 team doesnt get nearly enough credit for how fundamentally sound they were. The rushing attack was top 5. The defense was very good. If you look at the 6 losses that year - one to NE in essentially an exhibition game, two tough losses to Dallas which was a phenominal team, the early season loss to Green Bay (a 13-3 team), and the loss in 40 mph winds to a Skins team that ended up making the playoffs. The only stinker that year was Minnesota, a game in which Eli was historically bad.

In fact the only guy holding that '07 team back was Eli... and he stepped up when it counted.

I dont see anything about our team this year that gives me confidence it can go on a run. All I see is a scared, shell shocked QB running for his life on almost every play. We're surviving in recent weeks through the easy part of our schedule, nothing more.
I don't think any of us have great confidence  
Sneakers O'toole : 11/14/2013 3:29 pm : link
.
MAB...  
FatMan in Charlotte : 11/14/2013 3:29 pm : link
this is actually an excellent post about the state of the NFL.

Quote:
To me its a little less about parity
MetsAreBack : 3:14 pm : link : reply

and more about health

No way the Colts get clobbered at home by the Rams on sunday if they're healthy

No way Packers are 5-4 if Rodgers, Cobb, Finley, Matthews and others are healthy

49ers have a better record if Vernon Davis isnt in-and-out of their lineup all year

Etc


There is no way those things happen EXCEPT that they DO happen. Each and every year. The difference between an also-ran and a champ is as slight as key injuries or playing teams at the right time. If we played the teams again as they were at Week 1, we probably don't have any wins. But that isn't the way it works and that just goes to show you how close teams are in talent. The Chiefs are the only team in the history of US sports (in any of the 4 major leagues) to have the worst record one year and then win their first 9 games the next year. The Giants could conceivably become the first team to start 0-6 and make the playoffs.

Will we? Probably not, but things have fallen in place with:
1) Key injuries to teams in our recent wins
2) The NFC East being a very mediocre division
3) An unprecedented number of players on IR league-wide evening the field for many and bringing some top teams back to the pack.

Without parity, it wouldn't have been conceivable for us to even have a shot. We do - and it speaks less about the good state of the Giants and IMO, more about the poor state of the NFL.
My point is the talent gap is pretty wide on opening day  
MetsAreBack : 11/14/2013 3:32 pm : link
injuries are the great equalizer.

If you have a good team on opening day and manage to stay healthy through a season...

you're 9-1 like the Seahawks, 8-1 like Denver is. or 7-2 like New Orleans

Speaking of New Orleans - am I the only one really looking forward to their H2H with Carolina? Huge implications from those games and they still meet twice.
MAB  
Go Terps : 11/14/2013 3:37 pm : link
Quote:
If you have a good team on opening day and manage to stay healthy through a season...

you're 9-1 like the Seahawks, 8-1 like Denver is. or 7-2 like New Orleans


And those teams aren't much more likely to win the Super Bowl than the Giants or Ravens are.
I don't think the talent gap  
Sneakers O'toole : 11/14/2013 3:41 pm : link
is wide at all. I think it's razor thin.
My comment about this...  
FatMan in Charlotte : 11/14/2013 3:41 pm : link
is going to be a bit off-track with the recent discussion:

Quote:
No way the Colts get clobbered at home by the Rams on sunday if they're healthy


If that happened to the Giants, regardless of the health of the team, can you see any scenario other than BBI going absolutely apeshit and wondering who should be fired and benched and what draft pick we should be aiming for?

People forget a lot both between seasons and within a season. Last week's win against the Raiders wasn't pretty, but it exactly the type of win this team has had for years. Getting to 3-6 was huge. Getting to 4-6 is necessary. Then, even as shitty as we've played and as morbid as the fans have been, the team has a legitimate shot to claim the division. We have a long way to go, but all you can ask for as a fan is a shot. Win this week and we have that.
I dont know about that  
MetsAreBack : 11/14/2013 3:42 pm : link
Ravens had a much better defense and running game last year

Giants are still 3-6

I could see a point like 'Lions (6-3) might sneak in' or Colts, assuming their secondary gets healthy, could go on a run.... but its another thing entirely to say this year's Giants could win it all

As MoM has stated all the time, at least one bye week, top 2 seed has made the Superbowl every year since inception. And the only 'mediocre' team to ever win it all was the '11 Giants... for every '11 Giants, there are a lot more recent Bengals, Jaguars and (7-9) Seahawks teams that were excused from the postseason rather easily.
I'm pretty sure..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 11/14/2013 4:02 pm : link
the Steelers team that made it as a Wild Card can be considered mediocre as well.

Going into the playoffs last year, the Ravens had the 4th best odds to be the AFC representative (out of 6 teams).

I don't think anyone could accurately say the Giants have a GOOD chance to win it all, but even if they have any chance at all is pretty absurd in a "good" league. We've seen 6 seed teams make the playoffs and go on a run and we've seen #1 seeds shit the bed in their first game. The point remains - it is increasingly hard to predict who will win it all because it tends to be the hottest team at the moment, and it has rarely ended up being the favorite, even if one of them does actually make it to the game.
One thing is certain  
Sneakers O'toole : 11/14/2013 4:04 pm : link
this team is going to have to find it's offense again if they want to entertain ideas of postseason play.

If I were betting right now,  
Go Terps : 11/14/2013 4:07 pm : link
I'd feel better betting the Giants (3-6) to win the Super Bowl than I would Kansas City (9-0).

I agree with FMiC that this is about the state of the NFL...not the Giants. We've already seen two Giants teams that were a long way from great win the Super Bowl. Parity is absolutely the order of the day and I would say a clear goal of the NFL's owners. Consider that they are likely to add 7th playoff team per conference that will only add to the randomness of the playoffs.
The Giants  
Jerry in DC : 11/14/2013 4:08 pm : link
are really the major thing keeping the parity argument alive at this point. Other than the Giants, there is a lot of stability at both the top and the bottom of the league. The Final 4 in 2011 (SF, NYG, NE, BAL) was the same as the Final 4 in 2012 with the exception of the Giants. The teams that win Super Bowls are consistent playoff teams, except for the Giants. NE has been one of the best teams in the league for more than a decade. NO and GB have been excellent for years. PIT and BAL have been contenders for a long time (looks like that might be over for them now). Whoever Peyton plays for is in the playoffs every year.

Sure, there are some blips - NO last year with the coaching stuff, ATL this year with the injuries, etc. It doesn't stay constant forever - it's not soccer where things are basically permanent unless a sugar daddy owner comes on the scene, but there is a real year-to-year continuity.

Some teams build up over like SF and SEA did and KC and CAR are doing now. But when they get good (at least in the case of SF and SEA), they stay good (we'll see with KC and CAR). And some teams fall off over time like PIT and HOU, maybe it's happening to BAL and ATL right now as well.

But it's not some crapshoot. There are good teams and bad teams. We've seen a 16-0 team and an 0-16 team in recent years. There's a reason why Seattle and Denver are always 7+ point favorites and usually double digits at home. There are really good and really bad teams every year. And in most cases those teams remain good and bad the next year.
I really, really  
Sneakers O'toole : 11/14/2013 4:08 pm : link
hate the idea of expanded playoffs.
Jerry  
Sneakers O'toole : 11/14/2013 4:10 pm : link
I don't agree. Games are consistently contested into the fourth quarter in today's league that simply was not true in the pre-parity era.

A hallmark of modern football is that all the games are coming down to the wire.
^^^  
Sneakers O'toole : 11/14/2013 4:11 pm : link
The margin between winning games and losing games is closer than ever. These are things that are a result of parity as well.
RE: Jerry  
Jerry in DC : 11/14/2013 4:14 pm : link
In comment 11337894 Sneakers O'toole said:
Quote:
I don't agree. Games are consistently contested into the fourth quarter in today's league that simply was not true in the pre-parity era.


Is that true? Are there actual #s to support it? I have no idea if it's true or not.
The actual average margin of victory...  
FatMan in Charlotte : 11/14/2013 4:39 pm : link
is virtually unchanged from 2000-present vs. 1985-1999. It was 0.3 points higher in the earlier era.

That could be a function of lower scoring teams so the blowouts in the earlier times were of a less magnitude than today, or it could indicate there hasn't been a huge shift affecting the margin of victory.

But the key stat, IMO is that playoff favorites have lost at a 27% greater rate than that of the earlier Era. I took a closer look after seeing that stat.

From 1985-1999, there were actually 10 separate years where a home favorite didn't lose in the playoffs. From what I could tell in a quick scan, that hasn't happened at all since 2000.
I think that's because you have  
Sneakers O'toole : 11/14/2013 4:45 pm : link
the "big quarterback" teams that blow up the average.
Teams like this year's  
Sneakers O'toole : 11/14/2013 4:46 pm : link
incarnation of the Broncos as an example. You have a handful of those that are almost impossible to slow down under these rules.

But then you have the rest of the league, sort of mucking around.
The post linked here  
Jerry in DC : 11/14/2013 4:52 pm : link
is chock full of margin of victory stuff, sliced every which way - there's really nothing to indicate that games are any closer now than in the 80s or 90s. Definitely closer than in the 40s and 50s though.

FMIC - Where are you getting that playoff info? I just did a quick scan and didn't see a single year when all the home teams won in the playoffs. Were you using point spreads? I was just going on home and away, but even so, the home team is usually favored, especially back then, I'd think, since there were fewer divisions and fewer bad division champs.
Link - ( New Window )
I was just looking at that same link  
Sneakers O'toole : 11/14/2013 4:58 pm : link
I have it bookmarked. The gist of that article has been that parity isn't dying, because apparently when it was written a few years ago someone there thought it was.

It also seems to draw the same conclusion I did  
Sneakers O'toole : 11/14/2013 5:05 pm : link
about the big quarterback teams ruling the NFL, in that article they make the point that there has always been a small number of teams in every era that dominate.

I think that where you see a bigger difference in today's league. The haves and the have nots at quarterback.

But the difference in the level of talent beyond the QB position, I think is razor thin. Thinner than it's ever been.

I also think that the reason the numbers look more consistent than you would expect in a league where the margin of victory is growing (as I contend) is that in the earlier decades, those margins were spread out in more games, and today it's the super quarterback teams that really throw it off. A smaller number of elites, who blow the doors off the teams they play.

That article also has the misfortune of being in the middle of what I call the "defeneless player" era. 2009 and 2010 isn't a great cutoff point. I think we are in the middle of a shift now as we speak.

Some of the trends that we talk about here will be more evident 5 or 10 years from now. I have no doubt of that,
gah  
Sneakers O'toole : 11/14/2013 5:06 pm : link
margin of victory shrinking, not growing!
A 7-9 team winning one playoff game is just  
ZogZerg : 11/14/2013 5:15 pm : link
like winning the Superbowl. Yeah, that's reality in the NFL. Once crazy win in how many years? By a team that had no shot of doing anything.
This team hasn't looked really good in ONE game this year. They are no where near winning the NFC East or making any sort of playoff run.

The OL is terrible and Eli is sucking big time because of that. That is not something getting fixed this year.

Sorry, go back to your dream world...
But they didn't just look  
Jerry in DC : 11/14/2013 5:22 pm : link
at average margin of victory, which is something that could be influenced by outlying unstoppable QBs.

They broke it out by % of games with margins <= 3, <= 7, >=28. It's all unchanged. There's not big blowouts pumping up the averages. There's not more close games. It's just not true. The seasons with the highest % of close games were in the 80's and 90's (and 1961). Not a single season from the 2000s made the top 10.

It doesn't include data from the past few years, fine. Maybe it's changing drastically right now and it's not picked up in these numbers. It's not obviously true, though and I'd bet that it's not true at all, considering the numbers have been constant for 30 years. I'm happy to be proven wrong on that if the facts say otherwise.
.  
Sneakers O'toole : 11/14/2013 6:11 pm : link
Quote:
They broke it out by % of games with margins <= 3, <= 7, >=28. It's all unchanged.


Yes, I know that. I must not be explaining this well. Those tables show percentage of win differentials as a season aggregate. What they don't show you is how they were generated.

If you have one team, like the Manning lead Broncos, scoring high point differentials in 8 games over the season, or 8 teams each having one, the numbers in those tables are going to look the same. It' not telling you the story, percentage wide as a league whole it's the same thing.

And that is sort of what this chart is telling us

Quote:
Average Point Differential by Elite Teams of Last 7 Decades
Decade Teams Avg. Point Differential PG
1990s Buffalo, Dallas, Denver, Green Bay 3.93
1950s Baltimore, Cleveland, Detroit 4.07
1980s Denver, NYG, San Francisco, Washington 4.43
1960s Baltimore, Cleveland, Green Bay, NYG 5.39
2000s Indianapolis, New England, Pittsburgh 6.53
1940s Chicago, Philadelphia, Washington 6.59
1970s Dallas, Miami, Minnesota, Pittsburgh 7.34


The point differentials among the elite teams are growing again, it's low in the 90's, low in the 80's, growing again in this era.

It's quarterback play that is growing it. The Broncos without Manning are an average team, as are the Patriots or the Colts of the 2000's.

It's not the 40's style of football. It's the quarterbacks distorting the fact that in every other sense, parity is almost completely achieved. It's quarterbacks bombing on teams that are giving us this illusion that things haven't changed. They have.

And if you don't believe me, forget these charts. Watch the games this week. Most of them will come down to the wire. It's the outliers throwing things off.
And we are right in the middle  
Sneakers O'toole : 11/14/2013 6:16 pm : link
of a shift. Quarterbacks are more important now than they were just 7 or 8 years ago. It's an all quarterback league now. And there are only ever a handful of the truly elite at one given time.

In other words  
Sneakers O'toole : 11/14/2013 6:24 pm : link
the only way that all of those tables can look as remarkably consistent as you keep pointing out, while at the same time point differential is increasing among a small handful of elite teams, is if that point differential is coming at the expense of teams that are not quite as elite.

\
I ran  
Jerry in DC : 11/14/2013 7:21 pm : link
the #s from 2012 - I don't think using a partial season for 2013 would be appropriate because there are probably some timing effects for weather/injuries/teams quitting, etc.

Average Margin: 12.15 vs 11.80 in the 2000s

% of 3 Pts or Less: 22.2% vs. 23.1% in the 2000s

% of 7 Pts or Less: 46.9% vs. 45.7% in the 2000s

It just looks like noise to me. The average margin and %7 Points slightly support your hypothesis, while the %3 points slightly contradicts it. Is 11.80 to 12.15 a meaningful increase? Possibly.

But stepping back from the #s, you're claiming that there's lots of parity and using an increasing margin of victory as evidence. Isn't that kind of the opposite of parity? Parity, at least as most people define it, would lead to smaller margins of victory.

The QB-removed parity that you mentioned, which is a much more refined definition, is something that I would buy. I agree that the QB is more important than ever, which isn't really going out on a limb and obviously teams that have great QBs are typically very good. This strikes me as true and supportable, but it's not what most people mean when they say "parity".

I've been buying that theory for a while, but the emergence of Seattle and San Fran has made me question it at least a little.

Regardless, it's nice to have a detailed and civil discussion around here.
quarterback removed parity as you call it  
Sneakers O'toole : 11/14/2013 7:23 pm : link
is really a way of saying what most of the league is. Again, it's a small group of elite teams moving up the point differential. Your own link shows us this.
And I agree  
Sneakers O'toole : 11/14/2013 7:27 pm : link
This is a good football discussion, I'm enjoying talking to you about this.

I do think that ten years from now, if the trends with the rules remain consistent, the numbers will get more and more in line with this.

Of course, it could end up that the defenseless player rules slowly become less emphasized and thing even out.

There was a time when the "in the grasp" rule was out of control, similar to what the defenseless player rules and some of the quarterback protections are today. If a player got a hand on a quarterback in the early 90's they were calling plays dead. Far closer than they call it today.

Emphasis on rules is as important as the rules themselves.

This is a tangent of course, not really a part of the parity discussion, but it's related to the quarterback topic we drifted onto

Also  
Sneakers O'toole : 11/14/2013 7:34 pm : link
and forgive the back to back posts I keep doing, I love when physical teams like the Chiefs buck the trend.

I think they have a tougher road to success in this modern league, so I love when they can come out and smack some of these teams in the mouth
I think  
Jerry in DC : 11/14/2013 7:52 pm : link
it's possible to build a good team without a great QB - SF, SEA, KC, etc. There are good and bad units around the league and it does still matter most of the time (maybe not when playing the Saints in the dome).

I suspect that it's difficult to maintain a good team without a great QB - this is what's happening to Houston right now (and arguably a few other teams). You need to be pretty loaded all over the place to compete at the top and it's tough to stay loaded because of the cap, injuries, and it's just hard to keep on finding good players. I think there's a strong element of luck in the draft and it's hard to keep getting winning drafts year after year.


One potential balance would be an increase in great QB salaries. The Packers are already kind of mediocre around Rodgers, but what if he made $30 million a year? It's a justifiable salary.


I know everyone points to the rules and the cap (and it's true), but I think that some of this might be due to money and technology and the homogenization of organizations. Teams put so much into scouting now that it's hard to get an edge. There's so much film on guys, so much analysis done, and everyone probably operates pretty similarly. It's likely to result in a more even distribution of talent.
I think we are going to see  
Sneakers O'toole : 11/14/2013 9:07 pm : link
QB salaries continue to go through the roof. Teams will be squeezed when their guys hit that second contract. They already are, but it will get worse. It's going to be one of the more interesting things to watch play out, just how far can the QB's push their importance come contract time.

You raise an excellent point.
6-6 first please  
Mondo : 11/14/2013 9:38 pm : link
before we get hype
Extremeskins is probably having a good laugh.  
LawrenceTaylor56 : 11/14/2013 9:40 pm : link
.
Without delving in too deep...  
Torrag : 11/14/2013 10:03 pm : link
a lot has to change for this team to win a title...that being said....there is still time to ascend to a much higher level of play.
Back to the Corner