Old news but nice to see a player that played for the other team that did not say we were "lucky" like some here say take away the Tyree catch and the Giants lose to the better team Link - ( New Window )
"They came at us with that power running game with [Brandon] Jacobs and Bradshaw and the fullback, [Madison] Hedgecock," Bruschi said. "Physical offensive line, they had a defensive line, powerful. It validates what really wins football games. We had the highest-scoring offense in the history of the NFL, and we ran into a more physical team that day and lost."
Our current team is so far from having a power running game, a physical offensive line and a powerful D line. If Seattle wins again this year, it will continue to reinforce my belief that championships are won by running the ball and playing great defense.
it took a miracle catch by Tyree, blah, blah, blah crap it's so much nicer to read the truth rather than the better team lost, the Giants were lucky. The reality is they were the best team in the Super Bowl
Doesn't matter whether or not GB dominated most of the game..Seattle WON, so ultimately, were the better team
In this case, though, the Giants played well all game. You'd have to look back over the season to make some case about "better", and at that point, it's all just fantasy.
We could have won that game by double digits. Ball bouncing off of Smith's hands, Eli missing a wide open Plax in the fourth, etc.
During both of our runs, the only game I didn't think we controlled play was the Cowboys game. Maybe you can throw the 49'ers game in there, too - that one was pretty fucking even.
and they were called lucky or not the best team that year. I'm sure there are
examples but I'm glad someone with credibility acknowledges the truth about Super Bowl 42
Doesn't matter whether or not GB dominated most of the game..Seattle WON, so ultimately, were the better team
In this case, though, the Giants played well all game. You'd have to look back over the season to make some case about "better", and at that point, it's all just fantasy.
Oh agree..Just playing off the word better team, nothing more. Probably misplaced point..:)
We could have won that game by double digits. Ball bouncing off of Smith's hands, Eli missing a wide open Plax in the fourth, etc.
During both of our runs, the only game I didn't think we controlled play was the Cowboys game. Maybe you can throw the 49'ers game in there, too - that one was pretty fucking even.
I think that's fair. Given the way the teams played in the first half of that Cowboys game, it was a miracle that they went into the half tied. Seemed like Barber was going to just steamroll the defense. The Giants really only had two sustained drives the entire game but they got into the end zone on both of them.
I honestly felt like both of the following games were gravy at that point. Going into the Dallas game, I would have gladly made some kind of Faustian bargain to get blown out in Green Bay if it assured a victory in Dallas. That was the most satisfying non-SB playoff win in Giants history as far as I'm concerned, even more than the 1990 title game (which was a much better game overall).
We could have won that game by double digits. Ball bouncing off of Smith's hands, Eli missing a wide open Plax in the fourth, etc.
During both of our runs, the only game I didn't think we controlled play was the Cowboys game. Maybe you can throw the 49'ers game in there, too - that one was pretty fucking even.
I think that's fair. Given the way the teams played in the first half of that Cowboys game, it was a miracle that they went into the half tied. Seemed like Barber was going to just steamroll the defense. The Giants really only had two sustained drives the entire game but they got into the end zone on both of them.
I haven't rewatched in awhile, but I remember thinking we were holding on by our finger tips at halftime (despite our quick score) and that the Cowboys were going to come out and put up two TDs quickly.
We should have beaten the Packers by 10+ points in the NFCCG that year, though.
That run was so satisfying.
the lousy hold call that erased Bradshaw's TD against GB
Still annoys me. It was called on O'Hara or Seubert if I remember correctly - Corey Williams knew he had no chance of making the place so he just flopped, and got the flag. Very similar to the bogus hold on Wilfork in XLIV that killed a drive.
but it seemed like SB XLVI is the game the Giants could/should have had a double digit lead.
those long drives leaving the Pats offense on the sidelines were a thing of beauty.
Giants had 15 min more in TOP and out gained the Pats by 50 yards.
Giants had more yards in XLII, but TOP was almost even.
I think you're right as well - my point was that people only point out the perceived positive 'lucky' plays for us and not the missed opportunities that would have had iced the game for us much earlier.
We should have won XLVI by double digits. We probably would have if not for that horseshit holding on Wilfork.
Also, I hated our fucking game plan that game. We should have beat the shit out of them through the air. Their secondary blew and our WR's were great.
but it seemed like SB XLVI is the game the Giants could/should have had a double digit lead.
those long drives leaving the Pats offense on the sidelines were a thing of beauty.
Giants had 15 min more in TOP and out gained the Pats by 50 yards.
Giants had more yards in XLII, but TOP was almost even.
If the refs didn't blow the call on Holding against Wilfork (non existent), I think the giants would have blown the game open. IIRC, that was on a long run by Jacobs and the Giants were already up by 10.
but it seemed like SB XLVI is the game the Giants could/should have had a double digit lead.
those long drives leaving the Pats offense on the sidelines were a thing of beauty.
Giants had 15 min more in TOP and out gained the Pats by 50 yards.
Giants had more yards in XLII, but TOP was almost even.
If the refs didn't blow the call on Holding against Wilfork (non existent), I think the giants would have blown the game open. IIRC, that was on a long run by Jacobs and the Giants were already up by 10.
but it seemed like SB XLVI is the game the Giants could/should have had a double digit lead.
those long drives leaving the Pats offense on the sidelines were a thing of beauty.
Giants had 15 min more in TOP and out gained the Pats by 50 yards.
Giants had more yards in XLII, but TOP was almost even.
I think you're right as well - my point was that people only point out the perceived positive 'lucky' plays for us and not the missed opportunities that would have had iced the game for us much earlier.
We should have won XLVI by double digits. We probably would have if not for that horseshit holding on Wilfork.
Also, I hated our fucking game plan that game. We should have beat the shit out of them through the air. Their secondary blew and our WR's were great.
I disagree, I think the Giants had a great gameplan. The Pats protected everything over the top knowing we were a big play vertical offense and conceded everything underneath. Eli took it and completed like 30 of 40 passes that night, and got the deep shot when it counted most.
Still annoys me. It was called on O'Hara or Seubert if I remember correctly - Corey Williams knew he had no chance of making the place so he just flopped, and got the flag. Very similar to the bogus hold on Wilfork in XLIV that killed a drive.
Only in retrospect is the ending of SB XLII so sweet, but that bogus hold on the AB TD was total bullspit
That was a huge penalty. Looking it up on the box score, it was 3rd and 1 on the NE 46 yard line, and Jacobs gained 10 to get down to the NE 36. Instead, they faced 3rd and 10 from their own 45, threw an incomplete pass, and had to punt.
That was a huge penalty. Looking it up on the box score, it was 3rd and 1 on the NE 46 yard line, and Jacobs gained 10 to get down to the NE 36. Instead, they faced 3rd and 10 from their own 45, threw an incomplete pass, and had to punt.
As you'll recall, it was factually bogus as we all saw Wilfork admit it to the ref when we watched the film/DVD..Easily could have gone into halftime up 16-3 or at the very least, 12-3 instead of being down 10-9
It always bothers me when players say that they were
and hearing Wilfork tell the ref it wasn't a hold really pisses me off still. and that's a game the Giants won, LOL.
Wilfork is the one athlete who I've met multiple times and he's such a good dude off the field (it's being plastered all over twitter and most news sites he helped a woman out of her SUV that rolled over yesterday near Gillette - some sites say rescued, but what I read it wasn't a rescue, more of a stop and help since it didn't see she was in danger, but she was drunk so who knows).
but it seemed like SB XLVI is the game the Giants could/should have had a double digit lead.
those long drives leaving the Pats offense on the sidelines were a thing of beauty.
Giants had 15 min more in TOP and out gained the Pats by 50 yards.
Giants had more yards in XLII, but TOP was almost even.
I think you're right as well - my point was that people only point out the perceived positive 'lucky' plays for us and not the missed opportunities that would have had iced the game for us much earlier.
We should have won XLVI by double digits. We probably would have if not for that horseshit holding on Wilfork.
Also, I hated our fucking game plan that game. We should have beat the shit out of them through the air. Their secondary blew and our WR's were great.
I disagree, I think the Giants had a great gameplan. The Pats protected everything over the top knowing we were a big play vertical offense and conceded everything underneath. Eli took it and completed like 30 of 40 passes that night, and got the deep shot when it counted most.
Fair point. I recall thinking that we should have gone three wide a lot more frequently than we did (I couldn't find the number of plays we went with three receivers, so maybe my memory is underestimating it).
Our current team is so far from having a power running game, a physical offensive line and a powerful D line. If Seattle wins again this year, it will continue to reinforce my belief that championships are won by running the ball and playing great defense.
I agree 100%. Every few years it looks like these high scoring teams are the way to go (Saints, Pats a few years back) but overall, power in the trenches will triumph.
Our current team is so far from having a power running game, a physical offensive line and a powerful D line. If Seattle wins again this year, it will continue to reinforce my belief that championships are won by running the ball and playing great defense.
I agree 100%. Every few years it looks like these high scoring teams are the way to go (Saints, Pats a few years back) but overall, power in the trenches will triumph.
Only two of those teams didn't make the playoffs and one of those two outcasts still won ten games.
Not one of those teams had/has power in *both* trenches and the only one that really had it on the OL was the Cowboys (a few of the other teams may run the ball successfully and have quality OL, but their OLs are more finesse these days).
So many young guys that had juuuust enough seasoning to be able to pull off a seemingly impossible run. Even the rookies were getting it done. Bradshaw was so damn good, I've never seen a more impressive rookie RB.
f?
We suck now and the current Patriots could get out of bed and thrash this Giants team by 30.
The Pats are in the Super Bowl again and the closest Tom Coughlin and his players can get to it is to sniff the Pats laundry after the Big Game.
Our current team is so far from having a power running game, a physical offensive line and a powerful D line. If Seattle wins again this year, it will continue to reinforce my belief that championships are won by running the ball and playing great defense.
f?
We suck now and the current Patriots could get out of bed and thrash this Giants team by 30.
The Pats are in the Super Bowl again and the closest Tom Coughlin and his players can get to it is to sniff the Pats laundry after the Big Game.
Except we have two SB TITLES in 7 years and they have NONE despite all that sniffing..
In this case, though, the Giants played well all game. You'd have to look back over the season to make some case about "better", and at that point, it's all just fantasy.
During both of our runs, the only game I didn't think we controlled play was the Cowboys game. Maybe you can throw the 49'ers game in there, too - that one was pretty fucking even.
examples but I'm glad someone with credibility acknowledges the truth about Super Bowl 42
Quote:
Doesn't matter whether or not GB dominated most of the game..Seattle WON, so ultimately, were the better team
In this case, though, the Giants played well all game. You'd have to look back over the season to make some case about "better", and at that point, it's all just fantasy.
Oh agree..Just playing off the word better team, nothing more. Probably misplaced point..:)
During both of our runs, the only game I didn't think we controlled play was the Cowboys game. Maybe you can throw the 49'ers game in there, too - that one was pretty fucking even.
I think that's fair. Given the way the teams played in the first half of that Cowboys game, it was a miracle that they went into the half tied. Seemed like Barber was going to just steamroll the defense. The Giants really only had two sustained drives the entire game but they got into the end zone on both of them.
those long drives leaving the Pats offense on the sidelines were a thing of beauty.
Giants had 15 min more in TOP and out gained the Pats by 50 yards.
Giants had more yards in XLII, but TOP was almost even.
Quote:
We could have won that game by double digits. Ball bouncing off of Smith's hands, Eli missing a wide open Plax in the fourth, etc.
During both of our runs, the only game I didn't think we controlled play was the Cowboys game. Maybe you can throw the 49'ers game in there, too - that one was pretty fucking even.
I think that's fair. Given the way the teams played in the first half of that Cowboys game, it was a miracle that they went into the half tied. Seemed like Barber was going to just steamroll the defense. The Giants really only had two sustained drives the entire game but they got into the end zone on both of them.
I haven't rewatched in awhile, but I remember thinking we were holding on by our finger tips at halftime (despite our quick score) and that the Cowboys were going to come out and put up two TDs quickly.
We should have beaten the Packers by 10+ points in the NFCCG that year, though.
That run was so satisfying.
those long drives leaving the Pats offense on the sidelines were a thing of beauty.
Giants had 15 min more in TOP and out gained the Pats by 50 yards.
Giants had more yards in XLII, but TOP was almost even.
I think you're right as well - my point was that people only point out the perceived positive 'lucky' plays for us and not the missed opportunities that would have had iced the game for us much earlier.
We should have won XLVI by double digits. We probably would have if not for that horseshit holding on Wilfork.
Also, I hated our fucking game plan that game. We should have beat the shit out of them through the air. Their secondary blew and our WR's were great.
those long drives leaving the Pats offense on the sidelines were a thing of beauty.
Giants had 15 min more in TOP and out gained the Pats by 50 yards.
Giants had more yards in XLII, but TOP was almost even.
If the refs didn't blow the call on Holding against Wilfork (non existent), I think the giants would have blown the game open. IIRC, that was on a long run by Jacobs and the Giants were already up by 10.
Quote:
but it seemed like SB XLVI is the game the Giants could/should have had a double digit lead.
those long drives leaving the Pats offense on the sidelines were a thing of beauty.
Giants had 15 min more in TOP and out gained the Pats by 50 yards.
Giants had more yards in XLII, but TOP was almost even.
If the refs didn't blow the call on Holding against Wilfork (non existent), I think the giants would have blown the game open. IIRC, that was on a long run by Jacobs and the Giants were already up by 10.
Or, "what Brett said."
Quote:
but it seemed like SB XLVI is the game the Giants could/should have had a double digit lead.
those long drives leaving the Pats offense on the sidelines were a thing of beauty.
Giants had 15 min more in TOP and out gained the Pats by 50 yards.
Giants had more yards in XLII, but TOP was almost even.
I think you're right as well - my point was that people only point out the perceived positive 'lucky' plays for us and not the missed opportunities that would have had iced the game for us much earlier.
We should have won XLVI by double digits. We probably would have if not for that horseshit holding on Wilfork.
Also, I hated our fucking game plan that game. We should have beat the shit out of them through the air. Their secondary blew and our WR's were great.
I disagree, I think the Giants had a great gameplan. The Pats protected everything over the top knowing we were a big play vertical offense and conceded everything underneath. Eli took it and completed like 30 of 40 passes that night, and got the deep shot when it counted most.
Only in retrospect is the ending of SB XLII so sweet, but that bogus hold on the AB TD was total bullspit
As you'll recall, it was factually bogus as we all saw Wilfork admit it to the ref when we watched the film/DVD..Easily could have gone into halftime up 16-3 or at the very least, 12-3 instead of being down 10-9
Wilfork is the one athlete who I've met multiple times and he's such a good dude off the field (it's being plastered all over twitter and most news sites he helped a woman out of her SUV that rolled over yesterday near Gillette - some sites say rescued, but what I read it wasn't a rescue, more of a stop and help since it didn't see she was in danger, but she was drunk so who knows).
But man, that pissed me off.
Quote:
In comment 12101562 pjcas18 said:
Quote:
but it seemed like SB XLVI is the game the Giants could/should have had a double digit lead.
those long drives leaving the Pats offense on the sidelines were a thing of beauty.
Giants had 15 min more in TOP and out gained the Pats by 50 yards.
Giants had more yards in XLII, but TOP was almost even.
I think you're right as well - my point was that people only point out the perceived positive 'lucky' plays for us and not the missed opportunities that would have had iced the game for us much earlier.
We should have won XLVI by double digits. We probably would have if not for that horseshit holding on Wilfork.
Also, I hated our fucking game plan that game. We should have beat the shit out of them through the air. Their secondary blew and our WR's were great.
I disagree, I think the Giants had a great gameplan. The Pats protected everything over the top knowing we were a big play vertical offense and conceded everything underneath. Eli took it and completed like 30 of 40 passes that night, and got the deep shot when it counted most.
Fair point. I recall thinking that we should have gone three wide a lot more frequently than we did (I couldn't find the number of plays we went with three receivers, so maybe my memory is underestimating it).
It's so hard to see what happens in the middle of a pile like that the ref threw the flag obviously without seeing what was actually going on.
Our current team is so far from having a power running game, a physical offensive line and a powerful D line. If Seattle wins again this year, it will continue to reinforce my belief that championships are won by running the ball and playing great defense.
I agree 100%. Every few years it looks like these high scoring teams are the way to go (Saints, Pats a few years back) but overall, power in the trenches will triumph.
f?
We suck now and the current Patriots could get out of bed and thrash this Giants team by 30.
The Pats are in the Super Bowl again and the closest Tom Coughlin and his players can get to it is to sniff the Pats laundry after the Big Game.
Just M.S. being M.S...
Quote:
Our current team is so far from having a power running game, a physical offensive line and a powerful D line. If Seattle wins again this year, it will continue to reinforce my belief that championships are won by running the ball and playing great defense.
I agree 100%. Every few years it looks like these high scoring teams are the way to go (Saints, Pats a few years back) but overall, power in the trenches will triumph.
The top 10 teams in the NFL in scoring in 2014:
1. Packers
2. Broncos
3. Eagles
4. Patriots
5. Cowboys
6. Colts
7. Steelers
8. Ravens
9. Saints
10. Seahawks
Only two of those teams didn't make the playoffs and one of those two outcasts still won ten games.
Not one of those teams had/has power in *both* trenches and the only one that really had it on the OL was the Cowboys (a few of the other teams may run the ball successfully and have quality OL, but their OLs are more finesse these days).