Topic: Super Bowl XLVI

[thedrUNKenLoper]

Feb. 5, 2012 (Lucas Oil Stadium/Indianapolis, Indiana)

New York Giants (9-7/NFC) versus New England Patriots (13-3/AFC)

Giants 3-1 in Super Bowls (won Super Bowl XXI, XXV, XLII, lost Super Bowl XXXV)
Patriots 3-3 (won Super Bowl XXXVI, XXXVIII, XXXIX, lost Super Bowl XX, XXXI, XLII)

5th rematch in Super Bowl history joining Dolphins-Redskins (VII & XVII), Cowboys-Steelers (X, XIII & XXX), Bengals-49ers (XVI & XXIII), Bills-Cowboys (XXVII & XXVIII) and of course Giants-Patriots (XLI & XLVI), teams that lost the first meetings 1-3 in rematch with Redskins beating the Dolphins in the second meeting. This game will be the first meeting of Super Bowl MVP's with Tom Brady (XXXVI & XXXVIII) and Eli Manning (XLII).

Speaking of Manning here is Gregg Doyel chiming in on how the Colts QB and owner have stolen the spotlight this week in Indy, http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/17125207/its-the-super-bowl-so-why-are-we-talking-about-irsay-and-peyton

[thedrUNKenLoper]

Here are the droughts of the 32 franchises in the NFL well 30 not including the two playing tomorrow

New York Jets Super Bowl III (1969), Kansas City Chiefs Super Bowl IV (1970), Minnesota Vikings Super Bowl XI (1977), Miami Dolphins Super Bowl XIX (1985), Cincinnati Bengals Super Bowl XXIII (1989), Washington Redskins Super Bowl XXVI (1992), Buffalo Bills Super Bowl XXVIII (1994), San Francisco 49ers XXIX (1995), San Diego Chargers XXIX (1995), Dallas Cowboys Super Bowl XXX (1996), Denver Broncos Super Bowl XXXIII (1999), Atlanta Falcons (1999), Tennessee Titans Super Bowl XXXIV (2000), Baltimore Ravens Super Bowl XXV (2001), St. Louis Rams Super Bowl XXXVI (2002), Oakland Raiders Super Bowl XXXVII (2003), Tampa Bay Buccaneers Super Bowl XXXVII (2003), Carolina Panthers XXXVIII (2004), Philadelphia Eagles Super Bowl XXXIX (2005), Seattle Seahawks Super Bowl XL (2006), Chicago Bears Super Bowl XLI (2007), Arizona Cardinals Super Bowl XLIII (2009), New Orleans Saints Super Bowl XLIV (2010), Indianapolis Colts XLIV (2010), Green Bay Packers Super Bowl XLV (2011), Pittsburgh Steelers XLV (2011), Cleveland Browns/Detroit Lions 46 years without a Super Bowl, Jacksonville Jaguars entered league in 1995 which Super Bowl XXX was played and Houston Texans 2002 with Super Bowl XXXVII 

[thedrUNKenLoper]

Feb. 5, 2012: Lucas Oil Stadium/Indianapolis, Indiana

New York Giants (NFC) 21 vs New England Giants (AFC) 17

Super Bowl MVP: Eli Manning QB/New York Giants

[ebens311]

UNDER.
WHELMING.

I've been bored during the Super Bowl only a handful of times in the last 20 years that I've watched it. And this game is being added to that list. Aside from the last 3 minutes, it was boring. Even the commercials were kind of weak, and half time...NO.

[thedrUNKenLoper]

It had its moments and a exciting end but I don't disagree E not at all, the fact the game was decided on the final play didn't hurt. Sure the Giants at 9-7 got hot when it counted but they got into the tourney and won over the Patriots who were 13-3. I enjoyed the company I watched the game with and using the prop bets added to that.

[ebens311]

Score some good money from those props?

[thedrUNKenLoper]

Score some good money from those props?

We used it as a drinking game honestly hah

[thedrUNKenLoper]

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=AvdW.N7RNTBjRuYd.e7cNkg5nYcB?slug=dw-wetzel_tom_brady_super_bowl_gisele_bundchen_defeat_020512

Wetzel observing Tom Brady after the game, I think Brady is in a interesting position due to he won so often early and with that success a franchise that hadn't known that much winning has grown out of control.

Then there is the ultimate Boston homer Grantland's Bill Simmons

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7547184/searching-silver-linings-indianapolis

[architechguy]

You know, I've been listening to all the talking heads ripping Brady all afternoon, but you know who should really get the most blame for these two Super Bowl losses?  Bill Belicheck.  Look at this Patriots team and look at the the team that won 3 in 4 years.   The teams are absolutely nothing at all alike.  Those teams were hard nosed, physical defense, balanced offense.  Teddy Bruschi, Mike Vrabel, Willy McGinest, Rodney Harrison and Ty Law made up a physical defense that would shut down the best of offenses.  Brady led an unspectacular, but very efficient offense.  Today, the Patriots are flat out soft.  The media keeps hyping up the "Patriot Way" of building a roster... They cut players who are past their prime, they trade down with their draft picks to stockpile more picks.  Belicheck won with all the players that Bill Parcells before him brought in, but where are his replacements for those guys. There are no ass kickers on that defense.  They simply can't get a stop when they need one.  They lost yesterday because they let the Giants go 88 yards for a game winning touchdown, just like they did in their last Super Bowl.  And as good as their offense can be, it's mutated from that physical, balanced offense of 2004 to a sideways chuck n duck offense.  Long story short, they need to get back to the Patriot teams of ten years ago if they want to win another Super Bowl.

[thedrUNKenLoper]

I've chatted with a buddy about this and Tom Brady being the goat not at all while not on target those passes still were catchable. But yes the Patriots don't have a running game to speak of they are a complete finesse but really a spread offense. They are what the Rams were in 2002 the team that launched them into this era. The defense is a mess and they don't have a running game to speak of at all but hey they are build to win the AFC east and get 5-6 wins a season that way. I'm a AFC guy but its the lesser of the two conferences currently (three straight Super Bowl losses, Saints, Packers and Giants actually 4 of the last 5) in term of conference depth. In the NFC you get more challenged look at the two teams run to Indy, New York won at home against Atlanta went to Green Bay and San Francisco where New England beat Denver and Baltimore. Defense is how titles are won for the most part even if New Orleans/Green Bay are defenses that rely on turnovers to mask problems which is something the Patriots hide behind this season also.

[ebens311]

It's true, this is NOT the same Patriots team. And hasn't been for years. They have a horrific statistical defense, and it showed. Not that Eli Manning and his receivers are BAD, cause they obviously aren't. But if you can't stop someone, outscoring them isn't going to solve that issue.

I do believe a Texas Tech fan would agree

[thedrUNKenLoper]

With how lousy the Patriots have been at drafting there success has been amazing to me but the coaching staff has done a good job of hiding the problems the roster has.

[architechguy]

It's true, this is NOT the same Patriots team. And hasn't been for years. They have a horrific statistical defense, and it showed. Not that Eli Manning and his receivers are BAD, cause they obviously aren't. But if you can't stop someone, outscoring them isn't going to solve that issue.

I do believe a Texas Tech fan would agree

Where's the slow cap emoticon when you need one?     That is absolutely the truth.  If for no other reason, you can never really guarantee yourself that you'll have the ball last, so you can't rely on your offense to always bail you out.  New England was forced to use the last resort of letting New York score just so they could get the ball back with any significant amount of time.  "Defense wins championships" is a vague statement, but you CANNOT win a championship if your defense can't get a stop when it needs it.  Nobody has a 1.000 winning percentage in shootouts, so you can't build your team around winning that way. 

All the talking heads have been saying lately that the age old cliche that you wins championships with defense and running the ball isn't really true anymore.  Well I argue that it's more true than ever.  You don't have to run for 250 yards a game and you don't have to be the '85 Bears, but you have to be good enough in all phases of the game to make whatever plays are needed to win.  Sometimes, that means getting a stop with a 2 point lead and 3 minutes to go, or converting 3rd and 1 with 2:00 to go. 

[thedrUNKenLoper]

The leagues rules have evolved to the point where passing teams have the advantage which leads to more INT's for the defense in my opinion. Defensively you need a good secondary servicible LB's at least two good DL to compete in my opinion. The 49ers with their offense nearly exploited the system of playing keep away with a solid defense.

[architechguy]

The 49ers are very well built to compete with high flying offenses.  They have an excellent pass rush that doesn't just get sacks, they bring consistent pressure that constantly keeps the QB shuffling his feet and scrambling around.  That's the only way defenses are allowed to disrupt the passing game now.  Their problem is that they met a team in the playoffs that plays the exact same style, only with a great QB to go with that defense.

[thedrUNKenLoper]

I'd say that the 49ers didn't take any chances with Smith against the Giants wether it be because of the rain or not wanting to get behind schedule with the pass rush. SF did what it needed to except drop to punts that lead to Giants points but I agree they were evenly matched and both teams play the kind of defense that will disrupt most offenses.