355 replies to this topic

[CaptainLaddie]

Ricardo.

[Zomp]

Ricardo said Brady was the better QB yesterday. Pumpsie said he was spot on.

Like....the post above mine explains it.

[MyDaughterLovesTomGordon]

For me, it's not about blame, it's about explanation. Games that close hinge on one play here and one play there. Let's not forget some amazing plays Brady made - 14 straight completions and, good God, the block on the reverse alone should be being heralded here as one of the all time great take-one-for-the-team plays by a quarterback in Super Bowl history (possible hyperbole there, but it was pretty frickin' awesome).

Unfortunately, it's hard not to point to the Welker drop as the play that meant everything. The pass wasn't perfect. Welker fucking blew it. And EVERYONE knew that was basically the game:



There will be pundits who say this affects Brady's legacy, blah, blah, but I don't see how you could have watched that game and come away with the idea that Brady didn't play well enough to win.

[BucketOBalls]

Brady made 2 questionable decisions that were terrible. Eli played flawless. To say Brady was the better QB is nuts.

Holy cripes. The Pats best corner in that game as a safety a month ago. If Brady had been throwing against the Pats D the game would have been over by halftime(conversly, I'm not sure Eli does as well vs his own D with JPP tipping his passes).

[Paul M]

If Brady was the Pats' MVP--and maybe he was to be honest as I can't re-call anyone stepping up to make a big play--then the outcome was the right one and NY should have won. I wouldn't trade the Giants' roster for ours right now if I were a Giants fan. But, it's funny, if the Pats somehow won at 17-15 by just stopping that one 40-yard heave you have to imagine Brady is the MVP of the game so I can't say those defending Brady are wrong here. I just see the body of work over the last several seasons as not Tom Brady level output. The safety has to be one of the biggest negative plays of the game and that's on Brady and he also committed the only turnover of the game and it was virtually the same crucial error he made just a few weeks back that almost cost them dearly.

[tims4wins]

The drive that Brady led before the half was one of the great drives in Super Bowl history, and had Welker held on to the pass, it would have also been one hell of a drive to end the game. The Pats started that second to last drive with about 9:30 left on the clock. If Welker had caught the pass, then one more first down would have swallowed up almost the entire rest of the clock. We're talking a 9+ minute drive to ice a Super Bowl. It would have been legendary. It would probably have been called Brady's best Super Bowl. And in my opinion, of the 5 Super Bowls he's played in, he might have played his best last night.

Edited by tims4wins, 06 February 2012 - 05:27 PM.

[Zomp]

Holy cripes. The Pats best corner in that game as a safety a month ago. If Brady had been throwing against the Pats D the game would have been over by halftime(conversly, I'm not sure Eli does as well vs his own D with JPP tipping his passes).

But all the quarterback can do is play the team thats facing him. Brady had a safety and an interception. Eli did not. I'm not saying Brady played poorly...he actually looked really sharp. Eli had the better game, and was the better QB in the game.

[tims4wins]

But all the quarterback can do is play the team thats facing him. Brady had a safety and an interception. Eli did not. I'm not saying Brady played poorly...he actually looked really sharp. Eli had the better game, and was the better QB in the game.

If Welker came down with the pass, would you be saying this? Because in all likelihood Eli would have not even gotten the ball back with a realistic chance to win.

Edited by tims4wins, 06 February 2012 - 05:30 PM.

[Super Nomario]

If Brady was the Pats' MVP--and maybe he was to be honest as I can't re-call anyone stepping up to make a big play--then the outcome was the right one and NY should have won.

The Pats team this year is unusual; they really built a team that was designed to win without any big plays. I mean, their drives yesterday weren't keyed by huge plays; they were just Brady picking New York apart relentlessly. The game against Baltimore was the same way.

I wouldn't trade the Giants' roster for ours right now if I were a Giants fan.

I would. The Pats have won more games than the Giants every year under BB/Brady. I expect they're more likely to win more games next year, more likely to make the playoffs, more likely to make and win the Super Bowl.

But, it's funny, if the Pats somehow won at 17-15 by just stopping that one 40-yard heave you have to imagine Brady is the MVP of the game so I can't say those defending Brady are wrong here. I just see the body of work over the last several seasons as not Tom Brady level output. The safety has to be one of the biggest negative plays of the game and that's on Brady and he also committed the only turnover of the game and it was virtually the same crucial error he made just a few weeks back that almost cost them dearly.

Brady did make a couple mistakes. But it's a myth that early Brady never made mistakes. He threw a pick in the Super Bowl against Carolina. He did very little in the Snow Ball game and the Super Bowl against the Rams until the final drives. If Welker comes down with that ball yesterday, or the Pats grab one of the fumbles, or etc., Brady's safety and interception would be pretty much forgotten today. Tom Brady is playing football at as high a level as he has ever played football, and close to as high a level as anyone has ever played the QB position.

[ragnarok725]

But all the quarterback can do is play the team thats facing him. Brady had a safety and an interception. Eli did not. I'm not saying Brady played poorly...he actually looked really sharp. Eli had the better game, and was the better QB in the game.

This is the way it will go down in the narratives, because oh how we love the narratives. But it's just wrong. As tim points out directly above me, for this kind of "analysis" to be able to turn so quickly on such tiny elements in the game - from Welker's catch, to the Giants recovering three fumbles, if one or two things break the other way in this game all of a sudden Eli is just not quite elite, and Tom Brady is the best QB to ever play. Saying Eli or Tom had a better game solely based on the outcome is really silly. Although, I understand the allure for you - we did it for 4 years with Brady here.

[Zomp]

Probably not. But he didn't come down with it so I'm not sure what your point is. Eli was lucky to have a chance to have a better game??


Also, we have another whole thread dedicated to it, but Brady shares some of the blame for the throw.

[Zomp]

This is the way it will go down in the narratives, because oh how we love the narratives. But it's just wrong. As tim points out directly above me, for this kind of "analysis" to be able to turn so quickly on such tiny elements in the game - from Welker's catch, to the Giants recovering three fumbles, if one or two things break the other way in this game all of a sudden Eli is just not quite elite, and Tom Brady is the best QB to ever play. Saying Eli or Tom had a better game solely based on the outcome is really silly. Although, I understand the allure for you - we did it for 4 years with Brady here.

Point out to me where I said Eli had the better game because they won.

[Jungleland]

If Welker came down with the pass, would you be saying this? Because in all likelihood Eli would have not even gotten the ball back with a realistic chance to win.

But the fact that Welker didn't catch it, and the fact that that was at least in part due to it being a bad throw make the question irrelevant.

No one on the Pats played as well as Brady. Simultaneously, no one on the Pats made more mistakes than him. MVP in victory, inferior QB performance in defeat. Eli made no major errors, and his team won.

And as far as the narrative hinging too much on one or two plays in each game, is it really that incorrect for the game's outcome to determine the severity of a mistake? By definition, isn't a mistake more costly if the final score is in the wrong direction?

Edited by Jungleland, 06 February 2012 - 05:39 PM.

[tims4wins]

Right, it wasn't a perfect throw, but Welker could have come down with, just like Manningham caught his. The point here is that the Giants player made an amazing catch while the Pats player dropped a pass that was roughly equal in terms of degree of difficult. And because of the results of those two plays, you are saying Eli outplayed Brady. I think that is kind of faulty reasoning.

[Jack Sox]

Ricardo said Brady was the better QB yesterday. Pumpsie said he was spot on.

Like....the post above mine explains it.

Fine. I don't think it's a prevailing sentiment throughout the thread, though I'm not sure it's completely outlandish either. Eli played well, but his playmakers also made a few highlight reel catches for him. Those didn't happen for Brady and it was essentially the difference of the game.

[Zomp]

First off, Eli's throw was a great, great throw. Just about as perfect as can be. He put it where Manningham, and only Manningham, would be able to come down with it. Its a difficult catch to make, for sure...and probably more difficult of a catch then Welker made, but it wasn't because it was a poor throw.

Right, it wasn't a perfect throw, but Welker could have come down with, just like Manningham caught his. The point here is that the Giants player made an amazing catch while the Pats player dropped a pass that was roughly equal in terms of degree of difficult. And because of the results of those two plays, you are saying Eli outplayed Brady. I think that is kind of faulty reasoning.

Holy shit guys. Both guys played well. Both drove their teams down the field for 2 touchdowns. Similar completion percentages and yards. BUT BRADY THREW A PICK and a SAFETY. How hard is this to understand?

[Jungleland]

Right, it wasn't a perfect throw, but Welker could have come down with, just like Manningham caught his. The point here is that the Giants player made an amazing catch while the Pats player dropped a pass that was roughly equal in terms of degree of difficult. And because of the results of those two plays, you are saying Eli outplayed Brady. I think that is kind of faulty reasoning.

Tom's best moments in the game were absolutely on par with Eli's. Had the game magically ended the second the Pats went up 17-9, last night would be among Brady's all-time great performances. The drive leading up to the half was every bit as great as you say above. But as a whole body of work, Tom's miscues were both more numerous and costly. For that reason alone, I think it's hard to argue against the notion that Eli outplayed him. Had the Giants lost on anything but a game-sealing pick on the final drive, Eli wouldn't be getting the brunt of the blame.

BUT BRADY THREW A PICK and a SAFETY. How hard is this to understand?

Precisely.

Edited by Jungleland, 06 February 2012 - 05:46 PM.

[Mike in CT]

What do you mean by this? The Pats used two high draft picks on RBs last year. They made their G one of the highest-paid interior linemen in the league. They used their first pick on OL help, and one of their big free-agent acquisitions (Waters) was for the O-line. Over the past two years they've shifted from a 3WR / 1 TE / 1 HB look to a 2 WR / 2 TE / 1 HB look that gives them more running ability. What do you want them to do exactly?

And despite all that....

Rushing Attempts:
2009 - 466
2010 - 454
2011 - 438

So they're drafting and scheming more for the running game, yet running the ball less and less each year?

It's not even about attempts though. It's basically comes down to if a defense respects and fears your running game. Are you committed to it? Are you physical enough to wear down a defense and open things up more and more as the game goes on? I don't see that. Games vs. Buffalo don't mean much.

[Jack Sox]

First off, Eli's throw was a great, great throw. Just about as perfect as can be. He put it where Manningham, and only Manningham, would be able to come down with it. Its a difficult catch to make, for sure...and probably more difficult of a catch then Welker made, but it wasn't because it was a poor throw.




Holy shit guys. Both guys played well. Both drove their teams down the field for 2 touchdowns. Similar completion percentages and yards. BUT BRADY THREW A PICK and a SAFETY. How hard is this to understand?

If you want to talk about mistakes by each QB why are we not bringing up two horrific burned timeouts because Peyton's little brother wasn't paying attention to the play clock? Welker makes the catch and those burned timeouts are essentially what enables the Pats to ice the game.

I'd argue those gaffes could have proved to be far more costly than either of Brady's mistakes.

Edited by Jack Sox, 06 February 2012 - 05:52 PM.

[Paul M]

I guess I fault Brady more than Welker but that's my opinion. I saw a wide open receiver who was slightly overthrown. I think Brady was very good for 95% of the game and maybe that's selling him short but he put them in a hole and he stubbornly threw a bomb which is not what they do well. It sucks that the safety and pick carry more weight ex post than the 3 really good drives but they have had several chances going all the way back to 2006 AFC title to win the game by controlling the ball just another few downs and they didn't and the defense since then hasn't been as good as the earlier vintages to overcome that. I also think the safety may have been a small factor in how the defense seemed a little winded late as they played something close to 24 straight plays as a result of that play.

[Zomp]

Holy shit. Forget it.

[Pumpsie]

Three things.

The Brady interception was not a big deal at all. It was basically a good punt. And Gronk alone with a linebacker? I throw that ball up for grabs 100 times out of 100 times, and Gronkowski either catches it or keeps the linebacker from catching it 99 times out of 100. But he didn't make that play yesterday, just like Welker didn't make a play HE makes 100 times out of 100 times a little later on. Brady did the right thing both times.

And the Welker catch was a tough catch but a much more makeable one than the one Manningham made. They're not comparable. Manningham's catch bordered on the miraculous. I have no idea how he kept his feet inbounds. Welker was basically wide open and couldn't get his body squared around in time for the pass but he got his two hands on it and he should have caught it, as he has said over and over again in no uncertain terms, and his teammates would all agree with him...hence the reaction on the sidelines....which translated to "I can't believe he dropped that!"

As for the safety, I would love to see a replay where we could see the entire field. What were his options? Did he miss the safety valve or did the receivers not make themselves available in time?

[Jungleland]

The Brady interception was not a big deal at all. It was basically a good punt.

Wasn't it first down? And regardless of it being a good or bad decision, it was a really untimely bad throw.

Ugh. This was the wrong day to be at work from 8 to 8.

[Al Zarilla]

Wasn't it first down? And regardless of it being a good or bad decision, it was a really untimely bad throw.

Ugh. This was the wrong day to be at work from 8 to 8.

What would you do on the outside, kill a dog or a drifter?

[BigSoxFan]

Wasn't it first down? And regardless of it being a good or bad decision, it was a really untimely bad throw.

Ugh. This was the wrong day to be at work from 8 to 8.

It was first down at the 45 yard line. If we're talking 3rd and 10 then, yes, it's just like a punt. But, at the very least he could have thrown it away. In reality, he had Hernandez wide open at the Giants' 35 or 40 yard line. Who knows if he'll ever watch the video from this game but he certainly won't like what he sees on that play.

[Super Nomario]

And despite all that....

Rushing Attempts:
2009 - 466
2010 - 454
2011 - 438

So they're drafting and scheming more for the running game, yet running the ball less and less each year?

It's not even about attempts though. It's basically comes down to if a defense respects and fears your running game. Are you committed to it? Are you physical enough to wear down a defense and open things up more and more as the game goes on? I don't see that. Games vs. Buffalo don't mean much.

So what do you want them to do? Average 5 more runs per game? If it's ineffective, should they keep running it even though they have a Hall-of-Fame QB? Is there any evidence that running the ball a lot wears down opposing defenses?

[Jack Sox]

Holy shit. Forget it.

Nice cop out. I'm sure you were very pleased at the time when your QB needlessly burned two timeouts. Fortunately for you, Welker dropped a catchable ball. Congrats

[Zomp]

Thanks. Its nice owning your team.

[ragnarok725]

Point out to me where I said Eli had the better game because they won.

You didn't say it directly. I was implying that you wouldn't say Eli had the better game if the Patriots had won. I was saying Pats fans are equally guilty of this with regards to the times Brady wins.

But honestly, not sure what you were expecting trying to have conversation the day after around here. Are you really surprised people are reacting the way they have to your posts?

Edited by ragnarok725, 06 February 2012 - 06:27 PM.

[ragnarok725]

Thanks. Its nice owning your team.

Nice. Way to moderate.

[BigSoxFan]

Thanks. Its nice owning your team.

Stay classy there, buddy.

[Zomp]

But honestly, not sure what you were expecting trying to have conversation the day after around here. Are you really surprised people are reacting the way they have to your posts?

This started because a poster said Brady was the better QB yesterday. I disagreed and laid out why. The arguments against what I was saying were implications of a situation that didn't happen, ifs, and could haves.

As for the owning quote, guilty. Though you aren't telling me Jack Sox wasn't trolling with the Peyton's little brother comment...

Edit: and calling it a cop out because I'm not going to recite for the 3rd or 4th time what is very easy to understand. Burning two timeouts to prevent penalties...really?

[ragnarok725]

This started because a poster said Brady was the better QB yesterday. I disagreed and laid out why. The arguments against what I was saying were implications of a situation that didn't happen, ifs, and could haves.

As for the owning quote, guilty. Though you aren't telling me Jack Sox wasn't trolling with the Peyton's little brother comment...

Edit: and calling it a cop out because I'm not going to recite for the 3rd or 4th time what is very easy to understand. Burning two timeouts to prevent penalties...really?

Your team won. You should be able to take a little trolling today. You're in a freaking Patriots forum trying to analyze the game a day after that heartbreaking loss?

[smastroyin]

As for the safety, I would love to see a replay where we could see the entire field. What were his options? Did he miss the safety valve or did the receivers not make themselves available in time?

This replay was all over the place. The receivers all cleared out to the sidelines other than Branch who was covered underneath on a cross. It is clear from the play and from his comments that he did not think it would be called a grounding. He could have taken an easy two steps to the right and made the same play. It was also called within the rules and if Eli had done it all the same people who are sitting around dumbfounded about it today would have been screaming for the call. Whether that is on Brady or the NFL competition committee or whoever the rule is the rule and the right call was made.

On the general question. I think both QBs played really well. Manning did a better job in the 4th which makes the narrative change a lot. That's probably not fair to Brady. But, you guys are making all kinds of excuses for Brady based on the team play and forgetting that:

- The Giants lost their top two TEs which is fairly important to the way the Patriots were scheming.

- The Giants had the horrible (horrible as in horribly timed, not necessarily a horrible call, though I though the Patriots were lucky to get it) holding penalty with 3 minutes left in the 2nd that not only took away a first down but took back almost a sure 3 points and saved a minimum of 30 seconds of clock and 2 TOs for the Patriots (You could argue that if Wilfork wasn't held that he would have stopped Jacobs from gaining 7, but Jacobs beat him to the spot before he went down and would have had the first - a Giants fan on the other hand would argue that Wilfork slipped and made it look like a hold, but that's neither here nor there). Regardless, that was likely a 3 and more likely a 10 point penalty.

- Manningham made the awesome grab but would have been remembered for running himself out of bounds without any contact on the previous possession (on a pass that was nearly as good as the one he caught) which would have set up the go ahead score before Brady/Welker got a chance to have the fuckup. Basically you can play what if all damn day.

[smastroyin]

Hey BigSoxFan when you actually buy a sub here instead of suckling on the teat of others, you can start bringing up the fact that a guy is a moderator as an argument against him.

Everyone else, I mean, I'm not a Pats fan either (nor Giants) but I get it. You have a right to be pissed and irrational. But please. Calling a moderator a troll when he is just trying to make a point is weak mother fucking sauce. Just stop.

[Jack Sox]

This started because a poster said Brady was the better QB yesterday. I disagreed and laid out why. The arguments against what I was saying were implications of a situation that didn't happen, ifs, and could haves.

As for the owning quote, guilty. Though you aren't telling me Jack Sox wasn't trolling with the Peyton's little brother comment...

Edit: and calling it a cop out because I'm not going to recite for the 3rd or 4th time what is very easy to understand. Burning two timeouts to prevent penalties...really?

Listen, I apologize for calling Eli 'Peyton's little brother'. All things considered, things have been pretty civil around here today. If that's really going to set you off in a forum where what? 90 % of the posters are Patriots fans, then I don't really know what to tell you.

And how about Eli, you know, getting the play off on time? If you want to maintain that Eli played flawless while ignoring burning what could have been two very costly timeouts, be my guest. It's just intellectually dishonest.

[BigSoxFan]

Hey BigSoxFan when you actually buy a sub here instead of suckling on the teat of others, you can start bringing up the fact that a guy is a moderator as an argument against him.

Everyone else, I mean, I'm not a Pats fan either (nor Giants) but I get it. You have a right to be pissed and irrational. But please. Calling a moderator a troll when he is just trying to make a point is weak mother fucking sauce. Just stop.

Please re-read my comment. I simply said "stay classy there, buddy" when he made a blatant attempt at trolling. I never once mentioned the fact that he was a moderator.

P.S. Thanks for the free subs

[StuckOnYouk]

If you want to talk about mistakes by each QB why are we not bringing up two horrific burned timeouts because Peyton's little brother wasn't paying attention to the play clock? Welker makes the catch and those burned timeouts are essentially what enables the Pats to ice the game.

I'd argue those gaffes could have proved to be far more costly than either of Brady's mistakes.

It's really all about the situations, sometimes you don't get the play in on timme from the sideline, sometimes you have to redirect players who are out of position because they forgot what the fuck to do. I'm not saying it's not on Eli at all, I'm sure he owns some of it, I'd have to look at the game again and maybe we'd have to get insight from the players themselves. But bottomline is it's possible he gets a little redemption based on things out of control.

Regardless, I would say that even if using both of those timeouts were both completely on him, he more than made up for it with another great 4th quarter. Brady was very good, no one can take that away, but I find it hard to believe that Eli wasn't a tad better. He didn't turn the ball over and from what I remember there was no Asante Samuel moment where he could have been picked. Meanwhile when the outcome of the game was essentially on the line, he threw one of the most accurate/important throw in Super Bowl history. As great as that catch was, the throw was even better.
If Brady had that Eli-type accuracy at a moment that probably would have iced the game on the Welker play, it would have hit Welker close to the numbers and he probably catches it and the Pats likely finish it off. But he threw it a tad off while Welker had to contort himself a bit while already in the air. It was a catch that Welker probably should have made anyway, but Brady could have been more accurate. Like Eli was when his team needed a jolt.
Again, not saying Brady had a bad game at all, but Eli definitely had a better game.

[ragnarok725]

Hey BigSoxFan when you actually buy a sub here instead of suckling on the teat of others, you can start bringing up the fact that a guy is a moderator as an argument against him.

Everyone else, I mean, I'm not a Pats fan either (nor Giants) but I get it. You have a right to be pissed and irrational. But please. Calling a moderator a troll when he is just trying to make a point is weak mother fucking sauce. Just stop.

I was the one that commented on him being a moderator. The day after a Super Bowl, a fan of the team that wins should be able to take a little trolling and not be a dick about it. Saying "It's nice owning your team" is inappropriate for any poster, and far worse from a moderator.

Also, I don't have a member tag because my premium subscription didn't go through paypal, although the money did. There's a post about it in backwash. It's the fourth subscription I've bought.

Edited by ragnarok725, 06 February 2012 - 07:01 PM.

[Zomp]

Listen, I apologize for calling Eli 'Peyton's little brother'. All things considered, things have been pretty civil around here today. If that's really going to set you off in a forum where what? 90 % of the posters are Patriots fans, then I don't really know what to tell you.

And how about Eli, you know, getting the play off on time? If you want to maintain that Eli played flawless while ignoring burning what could have been two very costly timeouts, be my guest. It's just intellectually dishonest.

and I apologize for the owning comment. Things absolutely have been civil and its a credit to the board and members.

On the timeouts though, the post above this talks about it but you can't be certain they are 100% on Eli. He seemed to get frustrated that he had to use them (I mean, as frustrated as he can look).

Edit: Not the post above mine, the one above that.

[TheoShmeo]

Everyone else, I mean, I'm not a Pats fan either (nor Giants) but I get it. You have a right to be pissed and irrational. But please. Calling a moderator a troll when he is just trying to make a point is weak mother fucking sauce. Just stop.

Why is it weak sauce?

It was a foolish comment, it wasn't needed to make any point and Zomp just apologized for it.

[Eddie Jurak]

Brady basically made 2 huge unforced errors, and the Pats lost because he did. Sure, they could have pulled it out if Welker hangs on, but that would have been a highlight reel, great catch (even if it wasn't for the win). But Brady is to blame for the first play - he had plenty of time in the pocket and then made a stupid play. Unforced error.

And then that deep throw to Gronk was even worse. The ball was way underthown, and Gronk was hurt, ineffective, and covered. Brady led the team on two great, great scoring drives... and then he chooses to gamble the game away on a ill-advised deep ball. That's two bad interceptions in 2 games for Brady. He took the ball out of his own hands.

He played well in this game, SB record 16 straight completions. But he was 20-23 with 2 TDs after the second scoring drive, and from then on he went 7-18 with an interception on a ball that never, ever should have been thrown.

Eli had a better game, start to finish, and Giants deserved to win this one.

[dcmissle]

The drive that Brady led before the half was one of the great drives in Super Bowl history, and had Welker held on to the pass, it would have also been one hell of a drive to end the game. The Pats started that second to last drive with about 9:30 left on the clock. If Welker had caught the pass, then one more first down would have swallowed up almost the entire rest of the clock. We're talking a 9+ minute drive to ice a Super Bowl. It would have been legendary. It would probably have been called Brady's best Super Bowl. And in my opinion, of the 5 Super Bowls he's played in, he might have played his best last night.

I forget the details of the wild SB shootout vs Carolina but, yes, he was very good for the most part. At least until the Tuck hit. See here for before and after --

http://itiswhatitis....after-the-sack/

I raise this not as an excuse, but as a possible explanation. Not for the safety, of course, but perhaps for the bomb to Gronkowski, which was wrong situationally and, even if the right call, poorly executed. If you're going to miss with that pass, you have to miss long, especially with your TE not 100%.

Of course, this does not let him off the hook because if you're effed up, you should play more conservatively. And note that he made essentially the same mistake in the game against the Ravens.

It is time they get him some more help, on the outside and probably right next to him. The chances of Brady being banged up late season in the years ahead are excellent.

[Kenny F'ing Powers]

and I apologize for the owning comment. Things absolutely have been civil and its a credit to the board and members.

On the timeouts though, the post above this talks about it but you can't be certain they are 100% on Eli. He seemed to get frustrated that he had to use them (I mean, as frustrated as he can look).

Edit: Not the post above mine, the one above that.

I really don't understand the argument. Eli completed 75% of his passes (30 of 40) for 7.4 yards per attempt. Brady completed 65% of his passes for 6.7 YPA. Eli was more accurate, had a better deep ball, and didn't throw an INT that could have cost his team the game. All that without mentioning the boneheaded safety that Brady gave up (and yes, it was intentional grounding, and yes, I completely think it was the right call) that put the Patriots in a gigantic hole to start. Eli won the game, and he did it with better stats. How anyone could argue that Tom Brady was the better QB in that game is really bizarre.

Yes it's a team game. Yes, everyone takes the blame. But if you asked me in 10 years about this Superbowl, I'd tell you that Brady put them in a deep hole, clawed out of it, and then fell right back into the same fucking hole that he had just climbed out of. He was a lot of the reason they fell behind 9-0, he was a lot of the reason they were leading 17-15, and he was a lot of the reason they gave the game away in the 4th quarter. Eli, on the other hand, made a few really great throws, played slightly above average throughout the game, and didn't cost his team with any turnovers. Eli was consistently above average all game, Brady was awful for a handful of plays, and fantastic on a handful of plays. The consistent QB won the game.

With that being said...I fucking hate Eli Manning and his stupid retard face.

[Reverend]

I really don't understand the argument. Eli completed 75% of his passes (30 of 40) for 7.4 yards per attempt. Brady completed 65% of his passes for 6.7 YPA. Eli was more accurate, had a better deep ball, and didn't throw an INT that could have cost his team the game. All that without mentioning the boneheaded safety that Brady gave up (and yes, it was intentional grounding, and yes, I completely think it was the right call) that put the Patriots in a gigantic hole to start. Eli won the game, and he did it with better stats. How anyone could argue that Tom Brady was the better QB in that game is really bizarre.

Yeah, but... uh... um...

Yeah.

Yes it's a team game. Yes, everyone takes the blame. But if you asked me in 10 years about this Superbowl, I'd tell you that Brady put them in a deep hole, clawed out of it, and then fell right back into the same fucking hole that he had just climbed out of. He was a lot of the reason they fell behind 9-0, he was a lot of the reason they were leading 17-15, and he was a lot of the reason they gave the game away in the 4th quarter. Eli, on the other hand, made a few really great throws, played slightly above average throughout the game, and didn't cost his team with any turnovers. Eli was consistently above average all game, Brady was awful for a handful of plays, and fantastic on a handful of plays. The consistent QB won the game.

This last point is absolutely critical. It's sometimes difficult to assess when someone does good things and bad things--how good is he? For the QB position, though, lack of mistakes is often as important if not more important than excellence.

A huge portion of Belichick's coaching philosophy is actually based on minimizing disproportionately large losses, errors, and so forth for this reason, even if it sometimes means making it less likely you'll get some big good in your favor. It's his approach and it's been wildly successful.

It's like I said to a friend of mine once: "I'm a pretty good pool player, but I'm consistent. Which is to say, I'm not very good at pool."

With that being said...I fucking hate Eli Manning and his stupid retard face.

Fuck.

[Darnell's Son]

Yeah, but... uh... um...

Yeah.



This last point is absolutely critical. It's sometimes difficult to assess when someone does good things and bad things--how good is he? For the QB position, though, lack of mistakes is often as important if not more important than excellence.

A huge portion of Belichick's coaching philosophy is actually based on minimizing disproportionately large losses, errors, and so forth for this reason, even if it sometimes means making it less likely you'll get some big good in your favor. It's his approach and it's been wildly successful.

It's like I said to a friend of mine once: "I'm a pretty good pool player, but I'm consistent. Which is to say, I'm not very good at pool."




Fuck.

Just get a room already and consummate your relationship.

[Reverend]

Just get a room already and consummate your relationship.

Sorry, but my heart belongs to another:

I love Dogman2 unconditionally.

[dcmissle]

I really don't understand the argument. Eli completed 75% of his passes (30 of 40) for 7.4 yards per attempt. Brady completed 65% of his passes for 6.7 YPA. Eli was more accurate, had a better deep ball, and didn't throw an INT that could have cost his team the game. All that without mentioning the boneheaded safety that Brady gave up (and yes, it was intentional grounding, and yes, I completely think it was the right call) that put the Patriots in a gigantic hole to start. Eli won the game, and he did it with better stats. How anyone could argue that Tom Brady was the better QB in that game is really bizarre.

Yes it's a team game. Yes, everyone takes the blame. But if you asked me in 10 years about this Superbowl, I'd tell you that Brady put them in a deep hole, clawed out of it, and then fell right back into the same fucking hole that he had just climbed out of. He was a lot of the reason they fell behind 9-0, he was a lot of the reason they were leading 17-15, and he was a lot of the reason they gave the game away in the 4th quarter. Eli, on the other hand, made a few really great throws, played slightly above average throughout the game, and didn't cost his team with any turnovers. Eli was consistently above average all game, Brady was awful for a handful of plays, and fantastic on a handful of plays. The consistent QB won the game.

With that being said...I fucking hate Eli Manning and his stupid retard face.

In other words, Eli played like Brady during the early years of this century.

Interesting to me is the fact that Coughlin did not put too much on him. I was delighted every time Jacobs got the ball, even when it resulted in an 8-yard gains that made Collinsworth gush. It was a calculated decision on Coughlin's part, and you can bet that if this game had ended 24 to 21Pats, the airwaves in NYC would be burning up about how Uncle Tom didn't have the guts to allow Eli to exploit fully a second rate secondary.

[Darnell's Son]

Sorry, but my heart belongs to another:

I love Dogman2 unconditionally.

He's mine!

[Statman]

Holy cripes. The Pats best corner in that game as a safety a month ago. If Brady had been throwing against the Pats D the game would have been over by halftime(conversly, I'm not sure Eli does as well vs his own D with JPP tipping his passes).

Brady was throwing against the 29th ranked pass defense in the league yesterday. Let's not pretend that the Giants are any good at defending the pass.