NFL

The Giants beat Green Bay, the 9ers (the team that beat the Saints), and the Pats. Yep, they’re champions.

And yes, Eli is an elite QB. As good as any in the league right now.

And the supposed top 3 teams that all showed you don’t need a defense have gone down. I’m pretty happy right now.

Very good game—if not a great one.

Some thoughts and questions:

>Does everyone agree that Bradshaw should have fell at the one yard line, instead of going in for the scoring with about a minute left? (I think he should have.) What about Belichick’s decision to allow the TD? Should he have let that go in earlier?

>The Giants are a really good team, but what struck me was the amount of quality players they have. In a way, they reminded me of the pre-2000’s Superbowl teams. If you look a the skill positions, they seem pretty stacked. Maybe they don’t have a lot of great players, but they have a ton of very good players. None of three wide receivers may be great (yet), but they’re all very, very good. They’re almost clones—as if you have three Jake Reeds or John Taylors on a team. The running backs and TEs are like this, too, in a way. And like the older Superbowl teams, the Giants had very little weaknesses. In the past ten years or so, you could take away one or two aspects of a team, and that team would be relatively ineffective. Not so with this Giants team—or the Patriots for that matter. Maybe this isn’t accurate, but that’s the sense I got.

>What do people make of Brady’s performance? I don’t know if he was hurt or what, but he threw some poorly thrown balls—e.g., the deep pass to Gronk (who was open) that resulted in an INT; a fairly deeply pass to Welker (that spun Welker around), and some throws behind the receivers. For the most part, it didn’t seem like the pressure from the pass rush got to him, but I’m not 100% sure about that, either.

I know many are close to talking about Brady as one of the greatest QBs of all time, but I think this year and last year’s playoff performances (and maybe the year before that), have been a little shaky, imo. For me, it’s hurt my estimation of Brady as an all-time great. On the other hand, Montana played shaky when he went to the Chiefs, but people (or least me) haven’t chalked this up to age or playing past his prime. Maybe I should give the same consideration to Brady. (I get the feeling he’s past his prime.)

>If Peyton never plays again, would people consider Eli a better QB because he’s won two Superbowls? There’s no way I would think that. Eli played very well—and I understand he played like this all year. Had he been playing this way for most of his career, the question might (might) be more debatable.

Michael said, And the supposed top 3 teams that all showed you don’t need a defense have gone down. I’m pretty happy right now.

Yeah, me too. However, whatever the Patriot’s defense was like in the regular season, they were solid in the last two games. They bent, but often didn’t break against the Giants. Eli and the receivers made plays, too, (that pass and catch from Eli to Manningham was pretty terrific)—versus the defense playing badly.

>Does everyone agree that Bradshaw should have fell at the one yard line, instead of going in for the scoring with about a minute left? (I think he should have.) What about Belichick’s decision to allow the TD? Should he have let that go in earlier?

Yes, the Pats wasted an entire minute NOT letting the Giants score – and the Giants definately would have eaten the clock there.

When the game finished, we watched the end of ET where they all look up at the rainbow left by the space craft.
Someone said: “I’m finding this therapeutic.”
Everyone dragged their bloated bodies out into the cold night and went home.
It was over…..

Belichek made a very wise decision to let them score. They were going to run the clock down to zero and still score the go-ahead point. The coffin was being sealed and they were aiming the hammer at the nail. He took the odds of putting the game in his HOF’s hands with a minute on the clock and one time out. And he’d take those odds again too (as would I). Brilliant coaching decision that just didn’t pay off.

Giants are a great team. They’re stacked to the brim with talent at all levels on all sides. That has been made plain and clear now. And they’re incredibly streaky. They can turn it on at any point they want to and no one can beat them.

Here’s the truth about Brady in that game: he had two chances to make game-winning drives late in the 4th and didn’t deliver on either (he was not helped by some uncharacteristic dropped passes). Eli had one chance and he made good on it, in addition to draining the clock clean. Brilliant play. You can’t spell “elite” without Eli.

Is Brady an all-time great? Absolutely. His ticket is still punched for the Hall. And he might be right back in another Super Bowl next year. Why not?

Is Eli better than Peyton? Hmm…hmm…

It was clear Bradshaw tried to keep from scoring. What he should have done is just sit on the 1 waiting for time to run out. But if the field goal had been missed …. Stranger things have happened.

Brady is Hall of Fame certain. He was the best QB of the 00s (well, him or Peyton). He is is not now, although he’s still up there, but Eli has knocked him out of the top 3.

That Eli has won 2 SBs does not make him a better QB than Peyton. If so, then Jim McMahon was a better QB than Dan Marino and Fran Tarkenton.

I think it does make the Giants a better team than the Colts were, just as the Bears of ’85 were better than those 70s Viking teams.

@Robert

Yes, the Pats wasted an entire minute NOT letting the Giants score – and the Giants definately would have eaten the clock there.

One of my friends complained about this, but, to me, it was a tough call. If you could keep the Giants to only a field goal, that would be a lot better, and I think Belichik was hoping for that. Knowing when to let them score wasn’t an easy decision to make, imo.

@Bobby

Belichek made a very wise decision to let them score. They were going to run the clock down to zero and still score the go-ahead point.

But the question is, should he have allowed the score earlier? Did he allow too much time to tick off the clock?

His ticket is still punched for the Hall.

Right, but when is he the best QB of all time? I’m not there, yet. (He might not even make my top five.)

Is Eli better than Peyton? Hmm…hmm…

Well, I was interested in hearing your take on this, Bobby, since I know you place a lot on SB victories. To me, this is a pretty easy call for me. Now if Eli plays another five years like this and wins another one, I might change my mind.

@Michael

It was clear Bradshaw tried to keep from scoring. What he should have done is just sit on the 1 waiting for time to run out. But if the field goal had been missed…

It looked like he was indecisive. I agree that he should have fell on the one. If you’re worried about not making the field goal, you could go for it on third down. (I’m pretty sure the run didn’t occur on third down or am I wrong about that?)

@Jazz

It seemed obvious to us: the Giants are in range and could run around (laterally) before kicking the FG – running time off the clock -which would not give us the time to respond with a FG.
BB made a mistake trying to stop the NY run.
A FG is a high probability score, but one has to be able to get in position – that was the issue.

@Robert

It seemed obvious to us: the Giants are in range and could run around (laterally) before kicking the FG – running time off the clock -which would not give us the time to respond with a FG.

But doesn’t this depend on the time remaining and distance? In other words, if the Pats could have force the Giants to kick a FG with 1:30 (let’s say), I think Belichick would have preferred that to giving them the Giants a TD with closer to 2:00 minutes. I think it’s really hard to make the calcutions of likelihood of making the field goal, time remaining, etc.

I think it was 1st and 10 at the 12 – someone said they can run off 40 seconds per down – that seems like a lot, but they don’t have to make forward progress.

How much time was on the clock, though? I think at that point the clock was about a 1:30 or less. If that’s the case, you’re kind of stuck between a rock and hard place. Here’s big issue: would you prefer getting the ball with around 2:00 minutes but down a TD or would you rather get the ball back around a minute needing a FG? And suppose that around 2:00 minutes, the Giants are out of the redzone (say on the Patriot 30), and its second down. Letting the Giants score at that point would be really gutsy—especially since you know so many positive things can happen for your team (e.g., holding them to a FD, causing a turnover, etc.). Plus, it’s not like the Giants defense wasn’t formidable. To me, it’s a tough call.

If you can guarantee me one minute, then I take the FG.

And maybe that’s what BB was going for.

Yeah. NE called that last timeout with 1:04, and they ended up getting the ball back with 0:57 left.

“Does everyone agree that Bradshaw should have fell at the one yard line, instead of going in for the scoring with about a minute left?”

That’s really a decision that should be made on the sideline. Apparently nobody even raised the issue until Eli yelled out something after Bradshaw had already taken the hand off . . . by the time it clicked in his brain his momentum was already carrying him into the end zone.

“a fairly deeply pass to Welker (that spun Welker around)”

Brady was throwing to his back shoulder there because if he throws to Welker’s other side, he’s running him into the safety that was closer on the route (I think it was Phillips), and he gets Welker killed. It made for a tough catch, but Welker is expected to make that adjustment in that system. Brady didn’t have a great game, but clearly the shoulder was bothering him after that one hit, and clearly he missed having a functional Gronk out there. Hernandez had only 8 catches on 14 targets, Branch only 3 on 6—NE needed those two guys to have big games if they were going to win. The Giants were able to disrupt the precision of the Pats’ offense just enough to keep that from happening.

The Patriots have some receiver shopping to do in the off-season.

The Pats don’t need any receivers. They have one of the best cores in the league. They just didn’t rise to the occasion this weekend.

Is Eli better than Peyton? He has more upside now, that’s for sure. Peyton is a surgical technician that Eli will never be. But Eli’s game is effortless. Smooth as silk. And he’s a cold-blooded assassin when the game is on the line. I like that. He’s in the prime of his career and it seems like he’s only getting better. Eli won’t match Peyton’s numbers, but I’d be able to call him better if he wins another title and plays at a high level for longer than Peyton did. Tough call. This is why I use Super Bowls as an arbiter. At the end of the day, I like winning. I like it much more than unsubstantiated discussion and fancy numbers.

“The Pats don’t need any receivers.”

They definitively need someone that can go over the top. The difference between the Pats late game drive and the Giants was Manningham could get behind the corner, even if only by a foot. The Pats didn’t really have anyone that could get behind any d-backs all year.

“The Pats don’t need any receivers. They have one of the best cores in the league. They just didn’t rise to the occasion this weekend.”

They have two excellent tight ends and one excellent inside route runner—Welker—who’s a free agent and they’ll have to resign if he’s going to back next year. Deion Branch is a less-good version of the same type of inside route possession receiver—his chief value to the Pats is that his drop percentage is historically pretty low (Welker’s drop rate has risen sharply over the last couple of seasons). After that it’s a hodgepodge.

Even if both of those guys are back next year, they still need a receiver who can stretch defenses (and maybe even get open) running go routes and post routes between the numbers and the sideline. That’s (presumably) what they signed Ocho for, and that didn’t work out, so they’ve had to try to do that with Hernandez all season this year, which has been somewhat effective because of good coaching and Hernandez’s exception athletic ability, but you don’t really want to rely on that against playoff-caliber competition.

Brady was throwing to his back shoulder there because if he throws to Welker’s other side, he’s running him into the safety that was closer on the route (I think it was Phillips), and he gets Welker killed.

You could be right, but at the time, that’s not the impression I got. (The safety didn’t seem close enough.)

The Patriots have some receiver shopping to do in the off-season.

I’m more in agreement with Bobby on this. Was the Patriot offense the reason they lost the game? Is it a problem? That’s not my impression. If I were a Patriot fan, I’d prefer they get better players on defense. Yes, a deep threat would be nice, but I’d want a stronger defense (although it was good enough in the playoffs).

@Bobby

This is why I use Super Bowls as an arbiter. At the end of the day, I like winning. I like it much more than unsubstantiated discussion and fancy numbers.

But if Superbowl victories are the arbiter than Eli is better than Peyton—or Trent Dilfer is better than Dan Marino or Jim Kelly. That’s completely unpersuasive to me.

In order for Eli to surpass Peyton, in my mind, he’s going to have to play this way for another four or five years, go to a Superbowl or two and play really well—especially in these big games. He doesn’t necessarily have to win a Superbowl, but if he plays in a Superbowl and plays well, I might consider him. He has to sustain really good play and play really well in big moments/games.

I didn’t say THE arbiter, I said AN arbiter! Marino is an exception to the rule. He’s usually the only one people can roll out in defense. I don’t consider Kelly to be among the best who ever laced up. Then again, he’s in the Hall, right? There you have it. It all depends.

Eli has already been to as many Super Bowls as Peyton and he’s undefeated in them. This year he was the king of big moments and big games. Needless to say, his two rings (both won at the last minute) attest to all that needs to be said on that front. I think he’s getting better and will be great for another 5 years or more. He’s really close to being as good as his big brother.

“I’m more in agreement with Bobby on this. Was the Patriot offense the reason they lost the game? Is it a problem? That’s not my impression. If I were a Patriot fan, I’d prefer they get better players on defense. Yes, a deep threat would be nice, but I’d want a stronger defense (although it was good enough in the playoffs).”

Well, let’s look at Brady’s number in the playoffs.
75-111 (67.8) 878 yards 8 touchdowns (9 total)/4 interceptions 7.91 Y/A
104.1 Rat

Now, outside of the Broncos game, against actual playoff competition Brady was:
49-75 (65.3) 515 yards 2 touchdowns (3 total)/3 interceptions 6.87 Y/A
77.4 Rat

From what I see that core doesn’t stack up against defenses that have truly disruptive forces at skill positions and the reason seems to be there is no one over the top. If Ed Reed has to play five yards further back at the snap every single play in Baltimore I seriously doubt Brady leaves that game with a 55 passer rating.

The have four picks in the first two rounds of draft so merely because they draft a burner, or trade for one doesn’t mean they can’t still draft for defense. And I say this as a man that roots against the Patriots every year.

I didn’t say THE arbiter, I said AN arbiter!

OK, but you often sound like winning Superbowls is the most important criterion.

This year he was the king of big moments and big games.

The key phrase is “this year.” He needs to sustain that for several more years, imo.

Needless to say, his two rings (both won at the last minute) attest to all that needs to be said on that front.

You really credit him for his last minute peformance in the first Superbowl? He threw the ball right at Ashante Samuel—and if Samuel doesn’t drop the ball, the game’s over. Then there’s the fling to David Tyree—which might even be luckier than the Immaculate Reception.

I think he’s getting better and will be great for another 5 years or more. He’s really close to being as good as his big brother.

He seems to be getting better or maybe he’s peaked. In any event, if he can sustain this, play great in big moments and win or go to a couple more Superbowls, I’ll consider it.

What Peyton can do on the field is phenomenal and unique. In that way, he’s like Marino and Elway, imo. (Favre might have similar ability, and I’d consider him, too, if he didn’t throw away the ball so much.)

“He’s really close to being as good as his big brother.”

Yeah… no. How quickly we forget, huh?

Peyton:
11 of 13 years he’s thrown for 4,000+ yards.
Has never thrown fewer than 26 touchdowns in a season.
Has a career 95 passer rating.
Has a 1.93 touchdown to turnover ratio.
Has a career 7.6 Y/A average.
54,828 yards
4 MVP awards
1 Superbowl championship

Eli:
3 of 8 years he’s thrown for 4,000+ yards
Has thrown for more than 26 touchdowns in just 3 seasons.
Has an 82.1 career passer rating.
Has a 1.18 touchdown to turnover ratio.
Has a career 7.0 Y/A average
27,579 yards
0 MVPs
2 Superbowl championships.

In fact, Peyton averages 4217.5 yards a season. As a comparison Brees averages 4204.9 yards, Marino averaged 4056.9 yards, Brady averages 3973.1 yards and Favre averaged 3805.99 yards per 16 game season (Eli averages 3646.8 yards).

In the Superbowl era there has never been a quarterback as consistent as Manning. No team has relied on a quarterback more, no team gives a quarterback more room over their offense and no quarterback has done more with less sans maybe Elway.

Eli’s two rings don’t come close, especially since he’s been mired in mediocrity for much of his time outside of 2007 and 2011. I mean it’s embarrassing to compare them, right now.

“that’s not the impression I got. (The safety didn’t seem close enough.)”

He’s only a couple of yards off him by the time the ball gets to him, and Brady had to fit that ball in between Webster (the corner, whose responsibility is basically to run Welker up into the safeties), Rolle, and Phillips. If you look at the play, the outside receiver, Branch, runs a hitch out to try to get Webster to bite on him and open up space for for Welker behind Webster between the numbers and the sideline, but Rolle jambs Welker just enough to slow him getting off the line of scrimmage just a little, and Webster gets of Branch when he sees where Brady’s going with the ball just enough to change his angle just enough to straighten Welker’s route just enough. It’s a really well-defended play (by a Giants that didn’t exactly have a steller regular season).

“Was the Patriot offense the reason they lost the game? "

I guess you could parse this a lot of different ways, but bottom line the Pats offense scored 17 points in that game. Other than the last Giants-Pats Super Bowl (in which NE scored only 14 points), you have to go all the way back to 1975 to find a Super Bowl in which 17 points was sufficient for a victory. So, to me, the short answer is yes, their offense is a significant reason the Pats lost that game. They’re running game is an ineffective afterthought, and more apropos to this discussion, their receivers had some big drops in big situations, and Brady averaged only 6.7 yards per completion.

" If I were a Patriot fan, I’d prefer they get better players on defense."

Wu is right about their draft situation. Also, they are going to have a fair amount of cap space to work with this year, and all of the following will be unrestricted free agents:

RB Kevin Faulk
RB BenJarvus Green-Ellis
WR Deion Branch
WR Matt Slater
WR Wes Welker
OL Dan Connolly
OC Dan Koppen
DE Mark Anderson
DE Andre Carter
DE Shaun Ellis
DT Gerard Warren
LB Gary Guyton
LB Niko Koutouvides
LB Tracy White
CB Nathan Jones
CB Antwaun Molden
S James Ihedigbo

. . . so the defense is likely going to look very different next season anyhow.

Here’s the kind of receiver I’d be wanting if I were a NE fan:

…but bottom line the Pats offense scored 17 points in that game.

Right, but it’s important that arguably their most effective receiver was not 100%. I didn’t really notice this, but one analyst mentioned that the Giants could give Gronk one-on-one coverage with a linebacker (The Blackburn interception is a good example of this.) I think we can agree that the offense wasn’t 100%.

I would also factor in the time of possession of the Giants—which is partly a function of the Patriot defense. They kept the ball out of the hands of Brady and the offense. A better defense might have given the Patriot more opportunities. (The fact that the Patriots couldn’t recover the three fumbles was really huge.)

They’re running game is an ineffective afterthought, and more apropos to this discussion, their receivers had some big drops in big situations…

The running game wasn’t a huge factor in this game, but I wouldn’t characterize them as an “ineffective afterthought.” I don’t think they’re a team that can just pound the ball, wear the opponent down and seal a victory. But they’re pretty effective, imo.

As for the receivers, I think that’s partly a function of the style of play (throwing the ball so much and their receivers taking hits) and the fact that Brady often didn’t throw the ball well. You can blame the receivers to some extent, but some of the throws weren’t good at all. (The one Hernandez dropped at the end was on him, though.)

Btw, I thought the Giant receivers were taking some big hits—and I thought the routes they had to run were brutal. They really impressed me—but it’s not a style I care for. Along similar lines, I’m not a fan of Kevin Gilbride (never was, really). I really don’t care for, what seems to me, predictable formations and play calling. The thing I love about the Patriot offense is that they can run and pass in almost any formation, and they really do a good job of mixing up the plays to keep the defense off balance. I didn’t think the Giants did that really well.

“I wouldn’t characterize them as an “ineffective afterthought.”

Regular season they were 24th in yds/attempt. In the post season their per attempt was 7th of the 12 playoff teams (and over the course of the postseason, they ran the ball 32 fewer times than the Giants).

“I really don’t care for, what seems to me, predictable formations and play calling.”

His offenses have worked in Houston, worked in Jacksonville, and worked in NY. The Pats offense is interesting, but it could be argued that it has too many moving parts.

I’ll take up the defense of Eli in the case against his brother, for the sake of argument. An 82 career rating isn’t much worse than a 95. The yards per is virtually identical. Eli may not have seasonal MVPs, but he has two Super Bowl MVPs. You forgot to throw regular season win percentage and postseason win percentage in the mix. Of course, I’m sure Peyton is brilliant in that statistic as well.

Peyton is a truly unique quaterback and at this moment in time he has a body of work that can’t be argued against. Before he got hurt I thought he would smash all of Favre’s records.

@Matt

Thanks for showing me the clip of the Welker drop. Re-watching it, I was going to side with your take, but watching it a few more times, I think my original reading stands. The most compelling argument you gave was that Brady tried to protect Welker from Phillips—and the sideline area is more open. However, Welker’s body is positioned to catch the ball inside—and Phillips is running behind Welker trying to catch up to him—so I don’t really think Welker is in danger of taking a hard hit. Perhaps, the play was designed for the outside and Welker ran the wrong way, but it looks like he’s running inside all the way. (I also don’t think Webster and Rolle matter so much in the play. Webster bites enough to clear space and Welker gets off the line untouched.)

Regular season they were 24th in yds/attempt. In the post season their per attempt was 7th of the 12 playoff teams (and over the course of the postseason, they ran the ball 32 fewer times than the Giants).

Well, my impression was that you couldn’t just ignore the run. The running game could hurt you, if you concentrated too much on stopping the pass. (Didn’t they score twice on the ground versus the Ravens?) Also, the Patriots keep the defenses off balance with their play-calling, too. You can’t just ignore the run, and you’re not always sure when they’re going to run or pass. I think the Patriots do this better than any other team I’ve seen recently. (I used to think Weis deserved credit for this, but now I’m guessing that it’s Belichick.)

His offenses have worked in Houston, worked in Jacksonville, and worked in NY.

Well, I’m not saying it’s completely ineffective. Gruden’s offense is effective, but I’m dislike his offense. Martz has been effective, too, but, again, meh.

The Pats offense is interesting, but it could be argued that it has too many moving parts.

What do you mean by that?

If they had a deep threat it would definitely help their offense, but I don’t think they need more points. I’d prefer a stronger defense—although the defense played well in the last two games. If there were some changes on offense, I’d like to see an ability to play smash mouth football to close out games at the end.

One more thing about the Brady throw. I was going to say that I wouldn’t blame Brady as much as I did initially—still, I don’t think it’s a good throw. Btw, looking at the play yet again, it seems like Welker sits on his route at the last minute—as if to say, “put it right in this space”—anticipating that Phillips might run past him; he doesn’t look like he’s ready to catch it in stride and run with it. (If he didn’t stutter step, he could maybe turn to his left for an over-the-shoulder catch, but his stutter step prevents that.) Brady’s seems to be looking in that direction the whole time so he should see Welker’s body language. In any event, he’s clearly waiting for pass on the inside and then, at the last minute, he has to spin and jump at the same time to catch the ball. Brady’s throw is good if the play is designed to go toward the sideline, but it really doesn’t seem that way. (Welker moves a little wide to the left at the start of the play, but his body is “saying” inside all the way.)

“Welker’s body is positioned to catch the ball inside—and Phillips is running behind Welker trying to catch up to him—so I don’t really think Welker is in danger of taking a hard hit. "

When Welker gets his first gets his hand on the ball, he’s somewhere between the 23 and the 22 yard line. Phillips is actually on the 20 right on the number, with Rolle closing from behind him inside and Webster closing from behind him outside, so if he catches it on his inside shoulder, he’s going to get hit by either Rolle (if he has to reach back for the ball) or Phillips (if he doesn’t). The only way you’rte not leading him directly into a hit is the back shoulder throw which allows him to continue his downfield momentum outside toward the sideline.

“Brady’s throw is good if the play is designed to go toward the sideline, but it really doesn’t seem that way.”

You’re confusing the called play (based on pre-snap reads), with the throw the QB is trying to make (which is based on post-snap reads). Watch this.

“the running game could hurt you, if you concentrated too much on stopping the pass.”

On or near the goal line, yes, but between the 20s, not so much. Find me a back with > 120 carries this season not named Green-Ellis without a single run of 20+ yds.

“you’re not always sure when they’re going to run or pass. "

This season: 612 passing attempts, 438 rushing attempts. Was any other offense that pass heavy this year? (my guess would be that the Lions and maybe Green Bay might be the closest you get).

“it seems like Welker sits on his route at the last minute”

Yeah, basically once Brady has committed to throwing the ball that way, Welker has to commit to getting his body is position to catch the ball. If Brady had thrown in perfectly, and Welker had gotten in right position to catch the ball, he probably could have at least fallen upfield and toward the sideline and gotten a couple of additional yards without getting hit.

“Well, I’m not saying it’s completely ineffective. Gruden’s offense is effective, but I’m dislike his offense. Martz has been effective, too, but, again, meh.”

OK, yeah, I kind of agree with you then, although I liked it more this season with Cruz in the slot than I did in previous years. Give them good run blocking line and a Chuck Muncie/Earl Campbell/William Andrews-type back and I’d like it even more (though that would be true of a lot of teams these days).

“What do you mean by that?”

I think there’s a downside to using too many players in too many different ways—the Pats are splitting carries among a three back rotation of Green-Ellis, Ridley, and Woodhead, using two tight end set, relying on a YAC-based passing game—in that it can become strategically too diffuse (and I think you saw this to a degree in the Super Bowl). It’s possible to overthink football.

@Matt

The only way you’rte not leading him directly into a hit is the back shoulder throw which allows him to continue his downfield momentum outside toward the sideline.

I don’t see that. Phillips poses the biggest danger, but based on his angle and distance from Welker, I don’t think he can really unload on him. Also, Phillips angles up a bit as if he’s planning to cut him off downfield, so the hit wouldn’t come as soon as Welker caught the ball. Furthermore, I don’t think Webster or Rolle are in a position to deliver a bit hit—unless Brady really underthrows the ball, forcing Welker to either stop or move backwards.

As long as Brady isn’t leading Welker far toward the middle, Welker shouldn’t be in serious trouble.

But even though I think the throw wasn’t very good, the question is, should Welker have caught the ball? I tend to it was catchable, but it’s a little rough to blame him for not catching the ball. (I haven’t been able to watch the recent link. I’ll watch it later.)

On or near the goal line, yes, but between the 20s, not so much. Find me a back with > 120 carries this season not named Green-Ellis without a single run of 20+ yds

I agree they don’t have big runs, but it seems like they often get runs around six or seven yards. The running game isn’t a threat in terms of getting a TD, but they keep the drive going. To me, that’s sufficient.

Yeah, basically once Brady has committed to throwing the ball that way, Welker has to commit to getting his body is position to catch the ball.

But it looks like he’s waiting to catch on the inside. He then has to turn and jump to adjust.

Give them good run blocking line and a Chuck Muncie/Earl Campbell/William Andrews-type back and I’d like it even more (though that would be true of a lot of teams these days).

You don’t think Brandon Jacobs is in that mold? I haven’t watched the Giants a lot, but my sense is that the lack of running has to do with that shotgun spread formation and giving the RBs enough carries (i.e., a commitment to running the ball). Without the carries, a good RB can become mediocre.

I think there’s a downside to using too many players in too many different ways—the Pats are splitting carries among a three back rotation of Green-Ellis, Ridley, and Woodhead, using two tight end set, relying on a YAC-based passing game—in that it can become strategically too diffuse (and I think you saw this to a degree in the Super Bowl).

I can see YAC being somewhat of a concern, but I don’t think the Patriots “overthought” the game. Generally, being able to go a variety of players in a variety of ways make an offense difficult to defend. And let’s not forget that their most important weapon wasn’t 100%. Gronk not being a 100% and the Giants holding the ball for so long was really the big difference, imo.

Again, I think the Patriots rely a little too much on the scoring and not enough on a strong defense. The problem with this equation is if the opponent can sustain long drives and shorten the game.