|
AMERICA'S BEST-SELLING 
Click here for more info. KUBIAK UPDATE ROTOWORLD.COM The perfect complement
 |
» Printable version
Super Bowl XLII Previewby Aaron Schatz Super Bowl XLII is the biggest mismatch in Super Bowl history. If you have been reading Football Outsiders for the last couple of weeks, this statement will not come as a surprise. I’ve written about it a few times, both here and at ESPN.com. There’s no reason to go through all the numbers again. Nonetheless, "Biggest mismatch" does not mean "no chance at victory." Only an idiot thinks the Giants have a zero percent chance to win this game. After watching them play at a higher level over the past month, we know the odds of an upset are much better than anyone would have imagined five weeks ago. So now it is time to look at the actual matchup. What should we expect from the Patriots, and how will it be different from what we saw in that dramatic Week 17 game? If the Giants pull an upset, what will be the key? How can they take advantage of New England’s weaknesses? What has specifically changed about the Giants over their past four games — both for better and, in some cases, for worse?
For those who may be unfamiliar with the Football Outsiders stats, they are explained at the bottom of the page. Scroll down or click this link. Due to the Giants’ improvement over the past four games, we’re going to run our little stats tables for offense and defense with the Giants listed twice. One column lists their regular-season numbers. The other column lists their numbers solely from the last four games, along with where that number would rank if compared to how the other 31 teams did during the regular season. The Week 17 game against the Patriots shows up in both columns. The Patriots numbers (and Giants special teams numbers) are regular-season only; adding the postseason wouldn’t change things much. When you look at the weekly DVOA charts, remember that defensive DVOA gets better as it gets lower — so on the two defensive charts, the better games are the ones on the bottom. Football Outsiders tracks so many stats that I can guarantee I missed something. Probably a few things. Nevertheless, there is a lot of information here. Giants fans are not going to be pleased with most of it. The main focus of this website is objective analysis. The numbers simply do not favor a Giants victory. There is no way around this. (Our game charting statistics are a bit subjective, so I went and checked: 13 different people charted Giants games this year, and 14 different people charted Patriots games.) In an effort to keep the discussion of this game civilized and intelligent, I will make this request: Before you post a comment, go back and re-read the section you want to discuss. This time, wherever the Patriots are mentioned, imagine that the team going for a perfect season is actually the Jacksonville Jaguars. When the Giants are mentioned, imagine that we are instead talking about the Arizona Cardinals. If you still feel the same way about the game, go ahead and post. If you want to talk about the Super Bowl during the game, make sure to visit our Open Game Discussion Board. WHEN THE GIANTS HAVE THE BALL
How did the New York Giants go from a mediocre wild card team to NFC Champions in the space of four weeks? The answer is actually quite simple. The Giants aren’t any better stopping the pass, and they’ve only improved slightly against the run. Their ground game is actually gaining fewer yards per carry. The difference is almost entirely the passing game, especially the performance of quarterback Eli Manning. Starting with the final regular-season game against New England, Manning has been dramatically more accurate. In his first 15 games, he completed just 55 percent of his passes; in the last four games, his completion rate is 64 percent. During the regular season, he led the league in interceptions. In three playoff games, he has not thrown a single one. Conventional wisdom says that Manning has improved by "taking what the defense gives him," rather than trying to force the big play when it isn’t open. That’s true, somewhat, but don’t confuse "taking what the offense gives him" with "dumping the ball underneath." Manning is throwing more midrange passes, and fewer short ones.
Because of the increased consistency, with more midrange passes and no interceptions, Manning is having more success, even when he isn’t gaining as many yards per pass. Through Week 16, for example, the Giants were averaging 6.5 net yards per pass on first down, with a passing DVOA of -0.7%. Over the last four games, they are averaging just 5.4 net yards per pass, but their passing DVOA is 30.7%. Giants offensive coordinator Kevin Gilbride is also calling fewer deep passes, and the ones he does call are of a different nature: curls and outs that sacrifice yards after catch for a higher completion percentage. Over the first 15 games, Giants receivers averaged 4.5 yards after catch on deep balls (more than 15 yards through the air). In the last four games, they’ve averaged 0.6 yards after catch.
Gilbride wants to avoid those deep, middle of the field post and seam routes against this defense in particular. The Patriots were the best defense in the NFL against passes to the "deep middle." They led the league with a 66 percent Success Rate, and allowed 8.9 yards per pass, second in the league to Arizona. The Giants offense was average on passes to the deep middle during the regular season. During the playoffs, Eli Manning has thrown only four deep middle passes, all incomplete. However, the Giants are probably going to throw more to the left side in this game, simply because of Asante Samuel. Patriots opponents threw 42 percent of passes to the left side, the highest percentage in the NFL, and only 34 percent of passes to the right, the lowest figure in the league. Ellis Hobbs is usually on the offensive left, with Samuel on the offensive right. Based on the game charting we’ve collected so far, Samuel allowed just 4.7 yards per pass, which ranked second in the league among all cornerbacks with at least 40 charted passes (behind Fred Smoot, who had a shockingly good comeback season, but that’s another issue for another time). The Giants tend to move Plaxico Burress and Amani Toomer around, rather than each receiver generally sticking to one side of the field, but it is no accident that in Week 17, Burress was on the left side more, and Toomer on the right. Ironically, the left-side passes to Burress went 1-for-5 with Manning’s only interception of the game. The three passes listed as middle or right included two touchdowns and a 52-yard bomb in the middle of the field that was 16 yards longer than any other "deep middle" completion against the Patriots this year. Manning discovered his newfound accuracy against the Patriots, but most of his success came during the first half of the game. The Giants only scored on one of their last four drives. The Patriots improved by switching to the one weakness Manning does not seem to have conquered over the last four weeks: the big blitz. Big-blitzing Manning was an important part of Minnesota’s game plan when they whipped the Giants 41-17 in Week 12, and Washington also used it to beat the Giants in Week 15. In the past four weeks, Manning has improved significantly against four or five pass rushers, but he still has problems if the defense sends six or seven. Over the last four weeks, Manning averaged 7.3 yards per play against four pass rushers and 6.2 yards per play against five, but just 4.3 yards per play against six or more.
In the first Patriots-Giants game, the Patriots sent six pass rushers only once in the first half, but six times in the second half. On those seven plays, Manning completed three passes out of six, with a sack, for a net average of 0.7 yards per play. (The last Patriots big blitz did result in a three-yard touchdown pass to Plaxico Burress, which made the game 38-35.)
We’ve gotten this far without even mentioning New York’s running game, which for most of the season would have seemed completely backwards. The Giants ranked seventh in the league in carries by running backs, and had one of the league’s top ground games during the regular season. The passing game is more interesting because of the complete turnaround over the past month; the running game has stayed pretty much the same. The Giants have actually dropped from 4.8 yards per carry to 3.7 yards per carry, but DVOA has stayed roughly the same because Giants are running more consistently, and faced harder run defenses over the past four weeks. The Giants are particularly strong running up the middle, which has often been a weakness of the Patriots defense this season, but the Giants actually don’t run up the middle that much. Only 39 percent of runs by Giants running backs were listed as middle or guard, making them just one of five teams below 40 percent. The Giants have also been very good running around both left and right end, and the Adjusted Line Yards numbers show that left end runs have a lot more success against the Patriots than right end runs do. After the Ravens nearly beat the Patriots, they told reporters that they knew they could run at their old teammate Adalius Thomas. The Adjusted Line Yards numbers suggest the Ravens are onto something, but the trick may be to seal Thomas off and run around him, not straight at him. (The Patriots are pretty good against left tackle runs.) The Patriots also may have trouble with rookie big-play threat Ahmad Bradshaw, who missed the first Patriots-Giants game with an injury. The Patriots generally had trouble with smaller, shiftier running backs this season. They gave up 124 yards to Willie Parker on just 21 carries, and 56 yards to Lorenzo Booker on eight carries. Leon Washington had that 49-yard run when the Jets trotted out the option in Week 15, and of course, it took the Patriots roughly six hours to tackle Marion Barber, even though he was trapped in his own end zone. Remember Darren Sproles two weeks ago? It is a pretty safe bet that no matter the score of this game, at some point Bradshaw will have at least one highlight-reel big run. A final note: Unlike in the NFC Championship game against Green Bay, the Giants can’t count on the New England defense to hand them tons of free yardage with penalties. The Giants and Patriots finished 27th and 28th in penalties this year, respectively. WHEN THE PATRIOTS HAVE THE BALL
There are a lot of reasons why the Giants almost beat the Patriots in the final game of the regular season, but very few of them have anything to do with defense. The greatest offense in NFL history still scored on seven of their nine drives. A good defense will take away what the offense does well, but that’s impossible with the Patriots, because they do everything well. In the playoffs, San Diego and Jacksonville concentrated on taking superstar receiver Randy Moss out of the game — but if you double-team Moss, you can’t blitz quarterback Tom Brady. If you do try to blitz Brady, you’ll leave slot receiver Wes Welker wide open. And if you just hang back to play zone, protecting against the big play, the Patriots will flip it to Kevin Faulk underneath. If they don’t feel like throwing, they can always use the running game that led the league in DVOA. Laurence Maroney finished second in the league in Success Rate and sixth in DPAR, with 5.2 yards per carry over the last five games. As I said earlier this year: Even if you get to pick your poison, it is still poison. The Giants defense needs to be worried about two trends: one that didn’t change in the playoffs, and one that did. Both trends play right into the strengths of the New England offense.
To keep the Patriots out of the red zone, the Giants have to get stops on third down against the league’s best third-down offense. But over the past four weeks, while everything else was going right for the Giants, their third-down defense deteriorated significantly. If we’re supposed to assume that Eli Manning’s dramatic improvement over the past four weeks is for real, isn’t it also reasonable to assume that Giants’ sudden problems getting off the field on third down are equally for real? This is perhaps the worst weakness that a defense can have against the New England Patriots, who converted a league-best 48 percent of third downs during the regular season and are 13-of-23 in their first two playoff games. (By the way, this logic also works in reverse: If you think that Manning’s past performance suggests that he really isn’t as accurate as he has been in the last four weeks, and eventually he’s going to have to throw another interception, then it also makes sense that the Giants defense is really nowhere near the bottom of the league on third down.) Even if the Giants can stop the Patriots on third-and-short, don’t forget that Bill Belichick is the most aggressive coach in the NFL on fourth downs. Although the NFL conversion rate on fourth down is less than 50 percent, the Patriots converted 15 of 21 opportunities this year, while the Giants defense allowed conversions on 10 of 16.
It looks like the Giants’ secondary has played much better during the postseason, but the numbers don’t really support that idea. In general, the charting stats for the Giants corners show similar Success Rates over the past four weeks, with a bit of a drop in yards allowed per pass. Even Corey Webster, that favorite whipping boy of Giants fans, did very well in (a limited sample size of) regular-season charting data.
There’s been a lot of talk on ESPN about how the Patriots linebackers and safeties need to watch out for play-action fakes by the Giants. Well, the same goes double for the Giants linebackers and safeties. Patriots average 11.1 yards per play on offense, best in the league. The Giants defense allowed 7.0 yards per play, which was league-average. Over the last four weeks, they’ve allowed 7.3 yards per play, including two huge plays: the 90-yard touchdown by Donald Driver, and the 49-yard bomb dropped by a wide-open Randy Moss. (The following play, where Moss and Brady broke the touchdown records, was not play-action.) The linebackers and safeties also need to watch out for passes to tight ends and running backs, an area of weakness for the Giants during the regular season. The Giants ranked 29th in DVOA against passes to running backs, 31st against passes to tight ends. During the regular season, the Patriots only threw to running backs on 14 percent of passes, the lowest figure in the league — but in their last three games, they’ve thrown to running backs twice as often. Over the last three games, Kevin Faulk has 21 catches (no incompletes) for 182 yards, including nine first downs. Faulk may get a couple carries too, but the Patriots’ ground game is mostly about Laurence Maroney. Actually, it is mostly about the offensive line, which ranked first in the league in Adjusted Line Yards and was missing half its players when these teams played for the first time. Starting right guard Stephen Neal, starting right tackle Nick Kaczur, and blocking tight end Kyle Brady are all healthy now, and it will make a big difference. Maroney has gained 100 yards and at least four yards per carry in four of his past five games. The only exception was the game against the Giants — partly because the Giants have a good run defense, but partly because Neal, Kaczur, and Brady were out. The Patriots run best up the middle or behind the tackles, and they run up the middle a lot more often than the Giants do: 58 percent of the time (ninth in the league). One reason why the Patriots have so many runs up the middle is that they run more draw plays than any other offense in the league. (We charted 50 during the regular season.) That could be trouble for the Giants; after all, teams usually run a draw to take advantage of an aggressive pass rush, and the Giants have the best pass rush in the NFL. Overall, the Giants ranked third in the league against runs up the middle, but they were actually below average against draws, allowing 5.9 yards per carry. (NFL average on draws was 5.2 yards per carry.) SPECIAL TEAMS
Conventional wisdom points to Domenik Hixon’s kickoff return touchdown in the first Giants-Patriots game as evidence that the Giants have the advantage on special teams. That conventional wisdom could not be more wrong. Hixon’s touchdown kept the first game close, but it was an aberration: the only kickoff the Giants returned for a touchdown all year, and the only kickoff return touchdown the Patriots allowed all year. It certainly didn’t hurt Hixon that New England’s Stephen Gostkowski had to kick off from the 15-yard line because of a celebration penalty on the preceding touchdown. If we combine Hixon’s stats from New York and Denver, the Patriots kickoff return men averaged more yards per return (25.2) than Hixon did (24.9). The Giants game was a major aberration for Gostkowski, normally one of the top two or three kickoff men in the league. For the season, Gostkowski averaged 64.5 yards per kickoff, giving the Patriots 6.2 points worth of field position compared to an average kicker. Tynes averaged just 61.8 yards per kickoff, costing the Giants 1.0 points worth of field position. (These numbers are different from the ones in the table because they assume an average return on every returnable kick, thus filtering out the coverage team.) Gostkowski averaged only 60.5 yards per kickoff against the Giants, his second-worst game of the year. He’s almost guaranteed to be better in the Super Bowl, particularly when we consider the effect of the thin Arizona air. Add a few yards onto the average Gostkowski kickoff, and Hixon has to take a touchback. Add a few yards onto the average Tynes kickoff, and you still have a kickoff that Ellis Hobbs can return. At some point, Joe Buck will assuredly mention that Giants punter Jeff Feagles holds the all-time NFL record for punts that land inside the 20-yard line, and there’s no doubt Feagles is better than the Patriots’ Chris Hanson. However, the Giants had poor punt returns all season, so neither team really has an advantage in the punting game. BIG BLUE vs. THE GHOSTS OF PATRIOTS PASTOver the past two weeks, many observers have compared the Giants and the Patriots — not this year’s Patriots, but the Patriots from six years ago. The 2001 Patriots were 14-point underdogs against the St. Louis Rams, but they slowed down the "Greatest Show on Turf" and pulled off a shocking 20-17 upset. Now the Patriots are the juggernaut with a high-scoring offense, and the Giants are the scrappy underdog trying to prove they belong on the big stage. It’s not the best comparison. The 2007 Patriots might have an offense similar to that of the 2001 Rams, but that Patriots team wasn’t coming from the same place as this Giants team. New England had the second seed in the AFC that year. They ranked 12th in DVOA, but ninth in weighted DVOA — in fact, the only AFC team with a higher weighted DVOA was Pittsburgh. The Giants did not gradually improve over the course of the season, the way the 2001 Patriots did. They actually were going through their fourth straight second-half collapse until they suddenly flipped a switch and turned it on over the last month. Another Patriots team is a better comparison for this year’s Giants: the 1985 Patriots. That was the first team in NFL history to win three road playoff games on its way to the Super Bowl, a feat the Giants duplicated this year. Like the Giants, they had to beat the top two teams in their conference, including the archrival Miami Dolphins (read: Cowboys). That team was also led by a promising but inaccurate first-round quarterback, Tony Eason. Eason threw 17 interceptions during the regular season, but just like Eli Manning, he went three straight postseason games without a turnover. Like the Giants, the 1985 Patriots were massive underdogs against one of the greatest teams in NFL history. The Chicago Bears crushed them 46-10. Eason did not compete a single pass. Most likely, the Giants won’t pull a shocking upset like the 2001 Patriots, and they won’t get blown off the field like the 1985 Patriots. (They certainly won’t be pulling Eli Manning for Anthony Wright, the way the Patriots pulled Eason for Steve Grogan.) Instead, they’ll end up like a third team from New England’s Super Bowl past: the 1996 Patriots, a good team outclassed by a great team. The Patriots kept Super Bowl XXXI close for a while, but in the end, the Green Bay Packers were simply better, and they won by two touchdowns. This year’s Patriots will probably dispatch the Giants in a similar fashion, completing their historic 19-0 season. Not definitely. Just probably. STATS EXPLAINEDDVOA (Defense-adjusted Value Over Average) breaks down each play of the season and compares it to the NFL average based on situation and opponent. You’ll find it explained further here. Since DVOA measures ability to score, a negative DVOA indicates a better defense and worse offense, and a positive DVOA indicates a better offense and worse defense. Each team is listed with DVOA for offense and defense, total along with rush and pass, and rank among the 32 teams in parentheses. (If the DVOA values are difficult to understand, it is easy to just look at the ranks.) We’ve also listed each team’s rating split by down, as well as performance in the red zone. In some cases, we’ll simplify things by referring to "success rate." This removes some of the adjustments, and just looks at how often the offense gains 45 percent of needed yards on first down, 60 percent on second down, and 100 percent on third or fourth down. SPECIAL TEAMS numbers are different; they represent value in points of extra field position gained compared to NFL average. Field goal rating represents points scored compared to average kicker at same distances. All special teams numbers are adjusted by weather and altitude; the total is then translated into DVOA so it can be compared to offense and defense. Each team also gets a chart showing their performance this year, game-by-game, according to DVOA. In addition to a line showing each game, another line shows the team’s trend for the season, using a third-power polynomial trendline. That’s fancy talk for "the curve shifts direction once or twice." Numbers from the Football Outsiders game charting project are unofficial and are missing a handful of regular season games. 204 Comments » | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Another change over the past month is that the Giants are favoring the sidelines instead of the middle of the field. The average team this year threw 35 percent of passes to the left, 25 percent to the middle, and 40 percent to the right. Giants passes were split evenly between the three directions instead (33%/33%/34%). Since Week 17, however, the Giants have thrown 34 percent of passes to the left, 25 percent to the middle, and 41 percent to the right — almost exactly the league average.
There’s one other place where the Giants’ offense hasn’t improved over the past few weeks: protecting Manning. In the first eight games of the year, the Giants had an Adjusted Sack Rate of 3.8 percent, sixth in the NFL (1.1 sacks per game). In the final eight games of the regular season, the Giants had an Adjusted Sack Rate of 6.2 percent, 18th in the NFL (2.4 sacks per game). In the playoffs, the Giants have an Adjusted Sack Rate of 6.1 percent (2.0 sacks per game). The Patriots defense ranked second in the league in 
The Patriots were the NFL’s best offense in the red zone, while the Giants had a poor red-zone defense: 23rd in DVOA against the pass, 30th against the run. This has not changed in recent weeks. New England, Tampa Bay, Dallas and Green Bay got past the Giants’ 18-yard line a total of 10 times. Eight of those drives ended in touchdowns, two in field goals. (Apparently, the way the Giants stop offenses in the red zone is to stop them right at the door to the red zone: the Patriots and Packers each kicked two field goals from the Giants’ 18- or 19-yard line.)
The Giants’ pass rush was a major reason why the Giants’ defense was so strong on third down during the regular season. The Giants
I don’t think the improved S/T play for the Giants is a total aberration. You’re not going to return kicks for TDs with Reuben Droughns.
The fact that he was the team’s primary KR for a good portion of the year is why I’m not drinking the Coughlin kool-aid. It took him that long to trust Bradshaw or to agree to activate Hixon after he was picked up on waivers?
:: Jon — 2/1/2008 @ 12:49 am
If the Giants put up a fight for two and a half quarters or so and Eli doesn’t go full-Easaon on us, I’ll be happy. Seriously.
:: Matt — 2/1/2008 @ 1:44 am
Some observations:
1. I am not aware if weather will influence the SB but it did play its part in the Week 17 game. Thus, i expect a significantly higher possibility of touchback on kick-off from SG in this game
2. While it is great that we have stat evidence that Eli Manning is the major factor for the turnaround in Giants’ fortunes, therein lies the major issue for the team. Usually QBs don’t do that well when they face BB & pats, the second time around esp. in the playoffs (I would love if someone can pull together the DPAR ratings) and that might really make this a non-contest
Disclosure: Musings of a Pats fan!
:: Kalyan — 2/1/2008 @ 4:34 am
Good writeup. I predict there will be less heat in this thread than in the “Giants are the worst team…” thread; the difference in tone of the two articles is pretty stark, even if the message is close to being the same.
:: Gerry — 2/1/2008 @ 7:47 am
No, I don’t think you have missed anything. Very complete, very well-presented. Thank you.
:: ammek — 2/1/2008 @ 8:00 am
The “Jacksonville Jaguars” are definitely going to kill that over hyped and over rated team from NY - the “Arizona Cardinals”.
Best wishes “Arizona Cardinals”!
:: JFP — 2/1/2008 @ 9:01 am
Another reason 2001 Pats/2007 Jints comparison is bogus: Bill Belichick is not Mike Martz.
Ever since that game there have been numerous reports that Rams players were telling Martz the run was there for the taking, even to the point of pleading with him to change up the offense. No go.
I refuse to believe Belichick would be that unbending and unadjusting.
:: PatsFan — 2/1/2008 @ 9:02 am
I can’t get past imagining the Arizona Cardinals in the Super Bowl.
:: billsfan — 2/1/2008 @ 9:03 am
Yeah — definitely a better chance of having the superbowl in arizona, than arizona in the superbowl.
:: Jets Fan — 2/1/2008 @ 9:11 am
Re: #3
I was in personal attendance on 12/29 and there is no way the weather affected that game in the slightest. It was simply a non-issue. It was slightly chilly but there was no wind or precipitation. There were postgame quotes that Brady and Belichick agreed they had never seen Giants Stadium in such good weather conditions - talking not about the temperature but about the lack of wind or rain.
:: Steve — 2/1/2008 @ 9:52 am
I think the point about the weather (and the thin air) was that it would affect the kicking game; that, I think is pretty uncontroversial.
For a much-less scientific analysis of the effect of weather on the Pats’ passing game, click my name.
:: Teddy — 2/1/2008 @ 10:12 am
It’s certainly a notable upset if the Giants win. It’s *not* the biggest Super Bowl upset in history. The Jets over the Colts shocked the world and tipped it over, and the Colts were still shaken by it even when they won their own title two years later. The shape of the entire league was changed, arguably, by that game.
:: mush — 2/1/2008 @ 10:21 am
Let’s go Pats.
:: Nicky P — 2/1/2008 @ 10:47 am
“It’s certainly a notable upset if the Giants win. It’s *not* the biggest Super Bowl upset in history.”
It looks like it to me.
“The Jets over the Colts shocked the world and tipped it over, and the Colts were still shaken by it even when they won their own title two years later. The shape of the entire league was changed, arguably, by that game.”
I know that was shocking because there was a perception that the NFL was a much better league at that point, but if you look at the two teams’ relative performances on the year, there’s nowhere near the seasonal performance disparity that you see in this game. By almost any metric, this is the biggest mismatch in Super Bowl history. The biggest winning percentage difference, the biggest pythagorean winning percentage difference, the biggest point differential difference - on paper, these two teams are, based on the regular season, on difference levels.
None of which means that the Giants can’t win, because they could. But it’s a huge mismatch, and would be, I think, the biggest upset in the history of the Super Bowl.
:: lyford — 2/1/2008 @ 10:51 am
Two posts of thoughts, here is the first:
* People are tripping over themselves looking to break out all the historical comparisons for this SB matchup. As I have said before, the team that I think they most resemble is the 2003 Panthers, which is promising for NY because that team maintained their play through the SB.
The games that I have heard many compare this matchup to are the Buffalo/NY game in 1990 and NE’s first SB. Both paired efficient, tough defensive teams against unstoppable offensive juggernauts that also had some playmakers on defense. Myself, I can totally see the comparison, with the exception of one major detail.
Bill Belichick is on the wrong sideline.
BB was prominantly involved in taking down both of those offensive giants. Coughlin is a fine coach and I’m sure that his staff is full of competent guys as well. But I have little doubt that if you took BB off of either prior underdog the favorite’s chances of winning would have improved greatly. Then, go one step further and add Bill to the favorite…..
* By now we all know that NY’s approach to the first NE game was a major catalyst in their playoff run. Obviously they derived significant benefit from that game.
However, I have a different take on that, now that the teams are facing off once again. I personally believe that the earlier matchup was actually NY’s best played game in their last month; better than the GB game, better than the TB game and most certainly better than the Dallas game. Anecdotally, I have noticed that when one team plays at their highest level against an oppenent, it is a major advantage to that opponent if they face each other again.
Some examples of this are Pitt/NE on Halloween of 2004, Indy/Pitt the following year, NE/SD this year. I’m sure you could easily find examples disproving this, but it seems to have played out how I expected it when I notice it. I just think that NE has an edge in the fact that they saw NY’s best up close while NY saw NE at about a C+ level.
* Piggybacking on the previous though and similar to last year’s Indy playoff game, NE has the advantage of not being surprised by NY’s improved play. Just like I thought last year that some teams were surprised by Indy’s improved D and failed to make adjustments, I think that NY’s playoff opponents - TB and Dallas, anyway - may have been caught offguard by NY’s elevated play. NE will have the benefit of both better persepective and 4 games of film.
:: Oswlek — 2/1/2008 @ 10:54 am
In the Super Bowl III discussion (and this came up in the Conference Championship Audibles), we may be quibbling over the difference between “upset” and “mismatch”. Colts-Jets was never a mismatch; it was an upset because of the long-held belief that AFL talent was inferior to NFL talent. In truth, and as people like Vince Lombardi who had studied both leagues knew, it was more that the ‘66 and ‘67 Packers that won Super Bowls I and II were just better than everybody else in any league. The Jets were a fundamentally sound team based far more on rushing and defense then they were given credit for. I don’t know what DVOA would have said about the Colts and Jets in early 1969, but I suspect the numbers would not have pointed to a mismatch at all.
:: Doug Farrar — 2/1/2008 @ 10:55 am
Second Post
(first, a word of disclosure, I predicted NE to beat Jax 41-17 and SD 35-24. Obviously I am not on the best run right now, so take everything I say with a huge grain of salt. Although, in fairness to me, NE likely beats Jax by that type of score if Gost hits the FG ans Welker holds on to the ball. And how was I supposed to know that Brady was sick? Bah!)
No matter what excuses I or any Pats fan wants to toss in Eli’s direction, he most certainly has improved his play greatly in the last month. In my opinion he has to thank the boys up front for much of his success. Ever since the last NE game, NY’s OL has given Manning tons of time to throw the ball and he has stepped up as a result. Even when flushed from the pocket, Eli has made some terrific plays on the run, particularly to his right.
However, I still have some questions about him. Against GB, Manning rarely had to look in any direction aside from Burress who dominated Al Harris. Burress was awesome in that game, catching 11 of 13 passes - 11 catches being one more than the entire rest of the team.
Now, obviously Burress’ catches count, but I found it interesting that Manning was 11/13 for 154 yards throwing to Burress and 10/27 for 100 yards throwing to everyone else. When Dallas took Burress away the week before, Manning had OK numbers, but the offense was clearly not as much of a threat. This leads me to believe that Eli isn’t quite at the level that people are making him out to be. The key for NE will be limiting Burress’ touches while getting enough pressure to make Manning hurry through his secondary reads.
* Another Eli thing I noticed while rewatching some games: He still seems to lose grasp on the specific situation at hand sometimes. I will give you two examples. First, NY’s final TD drive against NE was markedly slow with Manning taking several seconds off the clock unnecessarily prior to every snap. There were three plays on the drive - none of which being longer than 12 yards - that at least 30 seconds ran off the clock before the next snap. Another 7 yard pass saw them take 26 seconds off before the next snap.
Against GB, after Plax dropped a perfect throw by Manning at the two yard line, Manning scrambled for a 2 yard gain despite the team being out of timeouts. He then failed to even throw the ball on 4th down despite having about 7 seconds to do so. Sure the coverage was good and sure GB made Manning move in the pocket, but it is 4th down with only 5 seconds left. The odds of a pick being returned for a TD - the only negative in that situation as any return into NY territory would also run out the clock - are infintesimal compared to the chances that a receiver would make a play.
Long story short, Manning will play well if NY’s OL gives him the same time they have in the last month. He will play great if that happens combined with Burress being open repeatedly. But if NE can get even decent pressure while minimizing Burress’ opportunities, I think that Eli could take a step back.
* Rewatching the GB game surprised me in another way - the Packers played a lousy game. They never gave Harris any help despite it being obvious early that he had no chance against Plax. Their DL was largely dominated by NY’s OL (which I credit NY more than blame GB). Favre was pretty terrible despite getting good time on most plays. Every time the defense made a play they would also commit an unnecessary penalty giving NY more chances. NY also recovered 4 of their 5 fumbles. I originally walked away from the game thinking that NY gave an impressive beatdown to a good team. The second time gave me a different impression. I can’t see them playing like that against NE and even staying competitive.
* A few times this season, I have been taken aback by something a player or coach said. For instance, when BB said, “On Sunday, that’s when we’ll make our statement” prior to the first SD game, I knew that they were going to kill them. I’m getting the same feeling now watching the Giants trip all over themselves to convice everyone that they deserve to be here and they can beat NE while nothing comes from NE’s locker room. We don’t even hear a “Let them say what they want, we’re gonna do our talking on the field.” Just a giddy Bill Belichick smiling and laughing at the podium. I can’t explain it, but I can sense a tremendous amount of confidence from their behavior.
* More on the Carolina comparison, I think this gives me more confidence. Yes, the game was very close with the Cats even having a late lead in the game, but NE really dominated that game early and blew some of their chances. In the first half, they missed two easy FGs and had another makable FG taken away by a stupid, stupid play call (the end around on 3rd and 3). Add to that the lousy squib kick that lead to Carolina’s half-ending FG and NE really outplayed Carolina to the tune of a 23-7 score but went in at halftime only up 14-10. I still maintain that if that game was played 100 times, Carolina would have won 10, played a close game 25 times and would have been blown out 65.
Obviously, by that same token, Carolina did play it close which means that the opposite point can be made as well. I just think that this NE team is much better and won’t blow so many opportunites.
* For all the talk about about NY’s defense in the playoffs, I thought they played a better game against NE than they did GB. They were consistently in Brady’s face and I thought that they played the run as well against NE as they did against GB - GB just inexplicably stopped running even though the game was close throughout. I thought GB showed signs of success running in the second half, but maybe I was wrong.
Anyway, NY played as well defensively against NE before as they have in the playoffs, but they still gave up 38 points despite NE missing their right side of the line, Kyle Brady and not having a 3TE package available. Even if NY plays better, I find it hard seeing NY holding NE under 30 points in a dome.
Further along this line, NY allowed NE to score on 7 of 9 real possessions. Along with this, NE’s shortest first half TOP drive was equal to NY’s longest. The kept it close for as long as they did because they kept NE out of the EZ in the first half and the KO return. But the signs of NE’s 22-0 run in the second half were there early on.
* In conclusion, I just think that NE is too strong for the Giants. I see a full circle conlusion of a 38-14 win against a NY team. As always, I welcome your thoughts.
:: Oswlek — 2/1/2008 @ 11:01 am
Can’t get away from New England fatalism. Regardless of what all the numbers say (sorry guys), I just can’t see the Pats walking away with this one. So I guess (because of the numbers) I won’t be super-surprised if they do walk away with it, but I personally expect it’s going to be a nailbiter.
The one thing that would surprise me is if Jersey/A blows out NE.
:: PatsFan — 2/1/2008 @ 11:19 am
Despite the 21-12 score against the Chargers, it still seems to me that by far the best chance to beat the Patriots is 35-31 or 37-34, and not 24-21 or 27-24. For purposes of viewing pleasure, I can only hope Coughlin has decided to be utltra-aggressive on offense. Who knows? Perhaps if Norv Turner had been, the Patriots would have been back in Boston this weekend.
:: Will Allen — 2/1/2008 @ 11:37 am
Aaron, love the analysis! One of your best pieces in recent memory!
A couple of thoughts. If Aaron is right, and the way to rattle Manning is the big blitz, expect to see a lot of Jarvis Green on Sunday, probably at the expense of Tedy Bruschi. Bruschi is still good against the run, but has tailed off in his pass rushing skill, and is a liability in coverage. Green is pretty much a one-trick pony–passable against the run but an above-average outside rusher–but if you’re going to be rushing six a lot, you’d rather be rushing with Green, Seymour, Wilfork, Warren, Vrabel, and either Seau or Thomas or Harrison, than put Bruschi on the field and be forced to rush with two of Seau/Thomas/Harrison and trust Bruschi to cover the quick read. Putting Green on the field hurts your runD a little, but probably helps a bit against Bradshaw because Green is a quick player who is better at handling speedy outside runners, whereas Bruschi is better at plugging holes up the middle for more powerful, downhill runners like Jacobs.
That being said, I don’t really expect to see a lot of big blitzes early. Even if Manning struggles against them, the big blitz only works consistently if you can keep the other team guessing. If the Patriots come out big blitzing early and often, then New York will simply switch to a max protect or something close to it, keeping seven or eight back to block and trusing the size of their WR’s, especially Burress to give them an edge over the little Patriots DB’s, especially Hobbs. If Manning sits back there with the plenty of time that seven or eight guys can give him, even with a six-man blitz, and waits for Burress to beat Hobbs, and does this three plays in a row, he’ll eventually win the matchup.
I would expect the Pats to come out more conventionally defensively, and save the big blitzes to surprise the Giants with when they are in a “must-score” situation sometime in the second half.
:: MJK — 2/1/2008 @ 11:42 am
Re:18, yes I think the biggest surprise to this SB would be the Giants winning by more than 1 score.
My prediction, as a fan of neither team, is that the score stays close, but that the Giants are still dominated everywhere EXCEPT on the scoreboard, a la the other 2 NE playoff victories.
:: Joseph — 2/1/2008 @ 11:56 am
18: Yeah, I agree. I was thinking this morning that I just don’t see this as a blowout. The 2003-04 Pats rarely blew folks out (heck, even the 20-3 win over Indy was 6-3 at halftime), and the games the last two weeks have reminded me of those kinds of Pats wins.
Although this team doesn’t have the same composition (especially on offense), its last real blowout was week 11 in Buffalo.
And, other than the 2000 Giants (and the 2002 Raiders, which were an anomaly because of the Gruden situation), Super Bowl blowouts seem to be a rarity these days.
:: patriotsgirl — 2/1/2008 @ 12:44 pm
I really feel that an Irrational Tom Brady - Eli Manning Thread would round out this preview nicely.
:: Joe T. — 2/1/2008 @ 1:08 pm
That was a great article. Among the many jaw-dropping performances of the Patriots, I remain mystified at their blitzing success. Perhaps you could do an analysis of that for us (me)? It seems that whenever they blitz they get someone running in untouched, while I see many other teams rush 6 and have them all blocked. What’s their secret?
:: Dev — 2/1/2008 @ 1:50 pm
Oswlek, it may be the 2 week layover, but I’m also smelling the blowout…or at least big points…and it’s assuming 2 things. The biggest assumption is that New England is installing a defensive plan that improves defense against the possession passing game. Defense of the possession passing game since week 12 against Philly has been very bad, and I’m assuming there is something installed to correct it - as long as it doesn’t interfere with avoiding the big play or stopping the run. Hopefully it doesn’t mean always having to rush 6, as the defensive success chart above might indicate.
The other assumption is that the O-Line, TE’s and RB’s will be better prepared against the Giants D-Line. It’s a good secondary, but I don’t see it keeping up with all of the skill personnel if Brady has 5 seconds every snap.
On the other side, of course, I do believe the Giants can win. I wouldn’t watch if I didn’t think so. If I come back here Monday after a Giants win, we will be discussing a -3 turnover +/- and 2 Giants TD’s on defense and/or special teams. To be honest, that would be the most exciting result for the general public: big turnovers, and big TD’s on defense and special teams.
Here’s me hoping for a “boring” game.
Pats, 46-24?
:: Herm? — 2/1/2008 @ 2:01 pm
Another plus for New England’s offense I thought would be mentioned (here and elsewhere) is the proficiency of Brady to Moss in early season/warm weather games that definitely trailed off as the season/weather got colder and nastier. Some of that can be attributed to teams doing more to disrupt Moss at the line and multiple coverages but it’s not like he was just seeing man to man early on. I would expect to see Tom and Randy have a productive day given the absence of those negatives.
:: Ron Holl — 2/1/2008 @ 2:08 pm
The 2007 Patriots might have an offense similar to that of the 2001 Rams, but that Patriots team wasn’t coming from the same place as this Giants team. New England had the second seed in the AFC that year. They ranked 12th in DVOA, but ninth in weighted DVOA — in fact, the only AFC team with a higher weighted DVOA was Pittsburgh. The Giants did not gradually improve over the course of the season, the way the 2001 Patriots did.
Aaron said two weeks ago that it was the biggest upset in SB history. Bigger than SB III. No one can dominate or upset like the New England Patriots. They’re the greatest team ever, and I don’t mean just in 2007.
:: azibuck — 2/1/2008 @ 2:36 pm
The Patriots only care about TEAM. And thats why they win.
Every other NFL team is filled with selfish primmadonnas who care about their stats and getting credit.
Just ask Bill Simmons.
side note: remember when Teddy Bruschi was the world’s greatest family man because he was seen playing with his kids? Isn’t he basically risking his life to be a subpar linebacker?
TEAM
:: Will — 2/1/2008 @ 2:37 pm
The opening statement:
“Super Bowl XLII is the biggest mismatch in Super Bowl history.”
is not supported by the final prediction:
“The Patriots kept Super Bowl XXXI close for a while, but in the end, the Green Bay Packers were simply better, and they won by two touchdowns. This year’s Patriots will probably dispatch the Giants in a similar fashion…”
Why not go out on a limb in support of the oepning statement with a 46-10 type prediction? We’ve certainly seen some men against boys Superbowls over the years where the game was basically over at halftime: Niners vs Chargers for example and many others.
If we really are watching the greatest-ever mismatch then surely the end result is a blowout right?
:: Keas — 2/1/2008 @ 2:52 pm
re: 30/Keas
The Patriots won’t win 46-10 because they never run up the score. They don’t care about stats. They don’t care about being cute (oh dear, there’s another unnecessary Vrabel TD catch). They only care about TEAM.
:: Will — 2/1/2008 @ 2:56 pm
Great stuff. I have a strange view of this game. I grew up in MA as a Pats fan but my Dad was an old school NYG fan from way back. So the Giants have always been my NFC team and the Pats my favorite team. I lived through a lot of bad Giants years until Simms and Joe Morris and the Wes Welker of old, Phil McConkey showed up, and saw Ray Perkins go and a guy named Parcells come into the Meadowlands.
I haven’t read any posts, just the 2 articles/writeups in here and the only thing I think I would add that is a major reason for Eli’s recent success and “accuracy”. I haven’t looked at it for sure, but I think The Giants had pretty close to a league leading dropped passes number at one point and since that final game of the season against the Pats, Eli’s WR’s have stepped up thier efforts for him, big time.
From Burress and Toomer to Steve Smith and even Kevin Boss especially in that Pats game.
:: PDoherty — 2/1/2008 @ 3:21 pm
Will, obsessing over the most idiotic angle that the mainstream media chooses to take on the Patriots is just silly and masochistic, unless you actually enjoy it for some reason. And anyway, the current media response to the pats is a lot closer to “OMG SUPERSTARS!” than to the whole team angle, which is really a storyline from yesteryear.
As for Simmons, you’re badly distorting what he writes — yes, he has a few lines of inane “they win cause they wanna win” stuff in his current column, but he also has a reasonably detailed explanation for their success involving salary caps and personnel choices that I think is reasonable.
:: Obeaast — 2/1/2008 @ 3:29 pm
#28/31 Will, I have been reading you posts here for a while and I don’t remember you being so irrationally bitter. What’s that all about? I mean come on, get over it already. The Pats are about team and not individual glory and Bruschi is not a sub par LB as part of the Pats D. As far as risking his life, he isn’t risking his life any more than Keven Everett was. The docs game him a clean bill of health and said he is fine to play football. I don’t expect unsubstantiated cheap shots on this site.
:: erik fast — 2/1/2008 @ 3:40 pm
My truthiness tells me that the Giants will win. No i can’t back it up with all these fancy “stats” and “facts”. I know in my gut and thats better than whatever numbers you make up.
Peyton Manning is the one who alerted the authorities about spygate, its part of his plan to humilate Tom Brady, he set up the trade for Randy Moss so Brady would be tempted to throw the ball around and set all these records. But he knew Brady would be ready for him in playoffs this year, after he choked away his chance last year. So he ducked him like Ric Flair in his prime, because he knew the ultimate embarrassment was not another lost to Peyton Manning thats actually commendable, he’s a superbowl champ. But to go down in front of millions and millions to his plucky- try -hard little brother, there is no way he comes back from that. The dynasty will die-nasty.
Long live the sons of Manning the Elder
Giants win
Happily Ever After
:: black — 2/1/2008 @ 3:41 pm
One thing that makes a stat analysis very difficult on the Colts and Jets in 1968 is the fact that the leagues were still separate and didn’t play crossover games - they only met in the Super Bowl. I realize this is obvious to older readers in the forum or anyone with an interest in league history, but there may be some newer fans here (or younger fans) who don’t realize this. Comparing Jets and Colts in 1968 is a slippery slope, no doubt. (I think it’s fair to assume the NFL clearly had a talent edge, it’s just a matter of how large the edge was.)
:: mush — 2/1/2008 @ 3:49 pm
Before going too far off topic, read above and count to see if it is Pats fans or anti-Pats fans trolling in this thread…
27,28,29:
How about adding some perspective? Here’s a topic:
1. What have the Giants done to become the worst team in the league on 3rd and 4th down (week’s 17-20), yet still make it to the SuperBowl? and
2. What specifically needs to be done to improve it?
:: Herm? — 2/1/2008 @ 3:57 pm
#36
The closest (popular) modern example I would consider to the comparison of AFL and NFL is American League and National League Baseball. Although there is interleague play, it is hard to get a good overall perspective, even though it was widely thought that the American League was better than the National League…Then those odds were defied when St Louis took Detroit down fairly easily.
:: Herm? — 2/1/2008 @ 4:03 pm
One nitpick…
“If we combine Hixon’s stats from New York and Denver, the Patriots kickoff return men averaged more yards per return (25.2) than Hixon did (24.9)”
I have to question the decision to combine stats from two different return teams, unless their overall performance was identical. Otherwise, Hixon’s performance as a Bronco is much less telling than his performance as a Giant.
And really, is 1 foot a statistically significant difference in average return yardage? Shouldn’t you be saying their return averages are effectively the same?
Anyways, superb article. Almost good enough to make me forget the “worst superbowl team” mail-in job from last week. ;)
:: vis — 2/1/2008 @ 4:06 pm
Oswlek,
The Pats seem to have broken their tradition of only making statements on the field…
Link in my name… Trademarking “19-0 Perfect Season” might constitute making a premature statement, no?
Otherwise, great comments as usual.
:: vis — 2/1/2008 @ 4:22 pm
Please do not feed the trolls.
They make a good discussion go south fast.
For the record, so far in this thread:
Posts off topic: 2
Posts making general, non-obnoxious comments: 8
Posts making interesting-in-depth analysis: 20
Posts by Obnoxious Anti-Pats Trolls: 4
Reasoned responses to Troll Posts: 3
Posts by Obnoxious Pats Fans: 0
Let’s keep those last three line items to an absolute minimum…
:: MJK — 2/1/2008 @ 4:26 pm
re: 34/erik
I probably am bitter. Not sure why. I love me my FO, but the string of podcasts with Simmons beat me down a little bit. CANNOT… ESCAPE… Boston Vortex of self-referentiality and fandom… I love what FO has done to cleanse football discourse from most of this garbage however, which is why I spewed my random venom in this forum.
Anyway, its all good, and this is probably verging on thread jacking.
As for Bruschi/Everett… I don’t quite see them as total parallels. Bruschi was an older player, was much more financially secure, had a growing family. Moreover, I haven’t heard that KE is going to be returning to the game, either. As for the health reports and clearances to play… eh, I tend to think their meaningless. So who knows, maybe its all nothing. Perhaps we’re as far apart on this subject as Wes Welker’s eyes.
:: Will — 2/1/2008 @ 4:31 pm
Dev,
I haven’t done a detailed analysis of how the Patriots blitz, but I do watch a lot of Patriots. It seems like some of their blitzing success comes from the fact that they don’t always do it. Blitzing works best when you surprise the other team–when you see a blitz get picked up it’s usually because the other team saw it coming.
There’s two other factors contributing to the Pats blitzing success–one is that the play a 3-4, which makes blitzing more effective in general, because the O-line doesn’t know who’s coming even in a standard rush, and when you add a blitzer the blocking assignments become really confused.
The other factor is that the Pats this season have had Rodney Harrison playing essentially as a hybrid S/LB, so he’s far more involved in the pass rush than he’s ever been, and they’ve been playing Vrabel, their best pass rusher, exclusively on the outside this year, and rushing him almost every down. This is a change from previous years and could account for some of their blitzing success.
All that said, I have seen plenty of times when the Pats do blitz and get picked up, and then the opposing QB finds an uncovered TE or slot receiver over the deep middle. Their pass rush is reasonably effective (FO numbers think so, at least), but it is mortal.
:: MJK — 2/1/2008 @ 4:32 pm
Will,
I just finished reading Bruschi’s book Never Give Up and it talks a lot about his decision to come back and play. From what I understand, he had to go to multiple independent doctors, all of whom agreed that he was no more at risk than any other player–there was zero chance of the stroke happening again after his surgery. In fact, he’s safer playing now than before his stroke, because that hole in his heart could have caused a stroke at any time in his career, and it was only luck that his stroke wasn’t more debilitating or fatal than it was. Now that the hole in his heart has been repaired, he’s actually less likely to have a stroke and die playing.
:: MJK — 2/1/2008 @ 4:36 pm
This thread is not about Spygate. Please do not post about it. We’re done discussing it. I’ve deleted those posts.
:: Aaron Schatz — 2/1/2008 @ 4:52 pm
Ah — looks like Spygate stuff has been ruled threadjacking and is being sent to the bitbucket (which is not unreasonable) — the post count has dropped from 45 to 43 in the past two minutes. So watch those “Re:” numbers :)
Back to the game…
I’m sorry its not incisive analysis, but I really don’t know what to expect from the Pats D. I do think the O should be able to hang 30+ on the G-Men (they did it under worse conditions, with the right side of the OL and two TEs missing, back in December). But while the Pats D has seemingly tightened up in the red zone (and of course Belichick would call it the “red area” just to sound less cool :), I say (like the FO people say about Eli) “look at the whole body of work”. And the whole body of work for Pats redzone defense this year is pretty damned poor.
:: PatsFan — 2/1/2008 @ 5:02 pm
re: MJK
Point taken. Thread-jacking over.
Eli regression versus third-down defense regression. A nation waits.
:: Will — 2/1/2008 @ 5:30 pm
If the SBIII upset factor was inflated by a general perception of the Jets facing weaker competition, and DVOA on this match up is based on better-supported opponent adjustments, then it’s probably a well supported case to say the Giants winning would be a bigger upset.
But I’d love to see the DVOA for the AFL/NFL in 1969 to be sure. Maybe we’d all be surprised.
:: Jacob Stevens — 2/1/2008 @ 6:02 pm
Emphasizing Doug’s point that “upset” is not the same as “mismatch”, the second-biggest Superbowl surprise (after III) was when the Broncos beat Green Bay in XXXII. Yet DVOA had both teams about level. Punters were blinded by irrelevant stats like the NFC’s long win streak and the fact that Denver was a wildcard.
But even so, for an underdog to win, the favorite has to make dumb mistakes. Linked is a fascinating article about the Packers’ meltdown during that game; much has also been written about Mike Martz’s obstinacy in XXXVI (though I’ve never read much criticism of Don Shula’s tactics in III or Bud Grant’s in IV).
This is why the upset feels unlikely in 2008. If one of the coaches is going to do something dumb, go to the corner if you think it will be Belichick.
:: ammek — 2/1/2008 @ 6:40 pm
“But I’d love to see the DVOA for the AFL/NFL in 1969 to be sure. Maybe we’d all be surprised.”
Without inter-league games, I doubt it could even be meaningfully calculated.
:: Gerry — 2/1/2008 @ 7:07 pm
Nice article, Aaron. And ammek, that Packers article was interesting too.
:: CaffeineMan — 2/1/2008 @ 7:42 pm
Super Bowl III is primarily seen as an upset because of the fact that people at the time believed the NFL was far superior to the AFL. However, it is also true that from a numerical standpoint — based on the limited data we have — Super Bowl III was a mismatch. The Jets were 11-3 (10.1 Pythagorean) while the Colts were 13-1 (12.9 Pythagorean). However, the fact that the two leagues did not play each other means doing a comparison isn’t entirely accurate.
What’s strange is that three of the four AFL-NFL Super Bowls were won by the “inferior” team, if we look only at win-loss record or Pythagorean wins. It is pretty easy to imagine that people saw 9-4-1 (10.5) Green Bay beating 13-1 (11.7) Oakland in Super Bowl II and said “Wow, the NFL is far better than the AFL.” But clearly that was not the case, because Super Bowl III was not an aberration. The AFL also won Super Bowl IV when Kansas City (11-3, 11.8) beat Minnesota (12-2, 12.9). Overall, those first four Super Bowls are pretty hard to judge.
:: Aaron Schatz — 2/1/2008 @ 7:46 pm
The best evidence that we have regarding the AFL vs NFL of the late 1960’s is to look at the games between those two groups of teams in 1970, the year the merger was completed.
The old AFL teams went a composite 19-39-2 against the old NFL teams, and an additional 0-2 in the playoffs. (Note: this is not the same record as the AFC vs NFC. This counts the Colts, Steelers, and Browns as old NFL teams.)
Using this one could estimate that a 7-7 AFL team could be expected to go 4-9-1 in the NFL, or that a 7-7 NFL team might go 9-4-1 in the AFL.
This would imply that the SBIII Jets probably would have had an over .500 record in the NFL, but that 11-3 inflates their record considerably. Perhaps 9-5 might be more like it. (This assumes a roughly similar quality ratio in 1968 as in 1970.)
:: Boston Bulldog — 2/1/2008 @ 8:10 pm
#52 Boston:
Interesting thought, but your numbers only work if the talent level is evenly distributed between strong and weak teams in each league.
Consider a league with a pair of great A+ teams and an assortment of D- teams VS another league with three A- and a bunch of B+ teams. League two is much stronger overall, but their top team “should” be a SB underdog.
On a whole different note: One of the biggest SB surprises for me was the Oakland win over the Hogs from DC. Apparently, RaiderJoe forgot to tell his boys that they were outclassed, because that game was very onesided in the opposite direction from my expectations.
Enjoy the game folks.
:: Thinker — 2/1/2008 @ 9:00 pm
Big Giants fan, not expecting much on Sunday… will say this, though, since I haven’t seen anyone else say it: the slowing down of the Giants running game in the playoffs seems to me due largely to the fact that Jacobs has looked noticeably slower since around week 14. I’m hoping the week off has helped him.
:: Doughboy — 2/1/2008 @ 9:07 pm
The dissection of Eli Manning’s improved accuracy was excellent, but I’m shocked that FO would carry over an error that I’ve seen elsewhere:
“He’s almost guaranteed to be better in the Super Bowl, particularly when we consider the effect of the thin Arizona air.” The altitude of Phoenix AZ is about 1100 feet, which is almost the same as Atlanta and less than 400 feet higher than Dallas, Indy, or Nashville. Altitude affects begin to get significant at Denver (5883 feet), but the humidity and temperature at game time would have a larger affect on punting distance than any external factor
:: Vermont Refugee — 2/1/2008 @ 9:23 pm
re: Pats Blitz
I could use access to stats regarding the Patriots when they rush 5+. I’m probably wrong, but I don’t get the same feeling that they have such success when blitzing. You see Wilfork and Warren in the backfield more often than Bruschi or Thomas. I’d also attribute that to thinking they don’t blitz but for the occasional Seau run blitz and a Harrison Safety blitz, with Vrabel and Thomas (and Colvin earlier) sprinkled in here and there. I’m referring to years past when they spent entire 4th quarters of games sending the house after unprepared qb’s.
Do they blitz infrequently but successfully, or am I way off base here?
:: Herm? — 2/1/2008 @ 10:33 pm
3:
“Usually QBs don’t do that well when they face BB & pats, the second time around esp. in the playoffs (I would love if someone can pull together the DPAR ratings) and that might really make this a non-contest.”
You mean like Rivers and the Chargers 2 weeks ago? With about 8 minutes left in the 3rd quarter the Chargers had outgained the Pats by 100+ yards, scored 4 times, had forced 4 punts and 2 INTs and had given up only one long scoring drive to the World’s Greatest Offense. They did this with a coaching staff that is often denigrated on this site (Turner and Cottrell), a QB playing with a ruptured ACL, their star RB on the bench, and with their top receiver (Gates) virtually limping around the field.
Whatever gameplan the Patriots came up with for the game, the Chargers had a better one. To the Patriots credit, they made the necessary adjustments and dominated the last quarter and a half.
Secondly, I think this sells Belichick short. I don’t believe he needs a “live look” in order to come up with an effective game plan against the Giants. It will help him, but does anyone think the Giants would be better off if Week 17’s game had never been played because Belichick won’t know how to defend Eli and the Giants?
:: DoubleB — 2/1/2008 @ 10:35 pm
“Usually QBs don’t do that well when they face BB & pats, the second time around esp. in the playoffs (I would love if someone can pull together the DPAR ratings) and that might really make this a non-contest.”
Yet again, most QBs he faces a second time are opponents within the division. JP Losman, Drew Bledsoe, Chad Pennington, Kellen Clemens, Brooks Bollinger, the Dolphins’ Poo Poo Platter of QBs over the past 6 years…
Not exactly the epitome of talent.
:: Kyle — 2/1/2008 @ 11:10 pm
In case anybody’s wondering what your favorite authors are predicting for the weekend, see the link.
:: Mike — 2/2/2008 @ 12:28 am
60: Very nice.
My favorite is the Ayn Rand. It gets the tone perfectly, as Belichick lectures Coughlin:
Or Jane Austen:
Forsooth.
:: nat — 2/2/2008 @ 8:14 am
Wouldn’t the week 17 game contradict the notion this is the “biggest mismatch?”
:: Brian — 2/2/2008 @ 11:16 am
31. There were eight drops in the Packers game. They’re still the Giants. Boss lost one in the end zone and Steve Smith blew a couple of chances, plus an Amani Toomer how-did-you-miss-that special.
I am not sure how much big-blitz can be brought - the Giants have had some success with Shotgun draw plays and while Eli can’t beat them himself I’d be curious to see what the Giants look like rushing against a blitz.
:: Matt — 2/2/2008 @ 11:43 am
arron biggest mismatch lol the pooblem with dvoa is it is a average of good and bad preformances if you used one game dvoa it would show a range of possible preformance the giants played very inconstint this season not always their “A” game also teams divisions are very diferent afc east is a joke while nfc east is very competive if you looked at single preformance this game can be very competive if giants play an “A” game remember men play this games not past numbers I think this super bowl will be a war we will be glad we saw not a mismatch
:: terry — 2/2/2008 @ 12:36 pm
Let’s try this again.
The point of this article is to discuss the Super Bowl, a game of football being played on a field on Sunday, February 3, 2008.
The only way to keep this thread as an intelligent discussion of football strategy instead of having it dissolve into name-calling and stupidity is to block threadjacking.
Trying to change this discussion into a discussion of something else is NOT APPRECIATED.
We’ll figure out some way to discuss that other thing somewhere on the site, and you will all be allowed to call each other names, swear at each other, and dissolve into unreadable garbage both pro and con. Not here, OK? Thanks.
:: Aaron Schatz — 2/2/2008 @ 12:38 pm
So now any criticism of the censorship policy gets censored.
:: Karl Cuba — 2/2/2008 @ 12:56 pm
A few thoughts, from someone that is not a fan of Belichik and the Patriots, even though you have to admit he has been one of the brightest minds in football over the past 2 decades. His defensive gameplanning prowress didn’t just start in 2001 against the Rams, but was a huge factor into the Giants and their battles vs. the 49ers as well in the 90s. I’ll admit I haven’t watched either the 2007 Pats or Giants teams too closely this season (as in re-watching games, etc).
I know it doesn’t really fit in the statistical but the thing that has stood out regarding the Patriots offense is the way they execute up and down the field. I suppose DVOA could also be seen as some type of “execution index”. They have been a pleasure and joy to watch, and one of the best executing offenses of all times. As much as I am biased against them you can’t take what they’ve done away.
I think Aaron underestimates how good the Giants are at stopping the run. If the Giants are able to stop the pass, I don’t expect the Pats to run so easily. (If, if, if, if). For me, the key to the Giants D is Pierce. I think the Giants need to blitz Pierce on every play, or do something that will play to his strengths (stopping the run). I think Pierce is the weak link for the Giants against TEs and RBs… and as Pierce goes, so will the Giants chances of winning.
I find it hard to believe that the Giants are going to execute on offense better than the Pats will. To be honest, I think Eli needs to raise his level and do something like 30-35 with 4 TDs… and Brady needs to have his random inaccurate 3 interception day (although he had that versus San Diego). For the Giants to win they need to play out of their minds, and have a little bit of luck. I hope the game is close, but everything points to blowout.
In the 2004 SB preview Aaron wrote: My belief that the Patriots will win big does not mean that a win is guaranteed. I’m guessing there’s roughly a 50 percent chance that the Patriots win this game convincingly, a 30 percent chance that they win it close, and about a 20 percent chance of a Philadelphia upset.
I have to deduce that Aaron think