[QUOTELumpy didn't need a game-winning drive to beat the Pats last year. Must really suck to lose to both the Manning in consecutive years. <!-- / message -->][/QUOTE]
Well he needed the refs help and got it.As the letter of apology from the NFL to Ellis Hobbs would testify.
Did you notice there was very little bitching about officiating in the playoffs after the Colts got knocked out?
Well he needed the refs help and got it.As the letter of apology from the NFL to Ellis Hobbs would testify.
Did you notice there was very little bitching about officiating in the playoffs after the Colts got knocked out?
I would have taken the Giants small, for the following reasons:
- Hard to bet against a hot pass rush.
- Felt the Pats peaked vs the Steelers.
- Pats D vs the run has been wearing down as the season went along.
Probably the only teams who could exploit the Pats were the Giants, SD (if LT was healthy), and maybe Washington w/ Collins at QB. The biggest shock was the OL play of the Pats. Brady started short-arming his throws. Someone needs to tell Moss that every play cannot be a fly pattern. He isn't much for going over the middle.
This is impossible to predict....I think there would be coaching changes between every game and we have no idea who would come out on top. It is clear that the Giants do matchup well with the Pats but as a safe bet I'd say it goes 5-5.
I will admit the Pats were lucky the game was as close as it was. I think the Giants should've won by much more:
the FG could be a TD (now we go from 3 pt win to 7 pt win)
the INT was pretty much luckbox extreme, with the momentum, that could've easily been a TD (we go from 7 to 14)
the ball that was batted away was very weird and fortunate for NE, he was not aiming upfield for sure. (I'll be nice and make that poss a FG, we go from 14 to 17)
I think final score should have been Giants 31, Pats 14....thats how much better the Giants were yesterday.
(I still think 5-5 over 10 games)
I will admit the Pats were lucky the game was as close as it was. I think the Giants should've won by much more:
the FG could be a TD (now we go from 3 pt win to 7 pt win)
the INT was pretty much luckbox extreme, with the momentum, that could've easily been a TD (we go from 7 to 14)
the ball that was batted away was very weird and fortunate for NE, he was not aiming upfield for sure. (I'll be nice and make that poss a FG, we go from 14 to 17)
I think final score should have been Giants 31, Pats 14....thats how much better the Giants were yesterday.
(I still think 5-5 over 10 games)
Look boys lets face facts.Giants had to play a near perfect game to win the game . they did that.
There were 4 plays of the last drive, if the Pats make any of them defensivley they are 19-0.
giants hit a two run homer in the bottom of the 9th.
The Giants win the pennant! The Giants win the pennant!
There were 4 plays of the last drive, if the Pats make any of them defensivley they are 19-0.
giants hit a two run homer in the bottom of the 9th.
The Giants win the pennant! The Giants win the pennant!
and when NE beat Giants in week 17 , they had to play perfect ... Maybe they shouldnt tipped their hats so much in that one .... Whats better , a 15-1 season regular season enroute to winning the SB ? or a 16-0 Regular season and losing the SB ? Don't answer , its a trick.
superbowl lines aren't made to be accurate, they are made based on public perception....NE had to lay that much cause if not, the bets fall uneven.
I saw these teams play twice this year, they match up good. I will say NE is probably a better team....but the Giants have their number. This happens a lot in sports. Throw in the fact they are a hot team at the right time, then your results are shown in yesterday's dominance.
