Super Bowl Predictions

[why?]

Originally Posted by bronsin

The Giants coaching staff is frequently guility of tactical blunders, although so far they havnt had to pay the price for them.

The most insane one was when they fell into Bellichicks trap at the end of the SB. The one where Bradshaw fell ass first into the end zone. If they tell Eli to take three knees and kick a field goal, the Patriots get the ball back with 20 seconds left and no time outs. Instead Bellichick gets to have a time out and a minute to play with. This results in a pass into their end zone which Gronk almost catches. If he does the Giants LOSE. The Giants were lucky It took the Pats four plays to get a first down when they got the ball or there would have been more and closer heaves into the end zone.

Maybe bad tactics cost them a playoff slot this year though. Im thinking of the first Eagles game when their coach call for a fieldgoal with 10 or 15 seconds on the clock. They had time to run another play and pick up five or ten yards (the Eagles certainly would have defended the endzone from a touchdown) which would have made it a 40 yards field goal instead of a 50 yarder.

The SB blunders aren't that big a deal, but missing the playoffs is inexcusable. That highlights bad coaching and bad leadership. They have too much talent to not be in it every year.

Originally Posted by fnkngrv

Funny how the Pats haven't won a SB either since they were forced to stop recording the opponents practices.

As for my consideration of SF being finesse it is all relative to their opponent which in this case would be Balt. . Unless mistaken I haven't heard of SF being called bruisers or brawlers, etc as I have when it comes to Balt.

don't be an ass. oh wait too late.

Originally Posted by nookandcrannycar

^^^^^ This. ...and...The publishers of TD Magazine put out a soft cover book (it came out just before the playoffs started -- a few weeks ago) that featured a ranking of all 46 previous Super Bowls, basically by decisiveness of the win. One of the Patriot wins is at number #15 and the other 2 are in the high 30s. On the other hand, 3 of the 49ers 5 wins are in the top 9 on that list including the 55-10 win over Denver at #1.....and the editorial office responsible for the publication is in New York, not in California.

Oh, I am not saying the Pats were as dominant as the 49er's. The Niners didn't have to deal with the salary cap or free agency. Everything has to be taken in that context, no one will ever be as dominant as teams that played before free agency.

Originally Posted by fnkngrv

Nope...not for me anyway.

There have been plenty of games that the Vikings just crushed their opponents like back in the late 90s when they broke the point record for a season. Without spectacular plays to back up the points running it up it becomes a snoozefest to me.

As for David's comments about the last few years for the Pats and defense being an issue I will agree to a point, but personally I think that they need to get a fresh perspective in the management role and ditch B. He is nothing if not an ass and that is no coincidence.

I actually anticipate this year's bowl to be a stalemate and then just blow up with offense for both of them to lead to a decent points run on both sides of the board.

it is like you are trying to win dumbest human being in human history. If you want bad management, then your vikes is as far as you need to look. talk about a horribly run organization.