Patriots-Giants drinking game: painful memories edition

One streak will end Sunday. Either the Patriots' 11-game winning streak, or Giants' 3-game winning streak against the Patriots.

Throughout the week, few people seemed to actually talk about this game in 2015, instead focusing on games played 4 and 8 years ago, by almost completely different sets of players. For the Patriots, this is a tough road game against a good opponent. And they probably won't make nervous mistakes like so many Pats' opponents have this season. Then again, a 5-4 record in the NFL this year isn't very impressive. Being slightly above average in an incredibly below average league is like repeating the 4th grade and then getting a B-. Who cares?

Speaking of who cares, who cares about my game analysis? Let's get to the drinking game!

The rules...

Anytime a commentator says:
"Super Bowl" = 1 drink of beer
"New York" = 1 drink
"Manning" = 1 drink
"Tom" = 1 drink
"Brady" = 1 drink
"Coughlin" = 1 drink
"Malcolm" = 1 drink
"Chandler" = 1 drink
"Tyree" = 1 drink
"Manningham" = 1 drink (plus the 1 drink for saying "Manning")
"Streak" = 1 drink
"Undefeated" = 1 drink
"18 and 1" = drink beer for 18 seconds, then drink 1 shot of liquor
"Pierre-Paul" = 1 drink
"Fireworks" = 1 drink


Anytime this is happens:
DraftKings or FanDuel commercial = 1 drink (not allowed to do so in New York)
Odell Beckham Jr. catches something with both hands = 1 drink
DeflateGate is mentioned = 1 drink
Shane Vereen catch or carry = 1 drink
Brandon Meriweather dirty play = 1 drink
Tom Brady takes longer than 2 seconds to get rid of the ball = 1 drink
Julian Edelman seems to get concussed = 1 drink
Rob Gronkowski breaks a tackle = 1 drink
Gronk scores a touchdown = finish your beer, spike the can/bottle (bonus points for spiking glass)
LeGarrette Blount breaks a 10+ yard run = 1 drink
Jamie Collins does something freakishly athletic = 1 drink
Chandler Jones records a sack = 1 drink
Touchback = 1 drink
Kickoff or punt return = drink for the duration of the return
Matthew Slater makes a special teams tackle = 1 drink


Anytime this is on screen:
Fall foliage = 1 drink, bonus points if it's pumpkin flavored
DraftKings logo = 1 drink
Highlights of a Super Bowl = drink for the duration of the highlight, then throw up if it was against the Giants
Roman numerals = 1 drink per set of numerals
Highlights of a Giants receiver making a ridiculous catch = drink entire beer, take a shot, snort a line of oxy
Clip of a former Patriots receiver named Wes dropping a catch = finish your beer, pop a Molly, and sign with the Rams
Bill Belichick as a NY Giants coach = drink a giant sized beer, like those Fosters beers
60 Minutes promo = 1 drink per clock tick
Jason Pierre-Paul's bandaged hand = 1 drink
Graphic about Pats' O-line injuries = 1 drink per injured player mentioned
A sign about DeflateGate = 1 drink
The New York skyline = 1 drink
The disgusting wastelands of north New Jersey = 1 drink
Bob Kraft = 1 drink
Kraft talking to someone = drink while he's talking

So enjoy the Pats-Giants game, get lubed up, and please don't play this drinking game because you'll probably die.

NFL Refs Conspiring to Ruin Football Games? Revenge for Lockout?

Nothing will ever match the ineptitude of last year's replacement refs. They couldn't keep up with the pace of the game. They made obvious blunders. They ruined the on-field product so badly that the NFL caved and we all celebrated the return of the real refs, who performed so much better than their scab counterparts.

Then there's this year. For the most part NFL refs have been fine. They're not perfect. They make mistakes. And there's the same old inconsistencies with holding and P.I. and all that stuff that's always been annoying.

Then there are a handful of weird plays, all at the ends of big games, that involve obscure rules, or questionable rule interpretations, or forgetting what down it is.

The Patriots and Jets played an overtime game that turned when the Pats were flagged for pushing each other while attempting to block a hopelessly long field goal. Two Sundays ago the Patriots were in Charlotte and the game ended with a pass interference flag being picked up. And this past Sunday the Redskins were apparently given a 1st down, which was actually 3rd down, then the refs caught the "mistake" and reset the dial-a-down to indicate a 4th down. They also failed to measure the very close 1st down that wasn't actually a 1st down.

Mike Shanahan probably didn't ask for a measurement since he seemed to think his team already had a 1st down.

It's just weird that these things are happening. That was replacement level incompetence in the Redskins game. I haven't seen that pushing penalty called since the Pats/Jets game. And few people who don't work for the NFL think it was correct for the officials to pick up the P.I. flag in the Pats/Panthers game.

There was also the Steelers game on Thanksgiving, in which the refs took a touchdown off the board because the ball carrier's helmet was knocked off half a second before he scored a touchdown.

Is there a conspiracy? I doubt it.

Or do I?

Are a group of rogue referees trying to get revenge on the NFL for last year's lockout? Have they decided to spoil the endings of close marquee NFL games with confusion? They waited until the end of the game to penalize the Patriots for their pushing. They tried to go back in take a touchdown from the Steelers. They royally screwed up the end of the Redskins game, and never paused to explain the confusion to anyone on either sideline.

Lack of explanation is another trend in these calls. Belichick didn't get one in Carolina. Shanahan didn't get one Sunday night.

How many times have we heard football pundits and talking heads say "I've never seen anything like this," in regards to officials this year?

It's almost too odd. And keep in mind, the crew that officiated that Steelers game also did the Pats/Panthers game with that waved off pass interference in the end zone.

And three of these four games were nationally televised. The Steelers and Redskins games were on NBC, the Pats/Panthers game was on a Monday Night. Three were divisional matchups. Three were rivalry games. And 6 of the 7 different teams involved are among the NFL's most popular. The teams involved have also won 9 of the last 13 Super Bowls.

It's just too weird for the best football refs to make such bizarre decisions at the endings of big games. A little too weird.

I Love Hakeen Nicks

Hakeem Nicks was questionable going into Sunday's game. That's how I knew he'd have a monster performance. He's always questionable, or doubtful, or limited participation, or no participation.

Then on Sunday he catches 10 passes for 199 yards and a TD.

That's why for the last four seasons, Hakeem Nicks has been a key member of my fantasy football team: The Fingering Penguins. Nicks personifies what the Fing-guins are all about. He's explosive, he falls in the draft, and for some reason I like him slightly better than anyone else likes him.

Thank you for the 25 points, Hakeem. The rest of my team disappointed this week, but that's the Fingering Penguin way. I need Matt Ryan to score over 20 tonight to win. Individual inconsistency is fine though, so long as teammates pick each other up. Penguins finger together!

Some Media Tries to Generate a Story About Belichick and the Giants

On Monday, the Giants put injured tight-end Jake Ballard on waivers after he failed a physical. On Tuesday, the Patriots picked him up. Ballard won't be able to play until 2013. He caught 38 passes for 604 yards and 4 TDs in 2011. And he cost the Patriots nothing.

Nothing but a few poor attempts by some in the Media to make mountains out of molehills.

Most of the national sports media didn't blink an eye at this story. Belichick was asked about potential "unwritten rules" he may have broken and said that there weren't any. Giants' coach Tom Coughlin was asked about the matter and seemed more angry at his own team for making the move, than at the Patriots for taking advantage of it.

But some members of the media didn't want to settle for the logic and common sense of all that. They wanted to generate a story.

An unnamed Associated Press writer wrote this piece on the transaction.

The piece carried the incendiary title: "Giants, Coughlin unhappy with Patriots grabbing TE." Had the AP writer spelled out TE, it would have been a marginally humorous headline.

Here are some of my favorite quotes from this piece:

"Tom Coughlin was in no mood to be noble toward the New England Patriots for plucking injured tight end Jake Ballard off the waiver wire."

"What was depicted as a 'calculated risk' by New England... was being viewed in some quarters as a vindictive move by Patriots coach Bill Belichick."

In other words, the writer of this story and his media buddies view it as vindictive. Nobody in the Giants has expressed such an opinion.

"Coughlin would not have had Ballard for 2012, but that didn't lessen his feelings on the situation. In the end, though, he had to admit that the Patriots did nothing outside the rules, except perhaps those of front-office etiquette."

So this AP stringer feels he is more of an authority of "front-office etiquette" than Bill Belichick or Tom Coughlin? Coughlin never came close to discussing "front-office etiquette." Only media people are talking about that.

I call what this writer is attempting to do a Smoke-Bomb Story. You know the expression "where there's smoke, there's fire." Well, this is an example of a media guy throwing a proverbial smoke-bomb, then claiming that because smoke exists, there must be a fire. But there is no fire.

It's a generated story. It's a sad attempt by a lame reporter to construct a narrative that isn't based on facts. Tom Coughlin is not upset with the Patriots, yet the headline implies that he is. The Patriots acquired a solid player, yet the story suggests they did so with an ulterior motive.

It's not an anti-Patriots thing, it's a desperate-for-a-story, starving, misguided reporter thing. There is no story here beyond the Giants making a miscalculation about interest in Ballard, and the Patriots acquiring a decent player for 2013.

It's pathetic.

NFL Changes Too Many Men Rule

In the Super Bowl, there was a play late in the game in which the Giants had 12 players on the field, and despite being penalized for this, the time that ran off the clock stayed off the clock.

So the NFL has made it a dead-ball penalty. It's now like a false start or a delay of game penalty.

I guess that's an improvement. I don't think the Giants purposely sent 12 men out there on that play. If they did, then it was diabolically brilliant. Good for them.

I wish they had made the rule so that any time run off the clock would be put back on (only in the last 2 minutes of a half). That would give the offense a free play. Then they could decide to decline the penalty and take the result of the play (including the time that ran off) or accept it, take the 5 yards, and move the clock back.

But this change will at least keep teams from trying to intentionally repeat the Giants' fortuitous accident.

The NFL has also decided to make all turnovers reviewed by the booth. Players receiving a crackblack block will be considered defenseless players and a 15 yard penalty will be assessed.

Also, the postseason OT rules will now apply to all regular season games as well. If the first team possessing the ball kicks a field goal, then the other team will have a chance to possess the ball and match the field goal, or win the game with a touchdown. The first team possessing the ball can also end the game with a touchdown. After each team has a possession, the game becomes sudden death.

Giant Disappointment

Two plays can sum up this game. One was Mario Manningham's toe-dragging sideline catch in the 4th. The other was Wes Welker's drop, also in the 4th. Manningham was covered well yet brought his toes down, maintained control of the ball, and in one play brought his team from its own 12 yard line to just 15 yards shy of field goal range. Manningham reached his maximum potential in that moment. He made the play.

Welker's drop came with the Pats up 2, with 4:00 on the clock. Had he held on, it would have been 1st & 10 on the Giants' 22 yard line. The Patriots could have drained at least another minute off the clock and would have almost surely scored at least a field goal. And if they'd scored a touchdown, the game would be over. Welker had all 10 fingers on that ball. And it popped out. He didn't make the play.

The Giants made more plays than the Patriots. It's not rocket science, it's fairly simple.

There were plenty of times in this game that the Patriots were just a play or two away from claiming victory. They didn't make the plays. The Giants did.

It's not effort, it's execution. No sane person can question Wes Welker's effort. But when his number came up, he just didn't make the play. Mario Manningham did.

After the Pats scored to start the second half, victory was within reach. They never grabbed it.

17-9 Pats and the defense gives up a field goal. If the Pats respond with a touchdown, they're up 21-12 and in the driver's seat. Instead they went three and out.

The defense gives up another field goal. 17-15 game, Pats get the ball back, move it a bit, then on a 1st down Brady evades pressure, then throws deep to Gronkowski. He underthrows a bit, Gronk can't outmuscle the linebacker covering him and it's an interception. What was Brady thinking? Throwing a jump ball on 1st down? That was a cocky decision.

The Giants eat about 5 minutes of clock and pin the Patriots back on their own 8. That drive ended the play after Welker's drop. Punt, Manningham, a few more plays, touchdown, history.

Victory was out there. The Patriots didn't reach out and take it. The Giants did.

Looking ahead, there's little reason to despair. There is a great deal of talent on this team. There's room to improve, but there's a strong foundation to build on.

I think you'll see significant defensive retooling. As much as I blame the offense's lack of execution for this loss, the Giants did mount an 88 yard game-winning TD drive. It'd be nice to have a better chance to prevent that. A team can't be so dependent on half of its roster to win all its games and right now the Patriots are dependent on the offense to make every single play in order to win.

That needs to change. Safeties that know what they're doing. Cornerbacks that can cover one-on-one without being embarrassed. A consistent pass-rush. Maybe an OLB that can rush the passer.

Here's a weird, almost frightening thought: the Bruins are the clutchest team in Boston sports.

Photo Credit:
AP Photo

Super Bowl Preview

Vegas favors the Patriots by 2.5 to 3. Which seems a little strange. The Pats were 13-3, and were the AFC's #1 seed. The Giants went 9-7, and were the NFC's 4th seed, even though they had the 6th best record. Of course, the Giants beat the Patriots 24-20 at Gillette Stadium in early November.

I don't want to play the underdog card too much here. As I said, Vegas is favoring the Patriots. Which means people are putting their money behind the Patriots. But the fact that questions like "Would you rather have Eli or Brady?" are being asked at all seems a little weird to me.

The Giants appear to match up well against the Patriots. They have a strong 4 man pass rush that can pressure Brady but also leave 7 men in coverage. On the other side of the ball, the Patriots have the 31st passing defense, allowing 293.9 yards per game in the air. The Giants have a good QB, with a bevy of weapons for him to throw to. Victor Cruz, Hakeem Nicks, Mario Manningham, and tight-end Jake Ballard who caught a TD against the Pats in November.

As bad as the Patriots' pass-defense has been, people don't seem to be noticing how bad the Giants are at defending against the pass. The Giants are 29th in yards allowed. Opposing QBs have an 86.1 rating against the Giants. What is the QB rating for Patriots' opponents? 86.1. Isn't that funny.

And since when has Eli Manning become an elite QB? I heard one pundit say that Eli's success is due to his not making mistakes anymore. Really? Doesn't make mistakes anymore? He threw 16 picks this year, 7th most in the NFL. He threw 25 picks last year.

He's been excellent in the postseason so far, with 8 TDs, only 1 INT, and a 103.1 rating. But his whole career has been defined by inconsistency. And he was hardly dazzling back in November against the Pats.

The Patriots lost that game because Brady wasn't as good as he should have been. They lost because they made mistakes like missing a 27 yard field goal. They lost because they turned the ball over 4 times. Brady threw 2 interceptions and fumbled. Edelman muffed a punt. The Giants scored 10 points off turnovers.

Eli Manning is the best QB that the Patriots will face in these playoffs. But he doesn't scare me. The November game was actually one of the better games played by the Pats' defense. People are talking about Ahmad Bradshaw not playing in that game and how much it helps the Giants that he's back. But the Giants were 32nd in the NFL in rushing for a reason. Bradshaw rushed for 3.9 per carry this year, and never once eclipsed 60 yards in a game.

And to be blunt, rushing the ball against the Patriots is doing their defense a huge favor.

This game comes down to one person. And his name is Tom Brady. How he throws, and how he's protected, and how he executes will determine if the Patriots win or lose. I know I've been saying it all year, but it is all about Brady, Brady, Brady.

The Patriots beat the Ravens without a fully effective Tom Brady. They won't be able to pull the same rabbit out of the hat twice. Brady needs to have a good game for the Patriots to win. And if he has a great game, the Patriots will win. No matter what Eli does against the Pats' defense.

One thing that unnerves me is that for the past few years Brady's tried to force the play in big games. He's thrown into double coverage with no margin for error. For example: that deep ball in the Ravens game intended for Slater. No need to try to be that perfect in one throw. He needs to realize that it's better to throw a couple good passes instead of forcing yourself to throw one absolutely perfect one. Because if a good pass is off, it's incomplete. If the attempted perfect pass is off, it's an interception.

I think Brady and the offense will execute on Sunday. At the very least, they won't turn the ball over as easily as they did in November.

Gronkowski's health will play a huge part in the Patriots' offense. He caught 8 passes in that November game. He's Brady's #1 target in the Red Zone, and he's a good receiving option to have if Brady is getting hurried. When Brady needs to press the panic button, he can throw to Gronkowski's general direction and Gronk will haul it in. If he's healthy.

Let's not forget about Wes Welker, though. Welker would have been Super Bowl MVP in 2008 had the Patriots been able to hang on. He caught 11 passes in that game. He caught 9 passes for 136 yards in November. He also had a 13 yard run. He will have a big game on Sunday.

The Giants are vulnerable against the run. They allowed 121.3 yards per game on the ground, 19th in the NFL. In November, BenJarvus Green-Ellis ran well at the start of the game, 52 yards on 12 carries. Then for some reason Ridley and Woodhead got more of the carries. They didn't do as well (combined 10 carries for 36 yards). This might have been due to Ellis' health, or might have simply been a play-calling mistake.

Look for Ellis to get the ball with regularity on Sunday. Not only do the Giants give up chunks of rushing yards, but a strong run can also slow down and wear out a pass-rush. Then of course comes play-action. Ellis can also become an outlet receiver, chipping a lineman then sitting in the middle of the field or the flat for a safe pass. J.R. Redmond style.

Brady will not look at Ochocinco unless he's clearly on the good side of a mismatch.

In the November game, Brady targeted Ochocinco 5 times. This was before we all accepted the fact that Ochocinco is not a significant part of the offense. It was Game #8. In the first 8 games of the season, Brady targeted Ochocinco 21 times. In the 10 games since then, Brady's targeted him 11 times. So from 2.6 targets per game down to 1.1.

Why is that a good thing? Because it demonstrates that the Patriots have adjusted their offense. Ochocinco was thrown to at key moments in that November game. And it didn't go well. Now, he won't be. Brady will be looking for someone else.

One thing this offense has done remarkably well this season is adjust, adapt, and evolve. Adjust to coverages, adjust to pass pass rushes, adjust to Ochocinco's inability to adjust, and so on. The Patriots didn't adjust back in 2007, they simply kept hammering away at the same thing the same way.

They've adjusted since November. The Pats have won 10 straight since that game. The Giants are 6-5 since that game. Yet somehow they've been billed as the red hot team. And give credit to them for their playoff wins. But they are prone to inconsistency.

I think the Patriots' offensive line will man-up and slow down the Giants enough for Brady to find open receivers. We can talk about schemes and strategies all we want, but football usually comes down to one group of guys outplaying another group of guys. It'll be up to the Pats' offensive linemen to protect Brady and make holes for Ellis.

I think BJGE will also slow down the pass rush and set-up a few 2nd & 2 situations. Eli will put up a few TDs, but he'll throw a pick or two. The Giants will score, and will have one or two painfully unstoppable drives. But they won't keep up with the Pats.

Patriots 34, Giants 27.

Legacies on the Line

How Super Bowl XLVI plays out will have a tremendous impact on the legacies of four men: Eli Manning, Tom Coughlin, Tom Brady, and Bill Belichick.

If the Giants win, and Manning does well, perhaps even wins another Super Bowl MVP, he'll be regarded as the superior Manning. At least he should be.

While Peyton has always been highly praised, and has been putting up gaudy regular season stats for years, the game of football is about playing your best in the big game. It's about performing in the clutch, capitalizing on the big moment, making that one play. More so than any other sport because other sports have best of 7 series. In the NFL, it's win or lose, live or die, all in one game on one night.

If Eli wins, he's the better big game QB. He'd have 2 rings. One more than Peyton. He'd have an 8-3 playoff record. Peyton is 9-10.

Eli would also have a much better record against the Patriots, a team that most NFL teams have measured themselves against for the last decade. Eli would have 2 playoff wins against New England. Peyton is 1-2. Eli would have a career record of 3-1 against the Patriots. Peyton, when facing the Patriots with both Belichick and Brady, is 4-8 against New England.

So if Eli does well and helps propel the Giants to a Super Bowl win, his legacy will surpass his older brother's.

What about Tom Coughlin's legacy compared to his former boss, Bill Parcells?

If the Giants win, then Coughlin matches the Tuna in the ring category with 2. Parcells won 303 games as a head coach, Coughlin has 256 wins. Parcells' playoff record isn't staggeringly amazing. He's led teams to 3 Super Bowls, won 2 of them, and is 11-8 in the postseason. Coughlin has been two 2 Super Bowls, won 1 of them, and is 8-7 in the playoffs.

I don't see much separation there. If I told you those numbers were some mystery coach, you might say that Coughlin is just a step behind Coach X. But Parcells' name carries the weight of his reputation as a winner. So it seems like Coughlin is further behind than he really is.

Parcells gets praised for producing lots of coaching talent. Like Coughlin, and Belichick. But that also means he's had high quality assistants helping him win. Was Parcells a great teacher? Or did he have genius students? Probably both.

I'm not saying that if the Giants win on Sunday, then Coughlin is better than Parcells. But he's at least in the conversation. Looking at just their bodies of work, there wouldn't be much separating the two.

And as for former Giants assistant Bill Belichick, a win on Sunday would put even more distance between he and Parcells. Belichick would be 96 games over .500 as Patriots head coach. Think about that. Parcells had a .570 winning percentage, and .611 with the Giants. Belichick has a .643 winning percentage, .724 with the Patriots.

Belichick has 272 career wins (31 behind Parcells, 22 behind if you include playoff wins), a 21-6 playoff record, 5 Super Bowl appearances, 3 titles. A win on Sunday would be icing on the already impressive cake of Belichick's legacy.

The same goes for Brady. If the Pats lose then both Brady and Belichick will still be considered among the best at their particular jobs. If they win, they'll be among the best ever in all of sports at anything, not just their specific positions in their specific sports. They're both already great. Winning Sunday could add an -est to the end of that word.

What would make ring #4 so impressive is that this team is completely and utterly different from the previous 3 Super Bowl champions. The Patriots won those with patient passing and a playmaking defense. Now they're trying to win with a playmaking offense and a defense that tests the fans' patience.

For a coach and quarterback to grow and adjust so dramatically over a 10 year span is impressive. Brady has become the poster boy for the passing frenzy that is the NFL. I think Belichick saw Brady's potential being underutilized in 2006, as he was forced to work with Reche Caldwell and Doug Gabriel.

That's when Belichick went out and acquired Randy Moss, Wes Welker, and Donte Stallworth.

And for 18 games, the formula worked. It just hasn't won Game #19. Yet. But if the Patriots win on Sunday, Belichick and Brady will have 4 rings, coaching and playing for 2 very different kinds of teams. Brady would have won as a "game manager" and as a "flashy" QB. Belichick would have won as an old-school defensive mastermind, and as an offensive "guru."

It's like a great actor who can do comedy and drama, who can play the hero in one movie, then the villain in another.

That kind of success puts you in the upper upper stratosphere of sports greatness.

Those are the legacies on the line Sunday. A good quarterback and a very good coach who can emerge from some shadows. And a great quarterback and great coach who can start casting even bigger shadows of their own.

This Isn't 2007

Well, technically, I should say this isn't 2008 when Super Bowl XLII was played. Then again, it still isn't 2007 either. It's 2012.

Anyway, this isn't the same Patriots team that lost that Super Bowl to the Giants. Nor is this the same Giants team. Some key figures have returned. Belichick and Coughlin. Brady and Manning. Welker, Tuck, and a few others. But only 7 Patriots from that 18-1 team are still on the roster. Only 15 Giants are still on their roster.

The team's are fundamentally similar to their 2007 versions. The Patriots have a high scoring, high flying, pass heavy offense. They had 5 offensive starters named to the Pro Bowl. The Giants have a ferocious pass rush, and a QB who is now recognized as clutch, if not as flashy as guys like Brees, Rodgers, and Brady.

So will we get the same kind of game? Will Brady have 0.2 seconds to get rid of the ball. Will there be a new David Tyree? Will Devin McCourty see a ball fly just over his fingertips?

I think the game will be just as close as Super Bowl XLII. But the Patriots are different. For one thing, they have BenJarvus Green-Ellis and not Laurence Maroney. Maroney's hesitation and dance moves in the backfield frequently led to negative plays in Super Bowl XLII. BJGE will at least get to the line of scrimmage, maybe a few yards past it, and maybe he can help set-up play-action, maybe force the Giants' line to respect the run, and maybe give Brady some time.

The Patriots' offense is more dynamic than it was in 2007. It isn't just vertical passes to Moss with Welker as the outlet. Now the Patriots throw underneath to their WRs, and deep to their tight-ends. In 2008, Wes Welker caught 11 of Brady's 30 completions. Brady didn't complete a single pass longer than 20 yards, thanks to the Giants' pressure.

The passing game is more diverse now. Brady completed 0 passes to his tight-ends in 2008. That's just slightly different from what the Pats have done in 2012. It's also why Rob Gronkowski's health is such a big story this week. If Gronkowski can help Brady as an outlet, especially if the Giants send all 4 linemen at Brady, and leave Gronk covered by linebackers without chipping him at the line, the Patriots can move the ball at will.

Cartoon by Larry Johnson

But while the Pats offense is now more flexible, their defense has gotten significantly worse since 2007. They were an old crew back then. Now they're young, riddled with injuries, and loaded with subpar talent.

There are playmakers like Wilfork and Spikes. Then there is Julian Edelman playing as a slot corner, and Matthew Slater as a safety. And Devin McCourty getting neck cramps as he watches balls fly over his head to the receiver who has just smoked him. His nickname should be Parliament Light he's smoked so easily.

The Giants are no longer a surprise success story. Eli Manning is being touted as one of the NFL's clutch QBs. And it's hard to argue against that. a 7-3 playoff record is a 7-3 playoff record. And 5 of those wins came on the road. How is it that Eli and the Giants have found such playoff success, while rarely being considered elite during the regular season?

Some might say that they're clutch. I'm going to say that they're inconsistent.

The Giants are capable of brilliant stretches, like their last 5 games (all wins), or their 6-2 start of the 2011 season, or their 2007 playoff run, or their 12-4 record in 2008. But they're also capable of some painfully frustrating stretches. They lost 4 straight this year, and 5 out of 6. They lost their playoff game in 2008, after their 12-4 record. They missed the playoffs in 2009 and 2010.

Eli Manning is 7-3 in playoff games. He's had some good ones. Some bad ones. He'll be up against a porous Patriots defense that will let him accumulate yards by the dozen. But I'm not quite convinced that he's Mr. February.

There's a significant psychological difference between this Super Bowl and Super Bowl XLII: The Patriots won't have the pressure of playing for 19-0. And this season they've been playing for something a bit more meaningful, and that's the memory of Myra Kraft.

These are not the same teams that met in 2008. The Patriots' offense is more versatile. But the defense is also more bendable. So maybe the game will be just as close, only with a few more points on the board.

And the result will be different.

Can the Patriots Get Revenge?

In a word: no.

I've heard this game called "Revenge Bowl." And even before last weekend's Conference Championship games, I knew several Pats fans who were craving a Patriots/Giants matchup because they wanted "payback," or "revenge."

But win or lose, the Patriots can't get revenge. The team can't, the coaches can't, and the fans can't.

Even if the Patriots win, we'll never forget what could have been but wasn't in 2007. I'm sure the team and players have moved on from what happened, that's their job. They've been able to focus on playing the next game, not reliving Super Bowl XLII. But we as fans are still living February 3, 2008 over and over again.

There have been comparisons to the Red Sox in 2003 and 2004. Since the Sox won the World Series in 2004, and went through the same Yankees that defeated them in '03, we no longer feel excruciating pain when Grady Little is mentioned. We don't cringe when we think about Giambi's solo homeruns, Mussina's relief effort, or Posada's double. We don't really think of those plays at all. The memory has been mostly erased, and replaced with the euphoria of winning in 2004 and fond recollections of moments like Roberts' stolen base and Damon's grand-slam.

Would a Super Bowl win cause the same acceptance, the same selective amnesia? Would we forget Asante Samuel's near interception? Or David Tyree's miraculous catch? How about Ellis Hobbs getting burnt like toast by Plaxico Burress? If the Patriots win on Sunday, would we forget these plays?

No.

The difference between the 2003/2004 Red Sox, and the 2007/2011 Patriots is simple. The Red Sox hadn't gone 162-0 in the regular season. Their goal was a World Series title. Which they accomplished the next year, thus achieving redemption.

The Patriots were going after a perfect 19-0 season in '07, which would have been the biggest and most impressive achievement for a sports team in American history. This year, the stakes are not as high. A Super Bowl title is still an amazing accomplishment, and not to be diminished in any way. But Don Shula won't lose any sleep over it.

There is no opportunity for revenge here, not for the players (only 7 Patriots return from that '07 team anyway), or the coaches, or the fans. The Patriots cannot achieve what they came so painfully close to achieving in the 2007 season.

By the same token, what the Giants did cannot be taken away from them, for their players, their coaches, their fans. They won Super Bowl XLII, and nothing that happens in Indianapolis can change that. It's in the past and there is no chance of redemption, revenge, or forgetting it happened altogether.

The haunting memories of Super Bowl XLII will remain in Patriot fans' memories forever. No matter the outcome of this Super Bowl, they cannot be erased. But, they can be joined by new memories, positive memories. There'll be no revenge. If the Patriots win, though, the memories of pain from 2007 will be joined with fresh, happy memories. And these new memories will temper the old ones. Like dipping spicy wings in bleu cheese.

So if you're a Patriots fan, don't watch the game on Sunday thinking about "revenge" for 2007. Because even if the Pats win, you'll be disappointed. Just hope they win so you can think about a great 2011 season.

Going to Indianapolis

The defense won this game. The defense and Billy Cundiff. It certainly wasn't the offense that won this game for the Pats. While I don't think Brady "sucked pretty badly," he wasn't good. The Patriots lost the turnover battle, Flacco in many ways had a better game than Brady, the Ravens accumulated more yards, and held the ball longer. But the Pats defense made some big plays in big moments and that's why the Patriots are going to the Super Bowl.

The defense did allow a pair of token touchdown drives, struggling to contain Rice and giving up chunks of yardage in the air.

But when Woodhead fumbled a kickoff return on the 28, the defense held Baltimore to a field goal (which gave the Ravens a 4 point lead instead of an 8 point lead). Spikes' interception might have been a big play if Brady didn't throw a pick a few seconds later.

In the 4th, the Ravens had a 3rd and 3 on the Patriots' 30 (48 yard field goal range). Wilfork stuffed Ray Rice for a 3 yard loss, and Baltimore was forced to go for it on 4th and 6 instead of kicking a field goal. The Pats did not allow the Ravens to convert that 4th down thanks to good coverage and pressure from the aforementioned Wilfork.

The offense had a chance run out the clock late but went 3 and out. The defense did allow a big 29 yard Anquan Boldin reception, which put the Ravens in field goal range. Then Sterling Moore saved the game by breaking up a pass in the end zone, then deflected the next pass. So at the very least, the defense preserved a tie.

Billy Cundiff did the rest.

The Patriots' offense wasn't bad all game. They just couldn't come up with many big plays. They struggled in the Red Zone, the Ravens got timely pressure on Brady, then there were the turnovers. Brady threw 2 picks, he also had one called back because of an illegal contact penalty, and he threw another one after an encroachment flag. He was not that sharp. He also missed a wide open Gronkowski and what would have been a touchdown in the 1st quarter. He missed a number of passes, and frequently threw into double coverage.

The Pats' best player had his worst game of the season, but because of Wilfork, Spikes, Moore, and Ellis, the Pats still won. And Brady will get a chance to redeem himself against the Giants.

Longest two weeks of the year. Let's party.

Photo Credits:
AP Photo

Flashbacks of 2007

We all turned our clocks back an hour on Saturday night. The Giants turned theirs back 4 years on Sunday evening. The Giants shutdown the Pats offense, then won thanks to a flag route in the end zone. And even though the defense didn't allow a ton of points, they couldn't stop the big drive at the end of the game. They weren't clutch.

As bad as the defense looked on that final drive, where was the offense. I know people hate the fact that the offense seemingly needs 35 points in order to mask the defense's shortcomings. But turning the ball over 4 times isn't exactly helpful. There's no doubt that the Patriots' talent is heavily weighted on the offensive side of the ball, so when that unit foes 5/15 on 3rd downs and turns the ball over 4 times, I think they deserve some criticism.

Both of Brady's interceptions were simply bad passes. He's had a lot of those this year. He was nearly picked again. And again. He then fumbled, which wasn't so much his fault. My point is, the Giants scored 10 points off the second Brady pick, and that fumble.

Then Edelman dropped the ball on a punt return after a 3 and out.

Criticize the defense all you want, and they deserve it. It's not a well constructed unit. But can you honestly tell me that this offense has performed to the level it's capable of?

I don't think it has.

Pats are at the Jets Sunday night and that is a massively important game with the Pats, Jets, and Bills all tied at the top of the AFC East. The Patriots haven't won a big road game in a long time, and they don't get much bigger than this one.

Photo Credit:
AP Photo

DEFEAT MOST BITTER

In 48 BC, 60,000 Roman soldiers under Pompey the Great stood against 22,000 Romans under Julius Caesar outside of Pharsalus in Greece. Pompey's legions were fresh, well-fed, and outnumbered Caesar's nearly 3 to 1. Caesar's men were tired, starving, and facing oblivion. Yet Caesar's men won a decisive victory.

In 1415, 30,000 French soldiers stood against 6,000 Englishmen on the fields of Agincourt in northern France. Despite possessing an overwhelming numerical advantage, the French were crushed. Only 112 Englishmen lay dead at the end of the day, while an estimated 7,000 to 10,000 French were killed.

In 1940, the mighty German Luftwaffe (Air Force) set out to cripple Great Britain. The Germans had more experience than English pilots, flying in the Spanish Civil War, as well as numerous campaigns in the early stages of World War II. The Germans had better fighters, and more of them. They had almost as many bombers as the English had total planes. But eventually the Germans were worn down and defeated.

Sunday's defeat to the Giants was not nearly as gruesome, nor as historically important. But the Patriots came in as the undeniable favorite, a team that had not lost in more than a calendar year. A two time Super Bowl MVP under center. The Coach of the Year on the sidelines. Pro-Bowlers galore. The tattered remains of broken records at their feat. Yet they lost.

How? I'll tell you how.

QB Pressure
No team has ever pressured Tom Brady the way the Giants did on Sunday. Their front four got pressure up the gut and on the edge. Their blitzes were savage, precise, well-disguised, and executed to perfection. Brady was sacked, knocked down, forced to step-up, unable to step through his throws, hurried, and flushed. There were very few easy dropbacks.



The Giants not only got in Brady's face, but they prevented the deep pass. Moss and others were wide open downfield several times, only to have the play broken up behind them by pressure on Brady. The Giants also clogged the throwing lanes, disrupting the short passing game.

The pressure led to several false start penalties, almost all of which came at inopportune times, disrupting the rhythm and momentum of drives, turning 2nd & 10s into 2nd & 15s.

The Running Games
Laurence Maroney had given two impressive performances to help get the Pats to Super Bowl XLII, and at the start of the game looked good. But the Giants clamped down and stopped him for the rest of the night.

In New England's first drive, Maroney had four carries for 15 yards. His final carry of the drive was a 1 yard touchdown. For the remainder of the game, he was held to 21 yards on 10 carries, averaging an anemic 2.1 yards per carry.

Here are those 10 carries:
11:11 2nd qtr, 2nd & 2, NE 41 - Maroney left end, pushed out of bounds, gain of 1
10:43 2nd qtr, 3rd & 1, NE 40 - Maroney left tackle, loss of 2
8:35 2nd qtr, 1st & 10, NE 30 - Maroney up the middle, no gain
1:41 2nd qtr, 2nd & 10, NE 11 - Maroney right end, loss of 3
14:16 3rd qtr, 1st & 10, NE 36 - Maroney up the middle, gain of 7
13:02 3rd qtr, 1st & 10, NE 48 - Maroney left end, loss of 2
8:42 3rd qtr, 1st & 10, NY 28 - Maroney right guard, no gain
2:19 3rd qtr, 1st & 10, NE 21 - Maroney right tackle, gain of 9
1:47 3rd qtr, 2nd & 1, NE 30 - Maroney left end, gain of 2
6:39 4th qtr, 1st & 10, NE 35 - Maroney left end, pushed out of bounds, gain of 9

So Maroney got 21 yards on these 10 carries, but 25 yards came on three of those carries. His runs were that inconsistent. In the entire game he had three 9 yard carries, a 7 yard carry, a 5 yard carry, a 2 yard carry, a pair of 1 yard carries, three carries for no gain, two carries for a loss of 2, and a carry for a loss of 3. Six of his 14 carries went for no gain or a loss. That's abysmal.

Of the 10 carries listed above, some hurt a great deal. The first two came after Ellis Hobbs intercepted Manning, and the Pats blew a chance to build on their 7-3 lead by going 3 and out. Think about this, they had 2nd and 2, and failed to convert for the 1st down. That's not supposed to happen...ever.

That carry for no gain with 8:42 in the 3rd, was one of the plays that led to the 4th & 13 debacle. The inability to get any yardage on 1st down led to a Kyle Brady reception for 3, which led to 3rd & 7, which led to a sack, which led to a 4th & 13 situation in no mans' land.

With no running threat, the Giants' front four was free to tee off on Brady. Drives lost momentum or were never able to pick any up.

But it wasn't all Maroney's fault, or even the offensive line's. The Giants did a good job of stopping him before he could build up any steam. They stuffed the middle, and pursued well to the outside. Even when Maroney got a little bit of space to get some power going, the Giants were quick to envelop him.

Meanwhile, Jacobs and Bradshaw combined for a solid day of work. They didn't put up massive numbers. They combined for 87 yards on 23 carries (3.8 YPC), which isn't stellar, but they picked up decent yardage almost every time they ran. They only lost yardage on one run. They gained 2 yards or more on 19 carries. They gained 3 or more on 13 carries. Four or more on 10 carries. Seven or more on 5 carries. These runs created 3rd and manageable situations for the passing game.



One of the biggest plays of the game was a 2 yard run by Brandon Jacobs on 4th & 1 with 1:34 on the clock in the 4th. If he gets stuffed, which he very nearly did, the game is all but over, with the Pats taking over on New York's 37, in need of a touchdown to ice it, or a first down to end it. Instead, Jacobs gets the 1st down, and the Giants drive winds up in the end zone for a game-winning touchdown.

Inability to Make a Big Play
The Patriots didn't make nearly as many big plays as the Giants did. In their long opening drive, the Giants converted four 3rd downs in order to hang on to the ball, chew up clock, wear down the defense, and eventually score 3 points. Meanwhile, Ellis Hobbs had an opportunity to pick off a tipped ball in the end zone, but failed to come down with it.

After eventually intercepting Manning, the Pats did nothing to capitalize. They made the big play but couldn't build on it. They failed to convert a 2nd & 2, then a 3rd & 1 and were forced to punt.

On the Giants' 33 yard line, a fumbled hand off was apparently smothered by Pierre Woods, but the Giants were able to wrestle it from him and retain posession. Instead of the Pats taking over at New York's 30 yard line, the G-Men punted, and New England got the ball back on their own 30, a 40 yard change in field position.

The rest of the 1st half was a field position battle. After absorbing two sacks, the Pats punted and the Giants got the ball on their 43 yard line. Then New York punted and Kevin Faulk caught it at the 11. Eventually Brady fumbled at New York's 44. A 45 yard drive hadn't even gotten the Pats into field goal range.

The Giants made a big play in the 3rd quarter, on a 3rd and 6. They sacked Brady for a loss of 7, which pushed the Pats beyond comfortable field goal range. Belichick decided to go for it on 4th and 13, but the Pats were unable to convert.

The Giants had the longest play of the game, a 45 yard reception by Kevin Boss, which set-up a touchdown pass to Tyree. The TD gave the Giants a 10-7 lead. New England's longest completion was 19 yards.

Brady's Deep Misses
When Brady got enough time and space to throw the deep ball, they all were horribly off-target. Moss, Stallworth, Gaffney, and Welker were all able to beat their coverage and get seperation. But Brady's balls were overthrown, underthrown, thrown wide right, wide left. He was all over the place. Against a better secondary, there would have been some interceptions.

The pressure had been all over Brady from start to finish, but his short passes were crisp and generally on target. He was 7 for 10 in that 4th quarter touchdown drive. So I don't think the pressure was why his long balls were so off target.

Those misguided bombs at the end of the game were perfect examples of Brady's loss of touch and accuracy when throwing deep. On 1st & 10, both Gaffney and Welker had a step on the coverage, but the ball fell over and in between the two. On 3rd & 20, Moss had a half step on his men (enough space for him) but the ball was just slightly underthrown.



My guess would be that the ankle, coupled with good pressure from the Giants, was responsible for these un-Brady-like deep balls. Had the Patriots got even one of those early deep balls, this game is entirely different.

Finishing the Game
By the middle of the 3rd quarter, it was clear that this game would be decided by 7 points or less, and each team's performance in their final drives would determine the game's outcome. Brady and the Pats went ahead 14-10 with 2:45 on the clock. It was up to the defense.

The Giants' final drive started off well for New England. Hixon was upended by Raymond Ventrone at the 17 yard line. The Giants would have to go 83 yards in 2:39. Not impossible, but the way the Pats defense had been playing, not probable.

The first opportunity to stop the Giants came on 4th and 1 at the 37. Brandon Jacobs got the hand-off up the middle, as we all expected. He was hampered at the line, but was able to fall forward for a gain of 2 and a 1st down.

The second opportunity came on 2nd & 5 at the Giant 44. Manning overthrew Tyree, and Samuel was right there. Asante got fingertips from both hands on the ball, but his leap was just a fraction of a second off. The tipped ball floated out of bounds and incomplete. An interception right there, with 1:15 on the clock, would have - at the very least - taken nearly a minute off the clock and forced the Giants to burn their timeouts.

The third opportunity was on this play:



Adalius Thomas started the pressure. Manning stepped up, but Jarvis Green and Richard Seymour were still right on top of him. But nobody took him down. Had he been sacked, it would have been a loss of about 8, setting up a 4th & 13 on the Giant 36 yard line.



Not only did the Pats fail to record the sack, Manning was able to find David Tyree, who made the catch of the century. Tyree almost let the ball fly past his head. Any tip would have probably been intercepted by the Pats. Rodney was right on Tyree. Hobbs, Sanders, and Samuel were all closing in on the play.



The fourth opportunity came on 2nd & 11. Another pass intended for Tyree was nearly picked off, this one by Meriweather. It would have been a tough, diving, over-the-shoulder catch; but it was possible. Meriweather did a good job just to break up the pass, but it could have been better.
Then New York's touchdown, featuring Plaxico Burress in single coverage, and a falling down Ellis Hobbs. That was ugly.

New York finished the game properly. New England came close to making big plays to end it, but they failed when it mattered most. Champions don't fail at times like that.

Questionable Coaching
It's hard to question Coach Belichick, but this game featured some interesting coaching decisions.

The 4th & 13 play was the most glaring decision, but for me it wasn't that bad. All year, we've gone for it from that spot of the field. I wouldn't have minded a punt, either, trying to pin the Giants back.

I do have a problem with the 3rd & 7 play calling on the previous play. Why not try a screen to Faulk on that play? Why try to go deep on 3rd & 7 when in field goal range, especially against a fierce pass rush that just might get to Brady. Even if you don't get the first down, you'll be in good field goal range, or set-up a 4th & 3 or 4th & 4.

I didn't like how often the Pats kept going deep. It was obvious that the Giants pass rush was teeing off on Brady. It was just as obvious that Tom's long passes were terribly innacurate. So many 2nd & 10s, and 3rd & 10s came about because of the deep ball addiction.



So the Giants played better than the Pats. The Patriots failed to come up with big plays, which they've made all year. There's nothing we can do except look to next season.

Giants' linebacker Antonio Pierce said after the game "This was the death of a dynasty."

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

To Mister Pierce, and the rest of the NFL...




we'll be back.



Sources:
ESPN.com, Fox, NFL.com, Yahoo Sports

Photo credits:
Harry How/Getty Images
Jim McIsaac/Getty Images
Elsa/Getty Images
Andy Lyons/Getty Images
Matt Slocum/AP
Timothey A. Clary/AFP/Getty Images