The Super Bowl Thread

NortheasternPJ

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 16, 2004
19,272
Dion Lewis is a fuckin' monster at whatifsports. Hopefully that portends good things. Just had 160 receiving yards and 85 rushing.
I love Lewis, but that's nuts. i just ran it and he had 5 touchdowns, 3 rushing, 2 receiving. 220 total yards.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,062
Hingham, MA
Atlanta has a 27th Defensive Efficiency Rating. Have the Pats with BB and TB ever lost a playoff game to a worse defense?
2011 Giants were 27th in yards and 25th in points. But obviously their D was much different in the playoffs.

The other comp is the 2006 Colts, 21st in yards and 23rd in points. Of course they got healthy and had Bob Sanders back. And it's not like they stopped the Pats that game. That was on the D / the flu.

Edit: 2005 Broncos had a good D. 2007 Giants had a good D. 2009 Ravens. 2010 Jets. 2012 Ravens. 2013 and 2015 Broncos. Basically all of the playoff losses came against good defenses with the above exceptions.
 

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
21,766
Pittsburgh, PA
Atlanta has a 27th Defensive Efficiency Rating. Have the Pats with BB and TB ever lost a playoff game to a worse defense?
Patriot playoff losses:

2005, DEN: #4 points / #15 yards
2006, IND: #23 / #21
2007, NYG: #17 / #7
2009, BAL: #3 / #3
2010, NYJ: #6 / #3
2011, NYG: #25 / #27
2012, BAL: #13 / #17
2013, DEN: #22 / #19
2015, DEN: #4 / #1

So yeah, I'd say the 2011 Giants were comparable. Fair question how many bad (ranked 20+) defenses we've beaten in the playoffs, though, just for comparison.
 

ObstructedView

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2001
3,237
Maine
The Pats having their key guys be Trump supporters is just an excuse people will use to justify their hatred for New England. Just like "they are a bunch of cheaters" it will legitimize their hatred even if it doesn't make any sense--it will give them some form of moral high ground on to stand on.

Any person who asks me about the Pats/Trump I just say that since I'm not a fucking idiot I don't care about the political opinions of my favorite athletes, I like them because they are great at their jobs and have always carried themselves with grace.
Sunday night I was texting with a Ravens-fan co-worker who said she couldn't fully enjoy the throttling of their arch-rival Steelers because of the Pats-Trump connection. I replied that the sports and political parts of my brain are separated by impenetrable firewalls - sort of like the one she presumably used to justify rooting for a team with such model citizens as Lewis and Rice. She had to grudgingly concede that point.
 

caesarbear

New Member
Jan 28, 2007
271
Also, the premise -- that their support emboldens Trump -- is ludicrous. Does anyone think that Trump's thoughts or actions would be altered by even .00000001% if BB, Kraft and Brady were not supporters?
Doesn't have to be Trump. Any racist misogynist can be emboldened by a public display of support.

I didn't level any accusations, I only pointed out what the concern is. The Patriots are going back into the national media and discourse. Trump himself makes mention of Brady and the Patriots unbidden. Why pretend that this can't be an issue?
 

allstonite

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 27, 2010
2,472
Please for the love of Pedro start another thread on the politics. Don't make these 2 weeks worse than they were 2 years ago.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,209
Please for the love of Pedro start another thread on the politics. Don't make these 2 weeks worse than they were 2 years ago.
Word. There are so many other places to argue non-NFL politics like Snapface and Twitter. Please let us just discuss the Superbowl here.
 

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
21,766
Pittsburgh, PA
Doesn't have to be Trump. Any racist misogynist can be emboldened by a public display of support.

I didn't level any accusations, I only pointed out what the concern is. The Patriots are going back into the national media and discourse. Trump himself makes mention of Brady and the Patriots unbidden. Why pretend that this can't be an issue?
You feel that strongly about it, go make another thread to tell us how our failure to discuss this always and everywhere makes us all "emboldening a racist misogynist". That way we can all ignore it. Just please, for the love of god, stop posting about it in this thread.
 

Kevin Youkulele

wishes Claude Makelele was a Red Sox
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2006
8,838
San Diego
Please for the love of Pedro start another thread on the politics. Don't make these 2 weeks worse than they were 2 years ago.
Yeah, maybe the political posts can be excised and dumped into an isolated thread of their own. I'm trying to think less about politics especially as it relates to sports and the frequent references in here are not helping.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
8,878
Dallas
I looked into tickets. $2,000 for nosebleeds. This is when I think about going back in time and have my tubes tied at 18 and therefore have much more disposable income.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
90,024
Oregon
I might tell the next poster who wants to talk politics in this thread to STFU ... and I don't even know what that stands for
 

GregHarris

beware my sexy helmet/overall ensemble
SoSH Member
Jun 5, 2008
3,460
Pats season tickets holders (those who haven't won the lottery like me) are being offered packages of $3,500+ for two tickets with hotel included.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,850
Per FO, Atlanta's pass defense versus "Other WRs" and "RBs" is AWFUL. Like, 29th and 26th, respectively.
 

Dr. Gonzo

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 8, 2010
5,213
Per FO, Atlanta's pass defense versus "Other WRs" and "RBs" is AWFUL. Like, 29th and 26th, respectively.
Hogan, Lewis, and White due for more success? Trying to fgigure out who would be #1 and #2 receivers by their definition. Edelman and Mitchell?
 

Kevin Youkulele

wishes Claude Makelele was a Red Sox
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2006
8,838
San Diego
Per FO, Atlanta's pass defense versus "Other WRs" and "RBs" is AWFUL. Like, 29th and 26th, respectively.
I think this makes Brady happy in the pants. How many times has he put on a clinic of exploiting whichever receiver is poorly covered?
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,850
Hogan, Lewis, and White due for more success? Trying to fgigure out who would be #1 and #2 receivers by their definition. Edelman and Mitchell?
Not sure it matters. They can't cover #3/#4 or backs. Whether that's Amendola, Mitchell, or Hogan could be by our offensive set. Two of those 3 should feast.
 

CR67dream

blue devils forevah!
Dope
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
7,206
I'm going home
I might tell the next poster who wants to talk politics in this thread to STFU ... and I don't even know what that stands for
Shut the fuck up. That's what it stands for, not me telling you to do so.
But yeah, everybody stop it right now. STFU.
 

GregHarris

beware my sexy helmet/overall ensemble
SoSH Member
Jun 5, 2008
3,460
Yeah I ain't won shit. 7 bowls since I've been a season ticket holder and not a bone yet. Tickets are pretty much the cheapest in the stadium. I just checked and those are sold out. All that's left are $5,000+ packages.
 
Per FO, Atlanta's pass defense versus "Other WRs" and "RBs" is AWFUL. Like, 29th and 26th, respectively.
You guys should probably take negative statistics about Atlanta's defense like this with huge grains of salt, for two reasons. One is that with the notable exception of the Chiefs game in Week 13, the defense - a young, well-coached unit which is learning all the time - has gotten progressively better as the season has gone along; three of its best four defensive performances by DVOA, all -10% or better, have come in three of its last four games. The other is that the Falcons have led so many games by so many points, they've wound up playing prevent-type schemes and/or been in "let's just get off the field and end this with no injuries" mode in the fourth and even third quarters quite a lot, and I think their overall stats are negatively skewed by their performance in low-impact situations. (Even since Week 13, this would include their games against the Rams, Saints and of course Packers.)

I'm not suggesting the Falcons are the '85 Bears, of course. But they did just hold St. Aaron of Lambeau to zero points in the first half on Sunday, in a game which saw Atlanta have its worst defensive performance by DVOA since Week 15 against the 49ers (see point 2, above). Demean and underestimate that defense at your own risk.​
 

Soxy

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2008
6,095
Any tolerable football podcasts out there?
The MMQB Podcast. Don't let the Peter King affiliation scare you off. The ones with Andy Benoit and Gary Gramling are great. I can't speak for the others as I don't listen to them. But Benoit has been one of my go-to's for X's and O's talk for a few years now. Any football podcast with him is probably going to be worth listening to.
 

staz

Intangible
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2004
20,663
The cradle of the game.
Time of possession, for all the over-emphasis it often gets, will be key. This is game #19 for a lot of these guys, and getting that D off the field will pay dividends in the 2nd half. Even matching TD for TD at the start is fine... as long as our drives take appreciably longer than theirs. Of course, a great way to get the D off the field immediately is with a turnover, and I expect our secondary's improvement stripping the ball to be evident.
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
13,487
Santa Monica, CA
You guys should probably take negative statistics about Atlanta's defense like this with huge grains of salt, for two reasons. One is that with the notable exception of the Chiefs game in Week 13, the defense - a young, well-coached unit which is learning all the time - has gotten progressively better as the season has gone along; three of its best four defensive performances by DVOA, all -10% or better, have come in three of its last four games. The other is that the Falcons have led so many games by so many points, they've wound up playing prevent-type schemes and/or been in "let's just get off the field and end this with no injuries" mode in the fourth and even third quarters quite a lot, and I think their overall stats are negatively skewed by their performance in low-impact situations. (Even since Week 13, this would include their games against the Rams, Saints and of course Packers.)

I'm not suggesting the Falcons are the '85 Bears, of course. But they did just hold St. Aaron of Lambeau to zero points in the first half on Sunday, in a game which saw Atlanta have its worst defensive performance by DVOA since Week 15 against the 49ers (see point 2, above). Demean and underestimate that defense at your own risk.​

I'm sure if all of the Patriots receivers and backs are injured between now and the Super Bowl, they'll shut the Patriots down, too.
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
51,299
You guys should probably take negative statistics about Atlanta's defense like this with huge grains of salt, for two reasons. One is that with the notable exception of the Chiefs game in Week 13, the defense - a young, well-coached unit which is learning all the time - has gotten progressively better as the season has gone along; three of its best four defensive performances by DVOA, all -10% or better, have come in three of its last four games. The other is that the Falcons have led so many games by so many points, they've wound up playing prevent-type schemes and/or been in "let's just get off the field and end this with no injuries" mode in the fourth and even third quarters quite a lot, and I think their overall stats are negatively skewed by their performance in low-impact situations. (Even since Week 13, this would include their games against the Rams, Saints and of course Packers.)

I'm not suggesting the Falcons are the '85 Bears, of course. But they did just hold St. Aaron of Lambeau to zero points in the first half on Sunday, in a game which saw Atlanta have its worst defensive performance by DVOA since Week 15 against the 49ers (see point 2, above). Demean and underestimate that defense at your own risk.​
Not underestimating potential improvement (hell, for years the mantra here in certain seasons was that terrible Pats' defenses would get better), but I do wonder how a young D will do against Brady, who exploits a defense like nobody else. He's seen it all, while many of the players he'll be up against have not.
 

alydar

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 19, 2006
921
Jamaica Plain
A favorite stat: In the TB / BB era, the Patriots are 12 - 0 against teams they are seeing in the playoffs for the first time that year (i.e. did not play them in the regular season). That includes 3 of their Super Bowl wins (Carolina, Philly, Seattle) and two of their AFCCG wins (Pitt in the playoffs following the '01 season, Bal in '11).

Those who watch the schedule closely may notice that the Patriots did not play the Falcons this year.
 
Not underestimating potential improvement (hell, for years the mantra here in certain seasons was that terrible Pats' defenses would get better), but I do wonder how a young D will do against Brady, who exploits a defense like nobody else. He's seen it all, while many of the players he'll be up against have not.
Absolutely...although to be fair, Dan Quinn has now been to three of the last four Super Bowls himself. Good coaching over a two-week period can make a big difference.

By the way, on the subject of defensive improvement, it's worth noting that Atlanta's defense has gotten better late in the season despite losing Desmond Trufant to injury in Week 9. If you consider how bad the defense was at the start of the year with Trufant, and then think of how much worse it would have been without Trufant in the first half of the season, the recent rate of improvement seems that much more impressive.
 

loshjott

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2004
14,945
Silver Spring, MD
Those who watch the schedule closely may notice that the Patriots did not play the Falcons this year.
But they will next season. The SB will decide whether the Pats go to Atlanta to open their new stadium on opening night in Sept or Atalanta comes to Foxboro then.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,062
Hingham, MA
But they will next season. The SB will decide whether the Pats go to Atlanta to open their new stadium on opening night in Sept or Atalanta comes to Foxboro then.
This is incorrect. The game will be in Foxboro regardless. If the Pats win the SB, then they will likely schedule the rematch for opening night. But if Atlanta wins, my guess is they do a rematch of the NFCCG with Green Bay going to Atlanta.
 

TheoShmeo

Skrub's sympathy case
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
12,890
Boston, NY
Between the lack of calls against the Pats in the AFCCG and the roof being open, I have this sick feeling that Goodell is saving the Ben Dreith Screw Job for the SB. Dare to dream that he's worried about being sussed out and is laying off as a result.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,062
Hingham, MA
Between the lack of calls against the Pats in the AFCCG and the roof being open, I have this sick feeling that Goodell is saving the Ben Dreith Screw Job for the SB. Dare to dream that he's worried about being sussed out and is laying off as a result.
If anything I think the roof being open helps the Pats. FWIW, the roof was closed in 2003.
 

TheoShmeo

Skrub's sympathy case
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
12,890
Boston, NY
If anything I think the roof being open helps the Pats. FWIW, the roof was closed in 2003.
That's my point. We have two positive data points. Few calls against them last Sunday and now this roof decision.

Waiting for the other shoe to drop...and hoping that Goodell has decided to avoid throwing any more chum into the water.
 

Toe Nash

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2005
5,600
02130
You guys should probably take negative statistics about Atlanta's defense like this with huge grains of salt, for two reasons. One is that with the notable exception of the Chiefs game in Week 13, the defense - a young, well-coached unit which is learning all the time - has gotten progressively better as the season has gone along; three of its best four defensive performances by DVOA, all -10% or better, have come in three of its last four games. The other is that the Falcons have led so many games by so many points, they've wound up playing prevent-type schemes and/or been in "let's just get off the field and end this with no injuries" mode in the fourth and even third quarters quite a lot, and I think their overall stats are negatively skewed by their performance in low-impact situations. (Even since Week 13, this would include their games against the Rams, Saints and of course Packers.)

I'm not suggesting the Falcons are the '85 Bears, of course. But they did just hold St. Aaron of Lambeau to zero points in the first half on Sunday, in a game which saw Atlanta have its worst defensive performance by DVOA since Week 15 against the 49ers (see point 2, above). Demean and underestimate that defense at your own risk.​
On the other hand, being ahead in games makes the other team one-dimensional and easier to defend. And GB moved the ball pretty well in the first, they just had a missed FG and a terrible fumble take away points, then a three and out and it was 17-0 and they had to start getting desperate.
 

bernardsamuel

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2006
195
Denver, only physically
In terms of neutral fan reaction to the Pats, Michael Smith of ESPN had an interesting viewpoint: He said that many fans who would normally be very anti Patriot are actually rooting for the Pats in the Super Bowl just to see the reaction of Goddell as he hands the trophy to Brady. Not sure how accurate this is considering the hatred against the Pats in the past but we shall see.
I do believe that Smith's assertion is correct, namely that the Patriots will be picking up fans for just one day, and thanks for bringing that assertion to us here. I'm going to offer a very from-left-field guess as to what actually will go on. I would guess that the president will attend the game, with very little announcement if any beforehand for purposes of optimizing security. I believe that if, unfortunately, Atlanta should prevail, the commissioner will handle the presentation responsibilities as is customary. In the better case, namely if the Patriots should win, I believe that the president will ask the commissioner if the commissioner will permit the president to handle the duties of the trophy presentation, thus saving/enhancing the commissioner's ego by having deferred to the request of POTUS.

Beyond that, I guess I may be in the minority of preferring that the upcoming game doesn't have a "hate" subplot, other than as regards the commissioner, as contrasted to viewing through the lens of Patriots front office alumni serving in Atlanta and a former Boston College QB leading the Falcons. "Hate" takes a lot of energy at my advanced age, far less than the energy it takes to hope that Martellus Bennett will again be dancing with cheerleaders when the game is over.

...and one last item, a prediction, namely that Malcolm Butler will be the MVP of the game and will give the car keys to Tom Brady who also will have played a fantastic game, thus serving the requirements of poetic justice.
 

Kenny F'ing Powers

posts way less than 18% useful shit
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2010
14,427
That's my point. We have two positive data points. Few calls against them last Sunday and now this roof decision.

Waiting for the other shoe to drop...and hoping that Goodell has decided to avoid throwing any more chum into the water.
Goodell just wants his buddy Robert Kraft back. He's praying for a Superbowl win for the Patriots.