PDA

View Full Version : Damn. We Won SuperBowl.



buffyblue
06-01-2012, 02:26 AM
So many folks didn't think we could do it but Easy Eli carried the team on his back and took care of business.

We are NY Giants fans and this is such a Great Time For us.
Relax and watch as The Greatest QB in franchise history of our organization brings us another Ring or Two.

I bELIeve.

Antwuan
06-01-2012, 02:47 AM
ALL IN!!!

Bohemian
06-01-2012, 03:03 AM
So many folks didn't think we could do it but Easy Eli carried the team on his back and took care of business.

We are NY Giants fans and this is such a Great Time For us.
Relax and watch as The Greatest QB in franchise history of our organization brings us another Ring or Two.

I bELIeve.

I still remember all of those injuries to our defense during the preseason, and all of the questions about our receivers and tight ends. So much unproven talent, yet all stepped up huge. And even if I never really questioned Eli's ability to win, he definitely showed another whole level of play, all the way to the championship game. Very impressive to think about it all.

This year, the team looks in much better shape, and the core is still there from last year. It should be an interesting one... as long as we take care of the division, I am willing to accept whatever outcome manifests itself. The division is a must in my book.

ru_gmen55
06-01-2012, 03:41 AM
They did? News to me...

;P

Go Gmen!

egyptian420
06-01-2012, 05:26 AM
Amazing how fast we forget and move on....I'm happy to take this all in again

Gimaniac
06-01-2012, 07:52 AM
Just read today's article on Yahoo sports about Brady shaking off last year's SB loss and retooling, yada, yada, yada.

All I could think of was, "sure glad that's not us"

nygsb42champs
06-01-2012, 07:54 AM
I'm in.

Mercury
06-01-2012, 08:23 AM
That was sooo February. Move on already, there's a whole new season to get ready for. And we were only a 9-7 team last year. There's plenty of room for improvement. And it begins with me. I'm going to be a much better fan this year. Anyone who bad mouth's JR, TC, PF, or KG is going to get shredded this year!

ShakeNBake
06-01-2012, 11:41 AM
Yeah things definitely didn't look too hopeful before the start of the season, we needed Eli to step up big time and he came through.

miked1958
06-01-2012, 11:46 AM
ALL IN!!!I believe ---All in

G-Man67
06-01-2012, 01:13 PM
yes, good to remember this</P>


puts the marginal DBs ACLs, Nicks foot and Osi being Osi in perspective ... it's all good in Giants land</P>

MikeIsaGiant
06-01-2012, 02:40 PM
I want them to win the SB as a 8-8 team now.

That'd be fun to watch

Redeyejedi
06-01-2012, 03:32 PM
A lot of people still say its a fluke. 2 Super Bowls in 5 seasons. 1 Season with the 1 seed in the conference and the team is still an underdog . Its kind of funny .

Morehead State
06-01-2012, 04:14 PM
So many folks didn't think we could do it but Easy Eli carried the team on his back and took care of business. We are NY Giants fans and this is such a Great Time For us. Relax and watch as The Greatest QB in franchise history of our organization brings us another Ring or Two. I bELIeve.</P>


No one carried anyone on their back. Eli was great but it was a pure team effort.</P>

buffyblue
06-01-2012, 07:18 PM
The team stepped up huge but Eli Manning carried us and pulled out 4th quarter comebacks during tje regular season to keep us in it. Eli shouldered the load and carried the team through so.e tough times and injuries last season. With tje exception of Tom Brady and a healthy Peyton Manning, I don't think there is another QB in NFL that could do what Eli Manning did with us last season.

I bELIeve.

NYgiants141
06-01-2012, 07:29 PM
So many folks didn't think we could do it but Easy Eli carried the team on his back and took care of business. We are NY Giants fans and this is such a Great Time For us. Relax and watch as The Greatest QB in franchise history of our organization brings us another Ring or Two. I bELIeve.</p>


No one carried anyone on their back. Eli was great but it was a pure team effort.</p>

He kept us in it. There are many games where Eli bails out the defense...If not for these wins from Eli we would not be in the playoffs.

plc
06-01-2012, 07:58 PM
If Eli "The Elite One" stays well he will have a season of greatness.Now that may not mean a SB but he will answer all of the the people that question his ability.I am looking forward to this season and the possibility of repeating last season.Go Big Blue

bigjeep
06-01-2012, 08:08 PM
So many folks didn't think we could do it but Easy Eli carried the team on his back and took care of business.

We are NY Giants fans and this is such a Great Time For us.
Relax and watch as The Greatest QB in franchise history of our organization brings us another Ring or Two.


I bELIeve.

+10

Morehead State
06-02-2012, 09:06 AM
So many folks didn't think we could do it but Easy Eli carried the team on his back and took care of business. We are NY Giants fans and this is such a Great Time For us. Relax and watch as The Greatest QB in franchise history of our organization brings us another Ring or Two. I bELIeve.</P>


No one carried anyone on their back. Eli was great but it was a pure team effort.</P>




He kept us in it. There are many games where Eli bails out the defense...If not for these wins from Eli we would not be in the playoffs.
</P>


I've seen 4 superbowl championships. Never once has a player "carried the team on his back". We are and have always been the ultimate "team".</P>


Eli is our leader and played great throughout the playoffs. But so did many players and many units, especially our defense. We held Tom Brady to 17 points.</P>

buffyblue
06-02-2012, 02:30 PM
So many folks didn't think we could do it but Easy Eli carried the team on his back and took care of business. We are NY Giants fans and this is such a Great Time For us. Relax and watch as The Greatest QB in franchise history of our organization brings us another Ring or Two. I bELIeve.</P>


No one carried anyone on their back.* Eli was great but it was a pure team effort.</P>




He kept us in it. There are many games where Eli bails out the defense...If not for these wins from Eli we would not be in the playoffs.
</P>


I've seen 4 superbowl championships.* Never once has a player "carried the team on his back".* We are and have always been the ultimate "team".</P>


Eli is our leader and played great throughout the playoffs.* But so did many players and many units, especially our defense.* We held Tom Brady to 17 points.</P>

Our team did step up but Eli Manning still had to bail defenae out in SuperBowl. Tom Brady and New England Patriots put up 17 straight points and the drives by New England that Tom Brady engineered at the end of the seco d quarter and the start of the third were two of the greateat in SuperBowl history. After that drive to start the 2nd quarter that put New England Patriots up 17-9, our defense was deflated and exhausted. The closeup of Justin Tuck laboring for breath as he was coming off the field was telling as was the very next closeup. The next closeup was a brief one od Eli Manning talking to Kevin Gillbride and David Carr on the sidelines and he was nodding his head confidently. Subsequently, Eli Manning methodically took almost 8 minutes off the clock on the next drive as he led us downfueld for a field goal and gave our defense a much needed rest. The next drive for NY Giants Eli Manning continued to eat the clock and took us downfield for another field goal. We won time of possession 38:00-22:00 in SuperBowl XLVI. Our defenae did steo up but only after Eli Manning took that game back. Eli Manning was masterful in SuperBowl XLVI. That throw to Mario Manningham on the game winning drive was one he set up the entire game. He manipulated New England Patriots secondary and then when it was time he struck with that throw.

All praise to our entire team but there is no denying that Eli Manning carried us.

EliTE
06-02-2012, 03:38 PM
eli put the team on his back all year, no doubt about it.

Morehead State
06-03-2012, 09:45 AM
So many folks didn't think we could do it but Easy Eli carried the team on his back and took care of business. We are NY Giants fans and this is such a Great Time For us. Relax and watch as The Greatest QB in franchise history of our organization brings us another Ring or Two. I bELIeve.</P>


No one carried anyone on their back. Eli was great but it was a pure team effort.</P>




He kept us in it. There are many games where Eli bails out the defense...If not for these wins from Eli we would not be in the playoffs.
</P>


I've seen 4 superbowl championships. Never once has a player "carried the team on his back". We are and have always been the ultimate "team".</P>


Eli is our leader and played great throughout the playoffs. But so did many players and many units, especially our defense. We held Tom Brady to 17 points.</P>


Our team did step up but Eli Manning still had to bail defenae out in SuperBowl. Tom Brady and New England Patriots put up 17 straight points and the drives by New England that Tom Brady engineered at the end of the seco d quarter and the start of the third were two of the greateat in SuperBowl history. After that drive to start the 2nd quarter that put New England Patriots up 17-9, our defense was deflated and exhausted. The closeup of Justin Tuck laboring for breath as he was coming off the field was telling as was the very next closeup. The next closeup was a brief one od Eli Manning talking to Kevin Gillbride and David Carr on the sidelines and he was nodding his head confidently. Subsequently, Eli Manning methodically took almost 8 minutes off the clock on the next drive as he led us downfueld for a field goal and gave our defense a much needed rest. The next drive for NY Giants Eli Manning continued to eat the clock and took us downfield for another field goal. We won time of possession 38:00-22:00 in SuperBowl XLVI. Our defenae did steo up but only after Eli Manning took that game back. Eli Manning was masterful in SuperBowl XLVI. That throw to Mario Manningham on the game winning drive was one he set up the entire game. He manipulated New England Patriots secondary and then when it was time he struck with that throw. All praise to our entire team but there is no denying that Eli Manning carried us.</P>


Complete nonsense.</P>


This is football. And we are a TEAM.</P>

gmen0820
06-03-2012, 09:49 AM
Morehead, would you at least say that you believe a QB has never carried his team to a SB?

FearNYGiants
06-03-2012, 11:21 AM
So many folks didn't think we could do it but Easy Eli carried the team on his back and took care of business. We are NY Giants fans and this is such a Great Time For us. Relax and watch as The Greatest QB in franchise history of our organization brings us another Ring or Two. I bELIeve.</P>


No one carried anyone on their back.* Eli was great but it was a pure team effort.</P>
Made it to the Playoffs with the worst rushing attack in the league and one of the worst pass defenses. We were much better in the playoffs in both the rushing attack and pass defense, but if we didn't get there then nothing else would matter after that, so I agree the playoffs and the SB was a team effort with Eli doing his part as leader and not accepting defeat or allowing the team to, but that much Eli did not do alone..especially against the 49ers. You have to at least throw the guy a bone for the regular season though with all those crazy bad snaps throughout from Boothe and a few times Baas, most QBs would have been flat on their back and down for the count in the games where there were several bad snaps; at times Eli looked like an outfielder out there fielding the football off the ground and jumping up to catch it just to make a halfway decent play before the pressure got to him, it was pretty ridiculous.
While the receivers were exceptional Eli had his own added challenge every play from nonsense such as that along with a sub-par O-line.

EDIT: to have his best season when the O-line is worse than it has ever been by a country mile is pretty special and Eli definitely deserves any props thrown his way for that.. just please don't throw a sandwich because we don't want him picking it up and eating it off the ground; that's just disgusting.

EliTE
06-03-2012, 11:42 AM
our o line was horrible and gave up more pressures than any other team, that should say it all.

ELI PUT THE TEAM ON HIS BACK AND CARRIED THEM TO THE PLAYOFFS

i'd say around the jets game the team started to play better as a whole, and that carried to through the playoffs and the superbowl... but without eli bailing the team out over and over again and pulling wins out of his butt late in games we'd never be in position to make it into the playoffs.

so yea, eli carried the team... ignore the eli hater that still tries to discredit him to this day after being proven wrong over and over again.

FearNYGiants
06-03-2012, 12:24 PM
our o line was horrible and gave up more pressures than any other team, that should say it all.

ELI PUT THE TEAM ON HIS BACK AND CARRIED THEM TO THE PLAYOFFS

i'd say around the jets game the team started to play better as a whole, and that carried to through the playoffs and the superbowl... but without eli bailing the team out over and over again and pulling wins out of his butt late in games we'd never be in position to make it into the playoffs.

so yea, eli carried the team... ignore the eli hater that still tries to discredit him to this day after being proven wrong over and over again.You can't mean MoreHead; MoreHead is Eli's most active supporter!

EliTE
06-03-2012, 01:33 PM
my bad, i must have him confused with someone else

chasjay
06-03-2012, 07:14 PM
Morehead, would you at least say that you believe a QB has never carried his team to a SB?

Morehead is kind of in a box on this one. He's already said, in this thread, that no one player has carried the team on their back in any of the Giants' 4 SB championships - but in his heart, he believes that Phil carried the Giants on his back in SB XX1. I know it is presumptuous of me to dare to speculate about what's in Morehead's mind - and he has every right to to scold me for it. But that is just what I think - and I said it.

Morehead State
06-03-2012, 09:01 PM
So many folks didn't think we could do it but Easy Eli carried the team on his back and took care of business. We are NY Giants fans and this is such a Great Time For us. Relax and watch as The Greatest QB in franchise history of our organization brings us another Ring or Two. I bELIeve.</P>


No one carried anyone on their back. Eli was great but it was a pure team effort.</P>


Made it to the Playoffs with the worst rushing attack in the league and one of the worst pass defenses. We were much better in the playoffs in both the rushing attack and pass defense, but if we didn't get there then nothing else would matter after that, so I agree the playoffs and the SB was a team effort with Eli doing his part as leader and not accepting defeat or allowing the team to, but that much Eli did not do alone..especially against the 49ers. You have to at least throw the guy a bone for the regular season though with all those crazy bad snaps throughout from Boothe and a few times Baas, most QBs would have been flat on their back and down for the count in the games where there were several bad snaps; at times Eli looked like an outfielder out there fielding the football off the ground and jumping up to catch it just to make a halfway decent play before the pressure got to him, it was pretty ridiculous. While the receivers were exceptional Eli had his own added challenge every play from nonsense such as that along with a sub-par O-line. EDIT: to have his best season when the O-line is worse than it has ever been by a country mile is pretty special and Eli definitely deserves any props thrown his way for that.. just please don't throw a sandwich because we don't want him picking it up and eating it off the ground; that's just disgusting.</P>


Did Eli have a great season and a great playoffs? Absolutely. But this is not the question. The OP said that Eli "carried the team on his back". This I strongly disagree with.</P>


In the first playoff game, we gave up no points on defense. the only points were a safety by the Atlanta defense. </P>


In the second game we played a great offensive game and a great defensive game. The refs handed the Packers 2 TD's. Our running game, QB, pass receivers and entire defense played great.</P>


In the championship game, it was a monumental defensive struggle. 2 fumbles by the punt returner (including a ball, inadvertantly off his leg) gave us 10 points. The second fumble created by a great ST play by us.</P>


The SB was another great dfensive performance by us. 17 points to Tom Brady. And a dropped pass in the end by Welker.</P>


We earned every win. We deserved our SB. Our entire team played well in all 4 games.</P>


No one carried this team on their backs. It took outstanding performances by all facets (Offense, defense and ST's)</P>


I think its unreasonable to believe otherwise. It is this very thing that separates us from most other teams. </P>


</P>

Morehead State
06-03-2012, 09:03 PM
Morehead, would you at least say that you believe a QB has never carried his team to a SB?

Morehead is kind of in a box on this one. He's already said, in this thread, that no one player has carried the team on their back in any of the Giants' 4 SB championships - but in his heart, he believes that Phil carried the Giants on his back in SB XX1. I know it is presumptuous of me to dare to speculate about what's in Morehead's mind - and he has every right to to scold me for it. But that is just what I think - and I said it.
</P>


We were so far and away the best team in football in 86. No player, not Phil, not LT, carried that team. We imposed our will on every team we beat. We outscored our opponents by a combined score of 66-3 in the 2 NFC playoff games.</P>


I love Phil, but no way he "carried that team on his back".</P>

lawl
06-03-2012, 09:42 PM
So many folks didn't think we could do it but Easy Eli carried the team on his back and took care of business. We are NY Giants fans and this is such a Great Time For us. Relax and watch as The Greatest QB in franchise history of our organization brings us another Ring or Two. I bELIeve.</p>


No one carried anyone on their back. Eli was great but it was a pure team effort.</p>




He kept us in it. There are many games where Eli bails out the defense...If not for these wins from Eli we would not be in the playoffs.
</p>


I've seen 4 superbowl championships. Never once has a player "carried the team on his back". We are and have always been the ultimate "team".</p>


Eli is our leader and played great throughout the playoffs. But so did many players and many units, especially our defense. <font size="6">We held Tom Brady to 17 points.</font></p>


Our team did step up but Eli Manning still had to bail defenae out in SuperBowl. Tom Brady and New England Patriots put up 17 straight points and the drives by New England that Tom Brady engineered at the end of the seco d quarter and the start of the third were two of the greateat in SuperBowl history. After that drive to start the 2nd quarter that put New England Patriots up 17-9, our defense was deflated and exhausted. The closeup of Justin Tuck laboring for breath as he was coming off the field was telling as was the very next closeup. The next closeup was a brief one od Eli Manning talking to Kevin Gillbride and David Carr on the sidelines and he was nodding his head confidently. Subsequently, Eli Manning methodically took almost 8 minutes off the clock on the next drive as he led us downfueld for a field goal and gave our defense a much needed rest. The next drive for NY Giants Eli Manning continued to eat the clock and took us downfield for another field goal. We won time of possession 38:00-22:00 in SuperBowl XLVI. Our defenae did steo up but only after Eli Manning took that game back. Eli Manning was masterful in SuperBowl XLVI. That throw to Mario Manningham on the game winning drive was one he set up the entire game. He manipulated New England Patriots secondary and then when it was time he struck with that throw. All praise to our entire team but there is no denying that Eli Manning carried us.</p>


Complete nonsense.</p>


This is football. And we are a TEAM.</p>

So then how did we hold Tom Brady to 17 points? Didn't we hold the Patriots to 17 points instead?

So much nonsense going on!

Morehead State
06-03-2012, 09:46 PM
So many folks didn't think we could do it but Easy Eli carried the team on his back and took care of business. We are NY Giants fans and this is such a Great Time For us. Relax and watch as The Greatest QB in franchise history of our organization brings us another Ring or Two. I bELIeve.</P>


No one carried anyone on their back. Eli was great but it was a pure team effort.</P>




He kept us in it. There are many games where Eli bails out the defense...If not for these wins from Eli we would not be in the playoffs.
</P>


I've seen 4 superbowl championships. Never once has a player "carried the team on his back". We are and have always been the ultimate "team".</P>


Eli is our leader and played great throughout the playoffs. But so did many players and many units, especially our defense. <FONT size=6>We held Tom Brady to 17 points.</FONT></P>


Our team did step up but Eli Manning still had to bail defenae out in SuperBowl. Tom Brady and New England Patriots put up 17 straight points and the drives by New England that Tom Brady engineered at the end of the seco d quarter and the start of the third were two of the greateat in SuperBowl history. After that drive to start the 2nd quarter that put New England Patriots up 17-9, our defense was deflated and exhausted. The closeup of Justin Tuck laboring for breath as he was coming off the field was telling as was the very next closeup. The next closeup was a brief one od Eli Manning talking to Kevin Gillbride and David Carr on the sidelines and he was nodding his head confidently. Subsequently, Eli Manning methodically took almost 8 minutes off the clock on the next drive as he led us downfueld for a field goal and gave our defense a much needed rest. The next drive for NY Giants Eli Manning continued to eat the clock and took us downfield for another field goal. We won time of possession 38:00-22:00 in SuperBowl XLVI. Our defenae did steo up but only after Eli Manning took that game back. Eli Manning was masterful in SuperBowl XLVI. That throw to Mario Manningham on the game winning drive was one he set up the entire game. He manipulated New England Patriots secondary and then when it was time he struck with that throw. All praise to our entire team but there is no denying that Eli Manning carried us.</P>


Complete nonsense.</P>


This is football. And we are a TEAM.</P>




So then how did we hold Tom Brady to 17 points? Didn't we hold the Patriots to 17 points instead?

So much nonsense going on!
</P>


Tome Brady DOES carry that team. </P>


</P>


The thought police on this MB are unbelievable. I put Eli in the top 5 of NFL QB's after the season he just had. I had him barely in the top 10 after the 2010 season.</P>


But that's not enough here. You have to agree that "Eli carried our team on his back", (which denigrates the other 49 players on our beloved team) or you are branded an "Eli hater".</P>


I choose to fight oppression. I choose to fight the thought police.</P>


<FONT size=4>I choose to FIGHT THE POWER!!!!!!</FONT></P>

lawl
06-03-2012, 09:51 PM
So many folks didn't think we could do it but Easy Eli carried the team on his back and took care of business. We are NY Giants fans and this is such a Great Time For us. Relax and watch as The Greatest QB in franchise history of our organization brings us another Ring or Two. I bELIeve.</p>


No one carried anyone on their back. Eli was great but it was a pure team effort.</p>




He kept us in it. There are many games where Eli bails out the defense...If not for these wins from Eli we would not be in the playoffs.
</p>


I've seen 4 superbowl championships. Never once has a player "carried the team on his back". We are and have always been the ultimate "team".</p>


Eli is our leader and played great throughout the playoffs. But so did many players and many units, especially our defense. <font size="6">We held Tom Brady to 17 points.</font></p>


Our team did step up but Eli Manning still had to bail defenae out in SuperBowl. Tom Brady and New England Patriots put up 17 straight points and the drives by New England that Tom Brady engineered at the end of the seco d quarter and the start of the third were two of the greateat in SuperBowl history. After that drive to start the 2nd quarter that put New England Patriots up 17-9, our defense was deflated and exhausted. The closeup of Justin Tuck laboring for breath as he was coming off the field was telling as was the very next closeup. The next closeup was a brief one od Eli Manning talking to Kevin Gillbride and David Carr on the sidelines and he was nodding his head confidently. Subsequently, Eli Manning methodically took almost 8 minutes off the clock on the next drive as he led us downfueld for a field goal and gave our defense a much needed rest. The next drive for NY Giants Eli Manning continued to eat the clock and took us downfield for another field goal. We won time of possession 38:00-22:00 in SuperBowl XLVI. Our defenae did steo up but only after Eli Manning took that game back. Eli Manning was masterful in SuperBowl XLVI. That throw to Mario Manningham on the game winning drive was one he set up the entire game. He manipulated New England Patriots secondary and then when it was time he struck with that throw. All praise to our entire team but there is no denying that Eli Manning carried us.</p>


Complete nonsense.</p>


This is football. And we are a TEAM.</p>




So then how did we hold Tom Brady to 17 points? Didn't we hold the Patriots to 17 points instead?

So much nonsense going on!
</p>


Tome Brady DOES carry that team. </p>

Complete nonsense.

This is football. They are a TEAM.

He doesn't run, block and catch the ball.

Morehead State
06-03-2012, 09:55 PM
So many folks didn't think we could do it but Easy Eli carried the team on his back and took care of business. We are NY Giants fans and this is such a Great Time For us. Relax and watch as The Greatest QB in franchise history of our organization brings us another Ring or Two. I bELIeve.</P>


No one carried anyone on their back. Eli was great but it was a pure team effort.</P>




He kept us in it. There are many games where Eli bails out the defense...If not for these wins from Eli we would not be in the playoffs.
</P>


I've seen 4 superbowl championships. Never once has a player "carried the team on his back". We are and have always been the ultimate "team".</P>


Eli is our leader and played great throughout the playoffs. But so did many players and many units, especially our defense. <FONT size=6>We held Tom Brady to 17 points.</FONT></P>


Our team did step up but Eli Manning still had to bail defenae out in SuperBowl. Tom Brady and New England Patriots put up 17 straight points and the drives by New England that Tom Brady engineered at the end of the seco d quarter and the start of the third were two of the greateat in SuperBowl history. After that drive to start the 2nd quarter that put New England Patriots up 17-9, our defense was deflated and exhausted. The closeup of Justin Tuck laboring for breath as he was coming off the field was telling as was the very next closeup. The next closeup was a brief one od Eli Manning talking to Kevin Gillbride and David Carr on the sidelines and he was nodding his head confidently. Subsequently, Eli Manning methodically took almost 8 minutes off the clock on the next drive as he led us downfueld for a field goal and gave our defense a much needed rest. The next drive for NY Giants Eli Manning continued to eat the clock and took us downfield for another field goal. We won time of possession 38:00-22:00 in SuperBowl XLVI. Our defenae did steo up but only after Eli Manning took that game back. Eli Manning was masterful in SuperBowl XLVI. That throw to Mario Manningham on the game winning drive was one he set up the entire game. He manipulated New England Patriots secondary and then when it was time he struck with that throw. All praise to our entire team but there is no denying that Eli Manning carried us.</P>


Complete nonsense.</P>


This is football. And we are a TEAM.</P>




So then how did we hold Tom Brady to 17 points? Didn't we hold the Patriots to 17 points instead?

So much nonsense going on!
</P>


Tome Brady DOES carry that team. </P>




Complete nonsense.

This is football. They are a TEAM.

He doesn't run, block and catch the ball.

</P>


And they lost.</P>


Teams that lose big games sometimes don't have a complete team effort. Brady carries that team and its not enough. You want to win champiuonships, you have to play as a team. He's one of the truly great QB's of all team but the rest of the team is average at best.</P>


The Pats used to in years past.</P>

lawl
06-03-2012, 09:56 PM
</p>


The thought police on this MB are unbelievable. I put Eli in the top 5 of NFL QB's after the season he just had. I had him barely in the top 10 after the 2010 season.</p>


But that's not enough here. You have to agree that "Eli carried our team on his back", (which denigrates the other 49 players on our beloved team) or you are branded an "Eli hater".</p>


I choose to fight oppression. I choose to fight the thought police.</p>


<font size="4">I choose to FIGHT THE POWER!!!!!!</font></p>

Theres more than 50 players on a team.

Call me officer

Morehead State
06-03-2012, 09:59 PM
</P>


The thought police on this MB are unbelievable. I put Eli in the top 5 of NFL QB's after the season he just had. I had him barely in the top 10 after the 2010 season.</P>


But that's not enough here. You have to agree that "Eli carried our team on his back", (which denigrates the other 49 players on our beloved team) or you are branded an "Eli hater".</P>


I choose to fight oppression. I choose to fight the thought police.</P>


<FONT size=4>I choose to FIGHT THE POWER!!!!!!</FONT></P>




Theres more than 50 players on a team.

Call me officer


</P>


Only 50 in any given game.</P>


What you don't see my friend is that the current Pats are a lot like Dan Marino's Dolphins. A near one man team. thats why they can't beat us. When the Pats won 3 SB's, Tom Brady wasn't near the player he is now. But they had a great team.</P>


Now its Brady. And even Brady isn't enough to win SB's.</P>

lawl
06-03-2012, 09:59 PM
Complete nonsense.

This is football. They are a TEAM.

He doesn't run, block and catch the ball.

</p>


And they lost.</p>


Teams that lose big games sometimes don't have a complete team effort. Brady carries that team and its not enough. You want to win champiuonships, you have to play as a team. He's one of the truly great QB's of all team but the rest of the team is average at best.</p>


The Pats used to in years past.</p>

Teams that win bigs games sometimes dont have a complete team effort either.

You're saying a whole bunch of nothing.

lawl
06-03-2012, 10:02 PM
</p>


The thought police on this MB are unbelievable. I put Eli in the top 5 of NFL QB's after the season he just had. I had him barely in the top 10 after the 2010 season.</p>


But that's not enough here. You have to agree that "Eli carried our team on his back", (which denigrates the other 49 players on our beloved team) or you are branded an "Eli hater".</p>


I choose to fight oppression. I choose to fight the thought police.</p>


<font size="4">I choose to FIGHT THE POWER!!!!!!</font></p>




Theres more than 50 players on a team.

Call me officer


</p>


Only 50 in any given game.</p>


What you don't see my friend is that the current Pats are a lot like Dan Marino's Dolphins. A near one man team. thats why they can't beat us. When the Pats won 3 SB's, Tom Brady wasn't near the player he is now. But they had a great team.</p>


Now its Brady. And even Brady isn't enough to win SB's.</p>

Maybe he should take a pay cut so they can sign (or resign) more good players

Also, 46 players dress for gameday

Morehead State
06-03-2012, 10:04 PM
Complete nonsense.

This is football. They are a TEAM.

He doesn't run, block and catch the ball.

</P>


And they lost.</P>


Teams that lose big games sometimes don't have a complete team effort. Brady carries that team and its not enough. You want to win champiuonships, you have to play as a team. He's one of the truly great QB's of all team but the rest of the team is average at best.</P>


The Pats used to in years past.</P>




Teams that win bigs games sometimes dont have a complete team effort either.

You're saying a whole bunch of nothing.


</P>


Put it this way Lawl. We wouldn't have won a SB this year without a great performance by our defense and ST's. By definition, no player "carried this team on his back".</P>


Thats the premise of this debate. My point is also that I can't think of a single SB winner that had one player "carry the team on his back" throughout their playoff run.</P>


Ben was probably the closest in 2008 that I can remember, but even there they still had a great defense. (althought they didn't play like it in the 4th quarter of the SB)</P>

Morehead State
06-03-2012, 10:06 PM
</P>


The thought police on this MB are unbelievable. I put Eli in the top 5 of NFL QB's after the season he just had. I had him barely in the top 10 after the 2010 season.</P>


But that's not enough here. You have to agree that "Eli carried our team on his back", (which denigrates the other 49 players on our beloved team) or you are branded an "Eli hater".</P>


I choose to fight oppression. I choose to fight the thought police.</P>


<FONT size=4>I choose to FIGHT THE POWER!!!!!!</FONT></P>




Theres more than 50 players on a team.

Call me officer


</P>


Only 50 in any given game.</P>


What you don't see my friend is that the current Pats are a lot like Dan Marino's Dolphins. A near one man team. thats why they can't beat us. When the Pats won 3 SB's, Tom Brady wasn't near the player he is now. But they had a great team.</P>


Now its Brady. And even Brady isn't enough to win SB's.</P>




Maybe he should take a pay cut so they can sign (or resign) more good players

Also, 46 players dress for gameday
</P>


<FONT color=#ff0000>Oh well....that changes everything. Obviously since only 46 dress, then Eli must have carried the team on his back. You got me Lawl.</FONT></P>

lawl
06-03-2012, 10:07 PM
Complete nonsense.

This is football. They are a TEAM.

He doesn't run, block and catch the ball.

</p>


And they lost.</p>


Teams that lose big games sometimes don't have a complete team effort. Brady carries that team and its not enough. You want to win champiuonships, you have to play as a team. He's one of the truly great QB's of all team but the rest of the team is average at best.</p>


The Pats used to in years past.</p>




Teams that win bigs games sometimes dont have a complete team effort either.

You're saying a whole bunch of nothing.


</p>


Put it this way Lawl. We wouldn't have won a SB this year without a great performance by our defense and ST's. By definition, no player "carried this team on his back".</p>


Thats the premise of this debate. My point is also that I can't think of a single SB winner that had one player "carry the team on his back" throughout their playoff run.</p>


Ben was probably the closest in 2008 that I can remember, but even there they still had a great defense. (althought they didn't play like it in the 4th quarter of the SB)</p>
Right, and the Patriots wouldnt have made the SB had Molden not knocked the ball out of Lee Evans' hands.

lawl
06-03-2012, 10:08 PM
</p>


The thought police on this MB are unbelievable. I put Eli in the top 5 of NFL QB's after the season he just had. I had him barely in the top 10 after the 2010 season.</p>


But that's not enough here. You have to agree that "Eli carried our team on his back", (which denigrates the other 49 players on our beloved team) or you are branded an "Eli hater".</p>


I choose to fight oppression. I choose to fight the thought police.</p>


<font size="4">I choose to FIGHT THE POWER!!!!!!</font></p>




Theres more than 50 players on a team.

Call me officer


</p>


Only 50 in any given game.</p>


What you don't see my friend is that the current Pats are a lot like Dan Marino's Dolphins. A near one man team. thats why they can't beat us. When the Pats won 3 SB's, Tom Brady wasn't near the player he is now. But they had a great team.</p>


Now its Brady. And even Brady isn't enough to win SB's.</p>




Maybe he should take a pay cut so they can sign (or resign) more good players

Also, 46 players dress for gameday
</p>


<font color="#ff0000">Oh well....that changes everything. Obviously since only 46 dress, then Eli must have carried the team on his back. You got me Lawl.</font></p>
Learn something new every day!

Morehead State
06-03-2012, 10:08 PM
Complete nonsense.

This is football. They are a TEAM.

He doesn't run, block and catch the ball.

</P>


And they lost.</P>


Teams that lose big games sometimes don't have a complete team effort. Brady carries that team and its not enough. You want to win champiuonships, you have to play as a team. He's one of the truly great QB's of all team but the rest of the team is average at best.</P>


The Pats used to in years past.</P>




Teams that win bigs games sometimes dont have a complete team effort either.

You're saying a whole bunch of nothing.


</P>


Put it this way Lawl. We wouldn't have won a SB this year without a great performance by our defense and ST's. By definition, no player "carried this team on his back".</P>


Thats the premise of this debate. My point is also that I can't think of a single SB winner that had one player "carry the team on his back" throughout their playoff run.</P>


Ben was probably the closest in 2008 that I can remember, but even there they still had a great defense. (althought they didn't play like it in the 4th quarter of the SB)</P>



Right, and the Patriots wouldnt have made the SB had Molden not knocked the ball out of Lee Evans' hands.
</P>


Huh? Are you drunk?</P>

Morehead State
06-03-2012, 10:09 PM
</P>


The thought police on this MB are unbelievable. I put Eli in the top 5 of NFL QB's after the season he just had. I had him barely in the top 10 after the 2010 season.</P>


But that's not enough here. You have to agree that "Eli carried our team on his back", (which denigrates the other 49 players on our beloved team) or you are branded an "Eli hater".</P>


I choose to fight oppression. I choose to fight the thought police.</P>


<FONT size=4>I choose to FIGHT THE POWER!!!!!!</FONT></P>




Theres more than 50 players on a team.

Call me officer


</P>


Only 50 in any given game.</P>


What you don't see my friend is that the current Pats are a lot like Dan Marino's Dolphins. A near one man team. thats why they can't beat us. When the Pats won 3 SB's, Tom Brady wasn't near the player he is now. But they had a great team.</P>


Now its Brady. And even Brady isn't enough to win SB's.</P>




Maybe he should take a pay cut so they can sign (or resign) more good players

Also, 46 players dress for gameday
</P>


<FONT color=#ff0000>Oh well....that changes everything. Obviously since only 46 dress, then Eli must have carried the team on his back. You got me Lawl.</FONT></P>



Learn something new every day!
</P>


And BTW Lawl. The Giants only dress 45 since they don't dress a third string QB.</P>

lawl
06-03-2012, 10:10 PM
</p>


The thought police on this MB are unbelievable. I put Eli in the top 5 of NFL QB's after the season he just had. I had him barely in the top 10 after the 2010 season.</p>


But that's not enough here. You have to agree that "Eli carried our team on his back", (which denigrates the other 49 players on our beloved team) or you are branded an "Eli hater".</p>


I choose to fight oppression. I choose to fight the thought police.</p>


<font size="4">I choose to FIGHT THE POWER!!!!!!</font></p>




Theres more than 50 players on a team.

Call me officer


</p>


Only 50 in any given game.</p>


What you don't see my friend is that the current Pats are a lot like Dan Marino's Dolphins. A near one man team. thats why they can't beat us. When the Pats won 3 SB's, Tom Brady wasn't near the player he is now. But they had a great team.</p>


Now its Brady. And even Brady isn't enough to win SB's.</p>




Maybe he should take a pay cut so they can sign (or resign) more good players

Also, 46 players dress for gameday
</p>


<font color="#ff0000">Oh well....that changes everything. Obviously since only 46 dress, then Eli must have carried the team on his back. You got me Lawl.</font></p>



Learn something new every day!
</p>


And BTW Lawl. The Giants only dress 45 since they don't dress a third string QB.</p>
They got rid of that rule and bumped it to 46 players.

lawl
06-03-2012, 10:10 PM
</p>


The thought police on this MB are unbelievable. I put Eli in the top 5 of NFL QB's after the season he just had. I had him barely in the top 10 after the 2010 season.</p>


But that's not enough here. You have to agree that "Eli carried our team on his back", (which denigrates the other 49 players on our beloved team) or you are branded an "Eli hater".</p>


I choose to fight oppression. I choose to fight the thought police.</p>


<font size="4">I choose to FIGHT THE POWER!!!!!!</font></p>




Theres more than 50 players on a team.

Call me officer


</p>


Only 50 in any given game.</p>


What you don't see my friend is that the current Pats are a lot like Dan Marino's Dolphins. A near one man team. thats why they can't beat us. When the Pats won 3 SB's, Tom Brady wasn't near the player he is now. But they had a great team.</p>


Now its Brady. And even Brady isn't enough to win SB's.</p>




Maybe he should take a pay cut so they can sign (or resign) more good players

Also, 46 players dress for gameday
</p>


<font color="#ff0000">Oh well....that changes everything. Obviously since only 46 dress, then Eli must have carried the team on his back. You got me Lawl.</font></p>



Learn something new every day!
</p>


And BTW Lawl. The Giants only dress 45 since they don't dress a third string QB.</p>
They got rid of that rule and bumped it to 46 players.

Morehead State
06-03-2012, 10:11 PM
</P>


The thought police on this MB are unbelievable. I put Eli in the top 5 of NFL QB's after the season he just had. I had him barely in the top 10 after the 2010 season.</P>


But that's not enough here. You have to agree that "Eli carried our team on his back", (which denigrates the other 49 players on our beloved team) or you are branded an "Eli hater".</P>


I choose to fight oppression. I choose to fight the thought police.</P>


<FONT size=4>I choose to FIGHT THE POWER!!!!!!</FONT></P>




Theres more than 50 players on a team.

Call me officer


</P>


Only 50 in any given game.</P>


What you don't see my friend is that the current Pats are a lot like Dan Marino's Dolphins. A near one man team. thats why they can't beat us. When the Pats won 3 SB's, Tom Brady wasn't near the player he is now. But they had a great team.</P>


Now its Brady. And even Brady isn't enough to win SB's.</P>




Maybe he should take a pay cut so they can sign (or resign) more good players

Also, 46 players dress for gameday
</P>


<FONT color=#ff0000>Oh well....that changes everything. Obviously since only 46 dress, then Eli must have carried the team on his back. You got me Lawl.</FONT></P>



Learn something new every day!
</P>


And BTW Lawl. The Giants only dress 45 since they don't dress a third string QB.</P>



They got rid of that rule and bumped it to 46 players.
</P>


Do you think Eli "carried the Giants on his back"?</P>

lawl
06-03-2012, 10:24 PM
Do you think Eli "carried the Giants on his back"?</p>
In the regular season.

Didn't have to as much in the postseason

Morehead State
06-03-2012, 10:33 PM
Do you think Eli "carried the Giants on his back"?</P>



In the regular season.

Didn't have to as much in the postseason
</P>


Really?</P>


So when we were 0-4 without Michael Boley, what happened there? Why couldn't Eli single handedly win games for us? Or was Boley really more important to our defense than we thought?</P>


When Victor Cruz split defenders and turned a 10 yard pass into a 99 yard TD for the biggest play of the season, that was really all Eli and we just didn't know it.</P>


Tell me more Mr. Science!</P>

lawl
06-03-2012, 10:46 PM
Do you think Eli "carried the Giants on his back"?</p>



In the regular season.

Didn't have to as much in the postseason
</p>


Really?</p>


So when we were 0-4 without Michael Boley, what happened there? Why couldn't Eli single handedly win games for us? Or was Boley really more important to our defense than we thought?</p>


When Victor Cruz split defenders and turned a 10 yard pass into a 99 yard TD for the biggest play of the season, that was really all Eli and we just didn't know it.</p>


Tell me more Mr. Science!</p>
Why didn't Tom Brady single-handedly win every single game for his team this year?

When Gronk breaks a bunch of tackles for a TD against the Redskins that was all Brady?

Welker's 99 yd td was also all Brady?

You are full of contradictions, but please, procede.

Eli was just as important to us as Brady was to the Patriots during the regular season. You say Tom Brady carried his team.

A=B and B=C then A=C

byron
06-03-2012, 10:52 PM
man..... giveEliall the credit you want but don't discredit everybody else on the team in the process....100 million dollar QB's ought to play great football...like reaching for a bad snap once in a while , make good discissions be on target with his passes, ect....Plenty of players made great plays last year...there is a big picture to look at ....</P>

Morehead State
06-03-2012, 10:54 PM
Do you think Eli "carried the Giants on his back"?</P>



In the regular season.

Didn't have to as much in the postseason
</P>


Really?</P>


So when we were 0-4 without Michael Boley, what happened there? Why couldn't Eli single handedly win games for us? Or was Boley really more important to our defense than we thought?</P>


When Victor Cruz split defenders and turned a 10 yard pass into a 99 yard TD for the biggest play of the season, that was really all Eli and we just didn't know it.</P>


Tell me more Mr. Science!</P>



Why didn't Tom Brady single-handedly win every single game for his team this year?

When Gronk breaks a bunch of tackles for a TD against the Redskins that was all Brady?

Welker's 99 yd td was also all Brady?

You are full of contradictions, but please, procede.

Eli was just as important to us as Brady was to the Patriots during the regular season. You say Tom Brady carried his team.

A=B and B=C then A=C


</P>


Spare me Lawl. You denegrate our team and our SB win by suggesting that Eli carried the team on his back. You focus on minutia like roster size and ignore the basic premise of the debate.</P>


If you don't believe the OP when he said that he carried the team on his back to win a SB, then you are taking my position and arguing for the sake of arguing.</P>


If you believe that the New York Giants are a one man team, then you join the ranks of the "Eli thought Police".</P>


Which is it?</P>

lawl
06-03-2012, 11:01 PM
Do you think Eli "carried the Giants on his back"?</p>



In the regular season.

Didn't have to as much in the postseason
</p>


Really?</p>


So when we were 0-4 without Michael Boley, what happened there? Why couldn't Eli single handedly win games for us? Or was Boley really more important to our defense than we thought?</p>


When Victor Cruz split defenders and turned a 10 yard pass into a 99 yard TD for the biggest play of the season, that was really all Eli and we just didn't know it.</p>


Tell me more Mr. Science!</p>



Why didn't Tom Brady single-handedly win every single game for his team this year?

When Gronk breaks a bunch of tackles for a TD against the Redskins that was all Brady?

Welker's 99 yd td was also all Brady?

You are full of contradictions, but please, procede.

Eli was just as important to us as Brady was to the Patriots during the regular season. You say Tom Brady carried his team.

A=B and B=C then A=C


</p>


Spare me Lawl. You denegrate our team and our SB win by suggesting that Eli carried the team on his back. You focus on minutia like roster size and ignore the basic premise of the debate.</p>


If you don't believe the OP when he said that he carried the team on his back to win a SB, then you are taking my position and arguing for the sake of arguing.</p>


If you believe that the New York Giants are a one man team, then you join the ranks of the "Eli thought Police".</p>


Which is it?</p>
I brought up the roster size because you said everyone nitpicks on stuff. I wanted you to feel right for once. And now you throw it in my face?! See if Im ever nice to you again.

I don't like Eli. Never have, never will. He somehow managed to be just as important to us as Tom Brady was for the Pats. Or about as close to it as he could. If you think Tom "carried" his team, then you must also feel the seem about Eli.

Our defense gave up more points than the Pats and our run game was worse than the Pats this year.

Morehead State
06-03-2012, 11:29 PM
Do you think Eli "carried the Giants on his back"?</P>



In the regular season.

Didn't have to as much in the postseason
</P>


Really?</P>


So when we were 0-4 without Michael Boley, what happened there? Why couldn't Eli single handedly win games for us? Or was Boley really more important to our defense than we thought?</P>


When Victor Cruz split defenders and turned a 10 yard pass into a 99 yard TD for the biggest play of the season, that was really all Eli and we just didn't know it.</P>


Tell me more Mr. Science!</P>



Why didn't Tom Brady single-handedly win every single game for his team this year?

When Gronk breaks a bunch of tackles for a TD against the Redskins that was all Brady?

Welker's 99 yd td was also all Brady?

You are full of contradictions, but please, procede.

Eli was just as important to us as Brady was to the Patriots during the regular season. You say Tom Brady carried his team.

A=B and B=C then A=C


</P>


Spare me Lawl. You denegrate our team and our SB win by suggesting that Eli carried the team on his back. You focus on minutia like roster size and ignore the basic premise of the debate.</P>


If you don't believe the OP when he said that he carried the team on his back to win a SB, then you are taking my position and arguing for the sake of arguing.</P>


If you believe that the New York Giants are a one man team, then you join the ranks of the "Eli thought Police".</P>


Which is it?</P>



I brought up the roster size because you said everyone nitpicks on stuff. I wanted you to feel right for once. And now you throw it in my face?! See if Im ever nice to you again.

I don't like Eli. Never have, never will. He somehow managed to be just as important to us as Tom Brady was for the Pats. Or about as close to it as he could. If you think Tom "carried" his team, then you must also feel the seem about Eli.

Our defense gave up more points than the Pats and our run game was worse than the Pats this year.

</P>


I really don't know what your point is. </P>


Again, it seems that you are arguing just to argue. If you think Eli "carried the team on his back" then thats fine. You would be wrong, but at least you are taking a position. But of course you already said that you don't. yet you continue to argue. You've been going back and forth with me for pages here and i still have no idea what you are arguing about.</P>


maybe this is left over hostility about David Wilson.</P>

Mercury
06-04-2012, 08:17 AM
Since when does the expression "put the team on his back" equate to being a one man team?

We aren't literally saying ten of our guys were piled up on Eli's back. We are saying Eli was the difference. Without Eli, this team would not have made it to the playoffs, let alone win a SB. He was the MVP of our team. His play carried our team to victory, etc.

Morehead State
06-04-2012, 08:52 AM
Since when does the expression "put the team on his back" equate to being a one man team?

We aren't literally saying ten of our guys were piled up on Eli's back. We are saying Eli was the difference. Without Eli, this team would not have made it to the playoffs, let alone win a SB. He was the MVP of our team. His play carried our team to victory, etc.


</P>


How was Michael Boley not "the difference"? How was JPP not "the difference"? Or for that matter how as the forced fumble vs. SF not "the difference"?</P>


The OP made the declaration that our QB "carried the team on his back", that suggests that he was the lone shining star during the playoffs. That we were condemned to mediocrity without him.</P>


I'm telling you that I disagree completely. The difference between the Giants of the 4 game losing streak and the Giants of the SB run was not Eli. Quite honestly, Eli was pretty darned consistent all season. It was our defense and ST's.</P>


To me the tone of the OP was that the team basically sucked and Eli carried us.</P>

gumby742
06-04-2012, 09:03 AM
Since when does the expression "put the team on his back" equate to being a one man team?

We aren't literally saying ten of our guys were piled up on Eli's back. We are saying Eli was the difference. Without Eli, this team would not have made it to the playoffs, let alone win a SB. He was the MVP of our team. His play carried our team to victory, etc.


</P>


How was Michael Boley not "the difference"? How was JPP not "the difference"? Or for that matter how as the forced fumble vs. SF not "the difference"?</P>


The OP made the declaration that our QB "carried the team on his back", that suggests that he was the lone shining star during the playoffs. That we were condemned to mediocrity without him.</P>


I'm telling you that I disagree completely. The difference between the Giants of the 4 game losing streak and the Giants of the SB run was not Eli. Quite honestly, Eli was pretty darned consistent all season. It was our defense and ST's.</P>


To me the tone of the OP was that the team basically sucked and Eli carried us.</P>


</P>


The team was not good. Our offense carried us in the regular season, not just Eli. However, the OP said "to the SB", and that was a total team effort.</P>


But our defense was absolute rubbish during the regular season. </P>

buddy33
06-04-2012, 09:08 AM
Sure, without a certain player a team could be lost, but one player does not win the Super Bowl.

Eli was great, especially in the post season. However, if the defense didn't come alive in the last couple games in the regular season they might not make the playoffs. I mean look at the offenses they played in the playoffs and Super Bowl.

They won as a team, but Eli was their MVP. Without him they are not the same team. With him they are better. I don't think anyone would argue that. Was it all him? No.

Mercury
06-04-2012, 09:37 AM
Since when does the expression "put the team on his back" equate to being a one man team?

We aren't literally saying ten of our guys were piled up on Eli's back. We are saying Eli was the difference. Without Eli, this team would not have made it to the playoffs, let alone win a SB. He was the MVP of our team. His play carried our team to victory, etc.


</p>


How was Michael Boley not "the difference"? How was JPP not "the difference"? Or for that matter how as the forced fumble vs. SF not "the difference"?</p>


The OP made the declaration that our QB "carried the team on his back", that suggests that he was the lone shining star during the playoffs. That we were condemned to mediocrity without him.</p>


I'm telling you that I disagree completely. The difference between the Giants of the 4 game losing streak and the Giants of the SB run was not Eli. Quite honestly, Eli was pretty darned consistent all season. It was our defense and ST's.</p>


To me the tone of the OP was that the team basically sucked and Eli carried us.</p>

The original poster also posted this, essentially agreeing with you:

"The team stepped up huge but Eli Manning carried us and pulled out 4th
quarter comebacks during tje regular season to keep us in it. Eli
shouldered the load and carried the team through so.e tough times and
injuries last season. With tje exception of Tom Brady and a healthy
Peyton Manning, I don't think there is another QB in NFL that could do
what Eli Manning did with us last season.
"

There's no sense in arguing over semantics. "Carried on his back" does not mean that that Eli is a "one man team." No one is saying the rest of the team is dead weight. He's saying Eli engineered some amazing 4th Quarter comebacks that led to victories that helped us make it to the playoffs and become SB winners. He was our MVP this season.

Morehead State
06-04-2012, 10:17 AM
Since when does the expression "put the team on his back" equate to being a one man team?

We aren't literally saying ten of our guys were piled up on Eli's back. We are saying Eli was the difference. Without Eli, this team would not have made it to the playoffs, let alone win a SB. He was the MVP of our team. His play carried our team to victory, etc.


</P>


How was Michael Boley not "the difference"? How was JPP not "the difference"? Or for that matter how as the forced fumble vs. SF not "the difference"?</P>


The OP made the declaration that our QB "carried the team on his back", that suggests that he was the lone shining star during the playoffs. That we were condemned to mediocrity without him.</P>


I'm telling you that I disagree completely. The difference between the Giants of the 4 game losing streak and the Giants of the SB run was not Eli. Quite honestly, Eli was pretty darned consistent all season. It was our defense and ST's.</P>


To me the tone of the OP was that the team basically sucked and Eli carried us.</P>




The original poster also posted this, essentially agreeing with you:

"The team stepped up huge but Eli Manning carried us and pulled out 4th quarter comebacks during tje regular season to keep us in it. Eli shouldered the load and carried the team through so.e tough times and injuries last season. With tje exception of Tom Brady and a healthy Peyton Manning, I don't think there is another QB in NFL that could do what Eli Manning did with us last season. "

There's no sense in arguing over semantics. "Carried on his back" does not mean that that Eli is a "one man team." No one is saying the rest of the team is dead weight. He's saying Eli engineered some amazing 4th Quarter comebacks that led to victories that helped us make it to the playoffs and become SB winners. He was our MVP this season.



</P>


Well let me explain my point of view here.</P>


I think Eli had a great year. His pocket awareness was far better than any other season with us. But our team came together in that Jets game. After the Cruz play, we were a different team. Offense, defense and ST's. Whatever the cause, it was awesome.</P>


I was proud of my team for their performance in the playoffs. (And I emphasize the word "TEAM")They beat some really good team. So it actually pisses me off when a poster suggests that one player carried us. I'm pissed off because it was bull****. We were 7-7 when Victor Cruz split defenders and went 99 yards. Thats hardly a great record. We became a championship team after that moment.</P>

buddy33
06-04-2012, 10:57 AM
It's even hard to say one play meant the season. I mean yeah, at the time that play against the Jets could be called a season saver, but so could the JPP block. I mean they had a lot of 4th quarter come backs this year and considering that they just made that means any one of them where just as important.

I'm just glad they won.

dezzzR
06-04-2012, 11:10 AM
Do you think Eli "carried the Giants on his back"?</p>
In the regular season.

Didn't have to as much in the postseason
This.
How many games did the Giants come back and win in the forth quarter last year? How many 4th quarter tds did eli have?
Lets straighten out what "put the team on his back" means. In my opinion it means coming up in big spots over and over again to help your team win. AKA Constant clutch performances that help your team win. And Eli did that last year. Does Eli have help? Absolutely, but he is the key. He is the constant.

Morehead State
06-04-2012, 11:19 AM
Do you think Eli "carried the Giants on his back"?</P>



In the regular season.

Didn't have to as much in the postseason
This.
How many games did the Giants come back and win in the forth quarter last year? How many 4th quarter tds did eli have?
Lets straighten out what "put the team on his back" means. In my opinion it means coming up in big spots over and over again to help your team win. AKA Constant clutch performances that help your team win. And Eli did that last year. Does Eli have help? Absolutely, but he is the key. He is the constant.
</P>


I doubt very seriously that the OP was referring to the period where we were 7-7. (including our 5 losses out of 6) The regular season pretty much sucked until the Jets game. </P>


It seems to me he was suggesting that the SB championship was a product of Eli "carrying the team on his back". Which in the never-to-be-humble view of Good 'Ol Morehead, is pure fiction.</P>


And don't indulge Lawl when he's been drinking Dezzypoo. Its bad form.</P>

lawl
06-04-2012, 12:06 PM
Since when does the expression "put the team on his back" equate to being a one man team?

We aren't literally saying ten of our guys were piled up on Eli's back.* We are saying Eli was the difference.* Without Eli, this team would not have made it to the playoffs, let alone win a SB.* He was the MVP of our team.* His play carried our team to victory, etc.


</P>


How was Michael Boley not "the difference"?* How was JPP not "the difference"? Or for that matter how as the forced fumble vs. SF not "the difference"?</P>


The OP made the declaration that our QB "carried the team on his back", that suggests that he was the lone shining star during the playoffs.* That we were condemned to mediocrity without him.</P>


I'm telling you that I disagree completely.* The difference between the Giants of the 4 game losing streak and the Giants of the SB run was not Eli.* Quite honestly, Eli was pretty darned consistent all season.* It was our defense and ST's.</P>


To me the tone of the OP was that the team basically sucked and Eli carried us.</P>


All these examples you're making can be applied to tom Brady as well. There are multiple instances where other players on the pats made game changing plays.

My point is that if tom carried his team then so did Eli. You just can't deal with that

Mercury
06-04-2012, 12:18 PM
As Giselle pointed out, you can't throw it and catch it. Every time Tom throws, or in regard to us, Eli throws, there's someone else on the receiving end. Yet Eli was consistently amazing this year and in many cases the reason we even got to be 7-7 when we were sucking. And yes, there were games when we sucked as a team. But even in those games, we didn't lose because of Eli, and in some cases, we won despite being outplayed for 3 1/2 quarters.

Morehead State
06-04-2012, 12:39 PM
Since when does the expression "put the team on his back" equate to being a one man team?

We aren't literally saying ten of our guys were piled up on Eli's back. We are saying Eli was the difference. Without Eli, this team would not have made it to the playoffs, let alone win a SB. He was the MVP of our team. His play carried our team to victory, etc.


</P>


How was Michael Boley not "the difference"? How was JPP not "the difference"? Or for that matter how as the forced fumble vs. SF not "the difference"?</P>


The OP made the declaration that our QB "carried the team on his back", that suggests that he was the lone shining star during the playoffs. That we were condemned to mediocrity without him.</P>


I'm telling you that I disagree completely. The difference between the Giants of the 4 game losing streak and the Giants of the SB run was not Eli. Quite honestly, Eli was pretty darned consistent all season. It was our defense and ST's.</P>


To me the tone of the OP was that the team basically sucked and Eli carried us.</P>


All these examples you're making can be applied to tom Brady as well. There are multiple instances where other players on the pats made game changing plays. My point is that if tom carried his team then so did Eli. You just can't deal with that</P>


1. I'm glad to see that you've sobered up.</P>


2. Tom Brady is the best QB in the NFL. He's actually a lot better than he was when they won 3 SB's. Unfortunately, the rest of the team isn't that good at all. The defense is mediocre at best. The only way a mediocre team makes it to the SB is to be carried by a great QB. Which is what they did.</P>


But we can disagree about the role of Tom Brady with the Pats if you like, but it won't change the fact that <U>our</U> team excelled in the playoffs because the entire team picked up their game.</P>


Ours is an example of a great team effort with a great leader at QB. Not a QB who carried the team on his back. (Which isoften the case with a SB champ)</P>


To suggest otherwise is to denegrate the great effort and great playby every player on the field.</P>

buddy33
06-04-2012, 01:09 PM
Tom Brady also hasn't won anything since "spy gate".

They beat 1 team last year with a winning record and that was because of a dropped pass in the end zone and a missed field goal. That's why they made it to the Super Bowl.

lawl
06-04-2012, 01:17 PM
Since when does the expression "put the team on his back" equate to being a one man team?

We aren't literally saying ten of our guys were piled up on Eli's back.* We are saying Eli was the difference.* Without Eli, this team would not have made it to the playoffs, let alone win a SB.* He was the MVP of our team.* His play carried our team to victory, etc.


</P>


How was Michael Boley not "the difference"?* How was JPP not "the difference"? Or for that matter how as the forced fumble vs. SF not "the difference"?</P>


The OP made the declaration that our QB "carried the team on his back", that suggests that he was the lone shining star during the playoffs.* That we were condemned to mediocrity without him.</P>


I'm telling you that I disagree completely.* The difference between the Giants of the 4 game losing streak and the Giants of the SB run was not Eli.* Quite honestly, Eli was pretty darned consistent all season.* It was our defense and ST's.</P>


To me the tone of the OP was that the team basically sucked and Eli carried us.</P>


All these examples you're making can be applied to tom Brady as well. There are multiple instances where other players on the pats made game changing plays. My point is that if tom carried his team then so did Eli. You just can't deal with that</P>


1.* I'm glad to see that you've sobered up.</P>


2. Tom Brady is the best QB in the NFL.* He's actually a lot better than he was when they won 3 SB's.* Unfortunately, the rest of the team isn't that good at all.* The defense is mediocre at best.* The only way a mediocre team makes it to the SB is to be carried by a great QB.* Which is what they did.</P>


But we can disagree about the role of Tom Brady with the Pats if you like, but it won't change the fact that <U>our</U> team excelled in the playoffs because the entire team picked up their game.</P>


Ours is an example of a great team effort with a great leader at QB.* Not a QB who carried the team on his back. (Which is*often the case with a SB champ)</P>


To suggest otherwise is to denegrate the great effort and great play*by every player on the field.</P>

Right. But i'm talking about the regular season.

The pats d was better than ours during the regular season

lawl
06-04-2012, 01:20 PM
Tom Brady also hasn't won anything since "spy gate".

They beat 1 team last year with a winning record and that was because of a dropped pass in the end zone and a missed field goal. That's why they made it to the Super Bowl.
All of Toms greatest seasons come after the video taping stuff. Safe to say that has nothing to do with his play

buddy33
06-04-2012, 01:47 PM
He has won 2 post season games since "spy gate". I don't care how good his regular season stats are. The 2007 season was his best anyway.

Morehead State
06-04-2012, 01:54 PM
He has won 2 post season games since "spy gate". I don't care how good his regular season stats are. The 2007 season was his best anyway.</P>


"Spy Gate" came out in the beginning of the 07 season. So he's won 4 playoff games.</P>


Since that he has averaged:</P>


4600 yards 38 TD's 9 Int's. per season.</P>


And has a win loss record of 53-11.</P>


</P>


Yeah....he's sucked since Spygate.</P>

buddy33
06-04-2012, 01:58 PM
Cool stats. I have a better one. How about 2 rings to 0 rings? Or 2 Super Bowl MVP's to 0 Super Bowl MVP's?

I like those stats a lot better.

Morehead State
06-04-2012, 02:05 PM
Cool stats. I have a better one. How about 2 rings to 0 rings? Or 2 Super Bowl MVP's to 0 Super Bowl MVP's? I like those stats a lot better.</P>


Oh...You're one of those "If you don't win a SB you must suck" guys. I love it.</P>


Oh wait....Brady's won 3.</P>


Have you ever seen Tom Brady play? Obviously not. The guy is great.</P>


No question though that the Giants D line has his number. </P>

buddy33
06-04-2012, 02:15 PM
Never said he was a bad QB. Just saying he hasn't done much as far as winning trophies since "spy gate". Hey, I'm not the only one that noticed.

Have I ever watched him play? Of course, he is a very good QB.

Im happier with Eli though.

Morehead State
06-04-2012, 02:22 PM
Never said he was a bad QB. Just saying he hasn't done much as far as winning trophies since "spy gate". Hey, I'm not the only one that noticed. Have I ever watched him play? Of course, he is a very good QB. Im happier with Eli though.</P>


What could spygate have to do with any of this?</P>

buddy33
06-04-2012, 02:33 PM
Seriously? Maybe it gave the Patriots an unfair advantage. Apparently it was a big enough deal that they where fined and had a pick taken away.

Hey, 0-2 in the Super Bowl since they got caught.

Morehead State
06-04-2012, 02:37 PM
Seriously? Maybe it gave the Patriots an unfair advantage. Apparently it was a big enough deal that they where fined and had a pick taken away. Hey, 0-2 in the Super Bowl since they got caught.</P>


The only reason the Pats don't have 2 more SB's is us. They have no real answer for our pass rush.</P>


We held them twice to under 20 ponts in the SB. Both times they were prolific scoring teams. </P>


Trust me, they've seen everything we've ever done on film. Is it your view that filming our "walk-throughs" would have had any difference?</P>


If so, you're just in a fantasy world.</P>

buddy33
06-04-2012, 02:41 PM
Fantasy world would be the world where someone would believe that "spy gate" was no big deal. Again, they havent been the same since.

They did it to gain an unfair advantage and since then have not been the same.

Morehead State
06-04-2012, 03:07 PM
Fantasy world would be the world where someone would believe that "spy gate" was no big deal. Again, they havent been the same since. They did it to gain an unfair advantage and since then have not been the same.</P>


They have won a hell of a lot of football games since then. Your position would only carry any weight if they all of the sudden were a struggling franchise. Since spygate, they've bean to 2 SB's. If it wasn't for a couple of miracle plays, they'd have two more trophies.</P>


Or is it your view that not having film of our walk-through's caused Welker to drop that pass, or cause Manningham to make an incredible play on the sideline?</P>


I'm trying to treat you with respect here but you're making it hard. Your "spygate" theory holds no water when looking at the facts.</P>


</P>

buddy33
06-04-2012, 03:26 PM
They have win a lot of regular season games since then. That also includes the year Brady was out with an injury. So is it the system or the QB?

Spy gate hold lots of water because it gave them an edge. It doesnt mean they are a terrible team, but it gave them an edge. Why would they tape a walk through? How stupid would they have been to tape something that didn't help them and resulted in them geting fined an losing a draft pick?

They went to 1 Super Bowl while the investigation was going on and another when they only beat 1 team with a winning record. You make it sound like they where such a good team last year. The only team they beat with a winning record was because a guy dropped a TD and then they the field goal kicker missed.

Morehead State
06-04-2012, 04:40 PM
They have win a lot of regular season games since then. That also includes the year Brady was out with an injury. So is it the system or the QB? Spy gate hold lots of water because it gave them an edge. It doesnt mean they are a terrible team, but it gave them an edge. Why would they tape a walk through? How stupid would they have been to tape something that didn't help them and resulted in them geting fined an losing a draft pick? They went to 1 Super Bowl while the investigation was going on and another when they only beat 1 team with a winning record. You make it sound like they where such a good team last year. The only team they beat with a winning record was because a guy dropped a TD and then they the field goal kicker missed.</P>


They won 13 games.</P>


Yes...they were a good team. When you beat 13 NFL teams, you are a good team.</P>


And mayI remind you that the only winning team we beat all season was the Pats.</P>

buddy33
06-04-2012, 04:57 PM
Well I was including the playoffs. If you want to leave the playoffs out of it the Patriots did not win A game against a winning team.

Including the playoffs the Giants beat the top 3 teams in the NFL according to their records including the Patriots twice.

buffyblue
06-11-2012, 02:03 AM
They have win a lot of regular season games since then. That also includes the year Brady was out with an injury. So is it the system or the QB?

Spy gate hold lots of water because it gave them an edge. It doesnt mean they are a terrible team, but it gave them an edge. Why would they tape a walk through? How stupid would they have been to tape something that didn't help them and resulted in them geting fined an losing a draft pick?

They went to 1 Super Bowl while the investigation was going on and another when they only beat 1 team with a winning record. You make it sound like they where such a good team last year. The only team they beat with a winning record was because a guy dropped a TD and then they the field goal kicker missed.

I love how folks bring up that they went 11-5 with cassel the year that Tom Brady got hurt and that means it is the system. However that very same team with Tom Brady the year before was 18-1 and almost won SuperBowl. They devolved to 11-5 and didn’t make the playoffs under Matt Cassell. That is much more of an argument as to how great a QB is thanthe system being the reason.

Since Spygate broke, New England Patriots are still one of the most successful franchises in NFL. They have been to 2 SBs and I really think that they would have beaten any team but us. We match up well with them and Tom Coughlin and Bill Bellichek know each other so well and it makes for a great game. Heck is Wes Welker holds onto that ball, chances are we lose the SuperBowl. I know it was not the best throw but it was in his hands and he should have caught it.

New England Patriots are a great team and I am very proud that NY Giants beat them twice in SuperBowl.

giantsfan420
06-11-2012, 03:51 AM
Seriously? Maybe it gave the Patriots an unfair advantage. Apparently it was a big enough deal that they where fined and had a pick taken away. Hey, 0-2 in the Super Bowl since they got caught.</P>


The only reason the Pats don't have 2 more SB's is us.* They have no real answer for our pass rush.</P>


We held them twice to under 20 ponts in the SB. Both times they were prolific scoring teams.* </P>


Trust me, they've seen everything we've ever done on film.* Is it your view that *filming our "walk-throughs" would have had any difference?</P>


If so, *you're just in a fantasy world.</P>

what? thats insanely 10000% wrong...

ur installing ur gameplam during the walkthrus...football is a game of critical situations second after second. knowing how we would approach situations vs their offense would give them a huuuuuuuuge advantage...listen to the rams discuss the sb, they said the first half, when they had their installed gameplan, ne's defense was in the perfect area over and over. after they installed another idea at halftime, the rams outscored the pats like 17-7 or something i forget

they were saying the pats d knew what they were doing based on their formations....if u think that doesnt have a huge impact ur the one in lala land...

giantsfan420
06-11-2012, 03:57 AM
Fantasy world would be the world where someone would believe that "spy gate" was no big deal. Again, they havent been the same since. They did it to gain an unfair advantage and since then have not been the same.</P>


They have won a hell of a lot of football games since then.* Your position would only carry any weight if they all of the sudden were a struggling franchise.* Since spygate, they've bean to 2 SB's.* If it wasn't for a couple of miracle plays, they'd have two more trophies.</P>


Or is it your view that not having film of our walk-through's caused Welker to drop that pass, or cause Manningham to make an incredible play on the sideline?</P>


I'm trying to treat you with respect here but you're making it hard.* Your "spygate" theory holds no water when looking at the facts.</P>


*</P>

lmfao are u reallys aying spygate doesnt matter or effect the game and saying the other persons argument doesnt hold water???????

lawl
06-11-2012, 02:01 PM
Fantasy world would be the world where someone would believe that "spy gate" was no big deal. Again, they havent been the same since. They did it to gain an unfair advantage and since then have not been the same.</P>


They have won a hell of a lot of football games since then.* Your position would only carry any weight if they all of the sudden were a struggling franchise.* Since spygate, they've bean to 2 SB's.* If it wasn't for a couple of miracle plays, they'd have two more trophies.</P>


Or is it your view that not having film of our walk-through's caused Welker to drop that pass, or cause Manningham to make an incredible play on the sideline?</P>


I'm trying to treat you with respect here but you're making it hard.* Your "spygate" theory holds no water when looking at the facts.</P>


*</P>

lmfao are u reallys aying spygate doesnt matter or effect the game and saying the other persons argument doesnt hold water???????

Tom Brady and the patriots offense has had its best years after they got caught

Morehead State
06-11-2012, 02:04 PM
Fantasy world would be the world where someone would believe that "spy gate" was no big deal. Again, they havent been the same since. They did it to gain an unfair advantage and since then have not been the same.</P>


They have won a hell of a lot of football games since then. Your position would only carry any weight if they all of the sudden were a struggling franchise. Since spygate, they've bean to 2 SB's. If it wasn't for a couple of miracle plays, they'd have two more trophies.</P>


Or is it your view that not having film of our walk-through's caused Welker to drop that pass, or cause Manningham to make an incredible play on the sideline?</P>


I'm trying to treat you with respect here but you're making it hard. Your "spygate" theory holds no water when looking at the facts.</P>


</P>


lmfao are u reallys aying spygate doesnt matter or effect the game and saying the other persons argument doesnt hold water??????? Tom Brady and the patriots offense has had its best years after they got caught</P>


Clearly.</P>


420 just likes to fight with me.</P>

buddy33
06-11-2012, 02:08 PM
I'm sorry, but didn't they break all kinds of records in 2007? I know they have been good since, but 2007 they where at their best.

giantsfan420
06-11-2012, 02:08 PM
Fantasy world would be the world where someone would believe that "spy gate" was no big deal. Again, they havent been the same since. They did it to gain an unfair advantage and since then have not been the same.</P>


They have won a hell of a lot of football games since then.* Your position would only carry any weight if they all of the sudden were a struggling franchise.* Since spygate, they've bean to 2 SB's.* If it wasn't for a couple of miracle plays, they'd have two more trophies.</P>


Or is it your view that not having film of our walk-through's caused Welker to drop that pass, or cause Manningham to make an incredible play on the sideline?</P>


I'm trying to treat you with respect here but you're making it hard.* Your "spygate" theory holds no water when looking at the facts.</P>


*</P>


lmfao are u reallys aying spygate doesnt matter or effect the game and saying the other persons argument doesnt hold water??????? Tom Brady and the patriots offense has had its best years after they got caught</P>


Clearly.</P>


420 just likes to fight with me.</P>

that has absolutely no bearing on it whatsoever.

are you literally claiming that videotaping a team instilling its gameplan (which is what walk thrus are) wouldnt give the opposing team an advantage?

the success afterwards getting caught is irrelevant. im not claiming that spygate was the reason for their success, im claiming it was certainly a factor.

buddy33
06-11-2012, 02:10 PM
If taping wasn't such a big deal then why did they do it?

giantsfan420
06-11-2012, 02:11 PM
oh and further, i dunno if u guys realize that spygate was more about NE videotaping opposing offenses to help their d...

and since spygate, their defense has fallen off a cliff...and have been the worst defenses in the league...

and thats way more relevant that the offenses success after getting caught...

Morehead State
06-11-2012, 02:13 PM
I'm sorry, but didn't they break all kinds of records in 2007? I know they have been good since, but 2007 they where at their best.</P>


The spygate controversy came out week 2, 2007. The dominance they had that season was more a vendetta that BB had against the NFL. They obviuosly weren't doing anything at that point.</P>


The only team he would never run up the score on (if he could) was us.</P>


Belichick loves the Giants.</P>


</P>


And BTW 420, there was never any evidence that they were filming walk throughs. that was just a rumor regarding the Rams/Pats SB.</P>

buddy33
06-11-2012, 02:14 PM
No evedince? So they fined the Patriots and took a draft pick away for nothing?

Morehead State
06-11-2012, 02:21 PM
No evedince? So they fined the Patriots and took a draft pick away for nothing?</P>


It wasn't about the walk through's. It was something about taping the signals from the sidelines during games and then trying to figure out what they were.</P>


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_National_Football_League_videotaping_controve rsy</P>

buddy33
06-11-2012, 02:35 PM
Ok. So you think that's not that big a deal?

Morehead State
06-11-2012, 02:44 PM
Ok. So you think that's not that big a deal?</P>


Taping the other team's signals? You are allowed to watch them. You are allowed to try to figure out what they are. Its not like you have to turn away when the other team is signaling from the sidelines.</P>


Teams have been trying to steal signals (obviuosly in baseball as well) since they have existed.</P>


No....I don't think it was a big deal. </P>


And given their success since, it clearly wasn't. I doubt any team has won as many games since.</P>

giantsfan420
06-11-2012, 02:47 PM
no. they were caught with tape of opposing teams walk thrus.

the hand/team signals was an issue too, but the pats full out had tapes of opposing teams doing walkthurs on offense

the hand signals was not nearly as big a deal. as u said teams have tapes of the games and the signals...its why coaches always try and hide what theyre saying and displaying...and the meanings can be switched up. teams know alot of the qb cadences and audibles, but they switch em up too.

thats way less than actually taping what teams are instilling in diff formations and what theyre trying to do

buddy33
06-11-2012, 02:49 PM
Apparently the NFL thought it was a big deal so they fined and penalized them.

Ask the Steelers defense what hey thought about it. I loved the tweets after the Super Bowl.

giantsfan420
06-11-2012, 02:55 PM
Ok. So you think that's not that big a deal?</P>


Taping the other team's signals?* You are allowed to watch them.* You are allowed to try to figure out what they are.* Its not like you have to turn away when the other team is signaling from the sidelines.</P>


Teams have been trying to steal signals (obviuosly in baseball as well) since they have existed.</P>


No....I don't think it was a big deal.* </P>


And given their success since, it clearly wasn't.* I doubt any team has won as many games since.</P>

their defense has sucked ball sack since spygate what r u talking about?

Morehead State
06-11-2012, 02:59 PM
Ok. So you think that's not that big a deal?</P>


Taping the other team's signals? You are allowed to watch them. You are allowed to try to figure out what they are. Its not like you have to turn away when the other team is signaling from the sidelines.</P>


Teams have been trying to steal signals (obviuosly in baseball as well) since they have existed.</P>


No....I don't think it was a big deal. </P>


And given their success since, it clearly wasn't. I doubt any team has won as many games since.</P>


their defense has sucked ball sack since spygate what r u talking about?</P>


They have won more games than any team in the NFL after that.</P>


What are <U>YOU</U> talking about?</P>

Morehead State
06-11-2012, 03:01 PM
no. they were caught with tape of opposing teams walk thrus. the hand/team signals was an issue too, but the pats full out had tapes of opposing teams doing walkthurs on offense the hand signals was not nearly as big a deal. as u said teams have tapes of the games and the signals...its why coaches always try and hide what theyre saying and displaying...and the meanings can be switched up. teams know alot of the qb cadences and audibles, but they switch em up too. thats way less than actually taping what teams are instilling in diff formations and what theyre trying to do</P>


That is simply not true.</P>


http://articles.boston.com/2008-05-14/sports/29274687_1_roger-goodell-tape-videotaping</P>

buddy33
06-11-2012, 03:02 PM
Yeah and they play in a soft division. Once they make the playoffs they have been losing until this year and they where lucky to have a guy drop a TD and then have their kicker miss a kick.

I'm not saying they rare a horrible team, but they pile up points and stats while falling short of what really matter since spy gate.

Morehead State
06-11-2012, 03:04 PM
Yeah and they play in a soft division. Once they make the playoffs they have been losing until this year and they where lucky to have a guy drop a TD and then have their kicker miss a kick. I'm not saying they rare a horrible team, but they pile up points and stats while falling short of what really matter since spy gate.</P>


If it makes you feel better to believe that fantasy...I say go for it.</P>


I want my Giant fan friends to be happy.</P>


</P>


I'm sure that the spygate case helped David Tyree trap that ball against his helmet, or caused Welker to drop that wide open pass.</P>


Because if not for those two plays, they would have won 2 more.</P>

buddy33
06-11-2012, 03:11 PM
A nice catch or a bad drop have absolutely nothing to do with taping a teams.

Fantasy? They are 0-2 in the Super Bowl since they where caught. They where fined by the NFL because of it because apparently it is a big deal. Those are facts, not fantasy.

giantsfan420
06-11-2012, 03:13 PM
no. they were caught with tape of opposing teams walk thrus. the hand/team signals was an issue too, but the pats full out had tapes of opposing teams doing walkthurs on offense the hand signals was not nearly as big a deal. as u said teams have tapes of the games and the signals...its why coaches always try and hide what theyre saying and displaying...and the meanings can be switched up. teams know alot of the qb cadences and audibles, but they switch em up too. thats way less than actually taping what teams are instilling in diff formations and what theyre trying to do</P>


That is simply not true.</P>


http://articles.boston.com/2008-05-14/sports/29274687_1_roger-goodell-tape-videotaping</P>

one, the success of the team has no bearing on whether the defense played at a high elvel or not. their defense has been one of the worst ranking defenses for several years now. to dismiss that would be moronic, especially when doing so bc of nes win loss record...double standard tho bc when people go "eli has been elite for some time now. how many games has he won now?" ud dismiss that but now use that mentality in this instance, erroneously i may add.

and ur misinterpreting the link. all thats said in that article is that the specific accusation that a specific rams walk thru practice was video taped was incorrect.
that does not mean that they had not done so in any other instance otuside that specific accusation.
and that "he had no knowledge of the tapes" is already widely known that was applied to BB. and most believe that to be a lie, especially since he was fined 500,000...they had no physical tape, therefore there was no physical evidence, therefore there was no proof he had seen that specific video tape.

however, its already documented that a member of the NE organization taped opposing teams walk thrus.
it occurred again in Denver. hand signals is part of it im sure. but there was illegal videotaping of opposing teams

Morehead State
06-11-2012, 03:15 PM
A nice catch or a bad drop have absolutely nothing to do with taping a teams. Fantasy? They are 0-2 in the Super Bowl since they where caught. They where fined by the NFL because of it because apparently it is a big deal. Those are facts, not fantasy.</P>


Finally you agree with me.</P>


I'm sure you feel better now.</P>

buddy33
06-11-2012, 03:17 PM
I never said they made the Super Bowl his year because they cheated by taping. I said they played a soft schedule and the only team they beat with a winning record last year was because of a drop and missed field goal in the same possession.

Morehead State
06-11-2012, 03:18 PM
no. they were caught with tape of opposing teams walk thrus. the hand/team signals was an issue too, but the pats full out had tapes of opposing teams doing walkthurs on offense the hand signals was not nearly as big a deal. as u said teams have tapes of the games and the signals...its why coaches always try and hide what theyre saying and displaying...and the meanings can be switched up. teams know alot of the qb cadences and audibles, but they switch em up too. thats way less than actually taping what teams are instilling in diff formations and what theyre trying to do</P>


That is simply not true.</P>


http://articles.boston.com/2008-05-14/sports/29274687_1_roger-goodell-tape-videotaping</P>


one, the success of the team has no bearing on whether the defense played at a high elvel or not. their defense has been one of the worst ranking defenses for several years now. to dismiss that would be moronic, especially when doing so bc of nes win loss record...double standard tho bc when people go "eli has been elite for some time now. how many games has he won now?" ud dismiss that but now use that mentality in this instance, erroneously i may add. and ur misinterpreting the link. all thats said in that article is that the specific accusation that a specific rams walk thru practice was video taped was incorrect. that does not mean that they had not done so in any other instance otuside that specific accusation. and that "he had no knowledge of the tapes" is already widely known that was applied to BB. and most believe that to be a lie, especially since he was fined 500,000...they had no physical tape, therefore there was no physical evidence, therefore there was no proof he had seen any video tape. however, its already documented that a member of the NE organization taped opposing teams walk thrus. it occurred again in Denver. hand signals is part of it im sure. but there was illegal videotaping of opposing teams</P>


Show me..</P>


1. The link that shows that</P>


and</P>


2. That Goodell accepted that as true and considered that in his penalty.</P>


because I promise you, the sanction would have been a lot stiffer if it were true.</P>


If you can't..its pure speculation based on rumors.</P>

buddy33
06-11-2012, 03:18 PM
I also said that it's a fact they are 0-2 since being caught cheating and the league fined them because it was a big deal even if you think it wasn't.

giantsfan420
06-11-2012, 03:22 PM
matt walsh already came forward and gave tapes of the patriots taping opposing teams practices. theres a timeline for this btw not everything was known at once.
but yeah walsh gave in the tapes and the tapes were destroyed. bb said he had no knowledge and had not seen any of the tapes.

walsh got immunity and stuff for working with goodell. but there was some sort of confidentially agreement issue. we dont know exactly what happened. but like the saints issue right now, we dont have any of the proof as fans either but we know what occurred.

and all the saints org are denying everything too...denying it is nothing new

Morehead State
06-11-2012, 03:23 PM
I never said they made the Super Bowl his year because they cheated by taping. I said they played a soft schedule and the only team they beat with a winning record last year was because of a drop and missed field goal in the same possession.</P>


So if the ref had blown the play dead (as he said he was close to doing) in the Tyree play, and Welker hadn't dropped that pass, all your claims are out the window. They would have won 2 more rings.</P>


It all comes down to a few plays. We made them, they didn't. Plus we had some good fortune as well. That being said, spygate had no bearing on any of it. </P>


Manningham makes that play, spygate or not. Welker drops that pass, spygate or not. Tyree makes that catch , spygate or not and Plaxico makes that awesome move, spygate or not.</P>


We won. They lost, spygate or not.</P>


The Pats were penalized because they broke rules and the Commish had to act. No reasonable person believes that the videotaping of signals from the sidelines had much or any effect on the outcome of games.</P>

giantsfan420
06-11-2012, 03:24 PM
no. they were caught with tape of opposing teams walk thrus. the hand/team signals was an issue too, but the pats full out had tapes of opposing teams doing walkthurs on offense the hand signals was not nearly as big a deal. as u said teams have tapes of the games and the signals...its why coaches always try and hide what theyre saying and displaying...and the meanings can be switched up. teams know alot of the qb cadences and audibles, but they switch em up too. thats way less than actually taping what teams are instilling in diff formations and what theyre trying to do</P>


That is simply not true.</P>


http://articles.boston.com/2008-05-14/sports/29274687_1_roger-goodell-tape-videotaping</P>


one, the success of the team has no bearing on whether the defense played at a high elvel or not. their defense has been one of the worst ranking defenses for several years now. to dismiss that would be moronic, especially when doing so bc of nes win loss record...double standard tho bc when people go "eli has been elite for some time now. how many games has he won now?" ud dismiss that but now use that mentality in this instance, erroneously i may add. and ur misinterpreting the link. all thats said in that article is that the specific accusation that a specific rams walk thru practice was video taped was incorrect. that does not mean that they had not done so in any other instance otuside that specific accusation. and that "he had no knowledge of the tapes" is already widely known that was applied to BB. and most believe that to be a lie, especially since he was fined 500,000...they had no physical tape, therefore there was no physical evidence, therefore there was no proof he had seen any video tape. however, its already documented that a member of the NE organization taped opposing teams walk thrus. it occurred again in Denver. hand signals is part of it im sure. but there was illegal videotaping of opposing teams</P>


Show me..</P>


1.* The link that shows that</P>


and</P>


2.* That Goodell accepted that as true and considered that in his penalty.</P>


because I promise you, the sanction would have been a lot stiffer if it were true.</P>


If you can't..its pure speculation based on rumors.</P>

lmfao. show u? so if i cant show u physical evidence of bountygate thats just pure speculation and rumor?

search the internet, its not my job to educate u although im sure it happens frequently :)

matt walsh already admitted to doing it and worked with the nfl...its like known.

buddy33
06-11-2012, 03:25 PM
That has nothing to do with hem cheating by taping teams.

giantsfan420
06-11-2012, 03:27 PM
I never said they made the Super Bowl his year because they cheated by taping. I said they played a soft schedule and the only team they beat with a winning record last year was because of a drop and missed field goal in the same possession.</P>


So if the ref had blown the play dead (as he said he was close to doing) in the Tyree play, and Welker hadn't dropped that pass, all your claims are out the window.* They would have won 2 more rings.</P>


It all comes down to a few plays.* We made them, they didn't.* Plus we had some good fortune as well.* That being said, spygate had no bearing on any of it.* </P>


Manningham makes that play, spygate or not.* Welker drops that pass, spygate or not.* Tyree makes that catch , spygate or not and Plaxico makes that awesome move, spygate or not.</P>


We won.* They lost, spygate or not.</P>


The Pats were penalized because they broke rules and the Commish had to act.***************************** No reasonable person believes that the videotaping of signals from the sidelines had much or any effect on the outcome of games.</P>

lmfao wow...

dude, realitys calling.
ur looking at it from a completely incorrect stance.

u should be saying "would we need the tyree catch if spygate happens or not?" "would welker have needed to make that catch had spygate happened ornot?"

thats so funny "we won, they lost spygate or not" so comical.

how can u deny that filiming the opposing team doesnt have an effect? ur acting as if were saying its the one and only main factor in a win or loss...
im saying it can absolutley effect a game and to deny that is unfathomable to me

buddy33
06-11-2012, 03:28 PM
No one believes it had an effect? Lol. Ask the Steelers defense that same question. Ask Don Shula.

buddy33
06-11-2012, 03:33 PM
What you are dismissing is that some of thos plays may have been defended better had the still been cheating.

It's not that hard to understand. When they where taping they knew where to be so the defense was better. Their offense also knew what blitz packages to look for. Lol. Why else would you tape? Lol. So they could get fined and penalized for noing? Wow! What a waste of time for them to do I then. Or was it?

Morehead State
06-11-2012, 03:36 PM
I never said they made the Super Bowl his year because they cheated by taping. I said they played a soft schedule and the only team they beat with a winning record last year was because of a drop and missed field goal in the same possession.</P>


So if the ref had blown the play dead (as he said he was close to doing) in the Tyree play, and Welker hadn't dropped that pass, all your claims are out the window. They would have won 2 more rings.</P>


It all comes down to a few plays. We made them, they didn't. Plus we had some good fortune as well. That being said, spygate had no bearing on any of it. </P>


Manningham makes that play, spygate or not. Welker drops that pass, spygate or not. Tyree makes that catch , spygate or not and Plaxico makes that awesome move, spygate or not.</P>


We won. They lost, spygate or not.</P>


The Pats were penalized because they broke rules and the Commish had to act. No reasonable person believes that the videotaping of signals from the sidelines had much or any effect on the outcome of games.</P>


lmfao wow... dude, realitys calling. ur looking at it from a completely incorrect stance. u should be saying "would we need the tyree catch if spygate happens or not?" "would welker have needed to make that catch had spygate happened ornot?" thats so funny "we won, they lost spygate or not" so comical. how can u deny that filiming the opposing team doesnt have an effect? ur acting as if were saying its the one and only main factor in a win or loss... im saying it can absolutley effect a game and to deny that is unfathomable to me</P>


You are allowed to film the opposing team. How do you think teams prepare.</P>


Imagine my shock that I needed to tell you this.</P>

giantsfan420
06-11-2012, 03:37 PM
What you are dismissing is that some of thos plays may have been defended better had the still been cheating.

It's not that hard to understand. When they where taping they knew where to be so the defense was better. Their offense also knew what blitz packages to look for. Lol. Why else would you tape? Lol. So they could get fined and penalized for noing? Wow! What a waste of time for them to do I then. Or was it?

i think he may be the one person in america who actually believes what hes saying is true.
that doesnt mean hes wrong necessarily...but his opinion does

Morehead State
06-11-2012, 03:38 PM
No one believes it had an effect? Lol. Ask the Steelers defense that same question. Ask Don Shula.</P>


Gee....bitter rivals. There's another shock.</P>


Sour grapes. Shula has always tried to belittle the 2007 Pats because of the undefeated thing.</P>


Grow up people!</P>

giantsfan420
06-11-2012, 03:39 PM
I never said they made the Super Bowl his year because they cheated by taping. I said they played a soft schedule and the only team they beat with a winning record last year was because of a drop and missed field goal in the same possession.</P>


So if the ref had blown the play dead (as he said he was close to doing) in the Tyree play, and Welker hadn't dropped that pass, all your claims are out the window.* They would have won 2 more rings.</P>


It all comes down to a few plays.* We made them, they didn't.* Plus we had some good fortune as well.* That being said, spygate had no bearing on any of it.* </P>


Manningham makes that play, spygate or not.* Welker drops that pass, spygate or not.* Tyree makes that catch , spygate or not and Plaxico makes that awesome move, spygate or not.</P>


We won.* They lost, spygate or not.</P>


The Pats were penalized because they broke rules and the Commish had to act.***************************** No reasonable person believes that the videotaping of signals from the sidelines had much or any effect on the outcome of games.</P>


lmfao wow... dude, realitys calling. ur looking at it from a completely incorrect stance. u should be saying "would we need the tyree catch if spygate happens or not?" "would welker have needed to make that catch had spygate happened ornot?" thats so funny "we won, they lost spygate or not" so comical. how can u deny that filiming the opposing team doesnt have an effect? ur acting as if were saying its the one and only main factor in a win or loss... im saying it can absolutley effect a game and to deny that is unfathomable to me</P>


You are allowed to film the opposing team.* How do you think teams prepare.</P>


Imagine my shock that I needed to tell you this.</P>
only u would think that statement is applicable or valid in any way.

of course teams are not allowed to film opposing teams ILLEGALLY.
imagine my shock that i need to tell u this and that u think it has absolutely no effect on anything lmfao

buddy33
06-11-2012, 03:40 PM
Or it could be because they did cheat and the Steelers and Shula didn't? Just throwing that out there.

giantsfan420
06-11-2012, 03:40 PM
if it didnt give them an unfair advantage why were they penalized so steeply.
why would it even be against the rules? lmfao

Morehead State
06-11-2012, 03:45 PM
if it didnt give them an unfair advantage why were they penalized so steeply. why would it even be against the rules? lmfao</P>


BB wasn't even suspended. They just suspended the Saints HC for a year.</P>


They filmed other teams signaling at thats a violation. But to suggest that the Pats are in some kind of decline because they can't "cheat" any more is pure fantasy. Its real "grassy knoll" stuff.</P>


Plus, they have been an elite team ever since.</P>


The opinions of Don Shula (who hates the Pats) and the Pittsburgh Steelers (who hate the Pats, and except for this past season have been owned by the Pats) are to be dismissed out of hand for their lack of objectivity.</P>

giantsfan420
06-11-2012, 03:50 PM
if it didnt give them an unfair advantage why were they penalized so steeply. why would it even be against the rules? lmfao</P>


BB wasn't even suspended.* They just suspended the Saints HC for a year.</P>


They filmed other teams signaling at thats a violation.* But to suggest that the Pats are in some kind of decline because they can't "cheat" any more is pure fantasy.* Its real "grassy knoll" stuff.</P>


Plus, they have been an elite team ever since.</P>


The opinions of Don Shula (who hates the Pats) and the Pittsburgh Steelers (who hate the Pats, and except for this past season have been owned by the Pats) are to be dismissed out of hand for their lack of objectivity.</P>

and i dont disagree with any of that.

but u cannot dismiss that the defense DID drop off a cliff and have been some of the worst ranking defenses in the league for several years now.

i am not saying thats solely bc of the spygate thing, but i am saying it prob def was a factor.

buddy33
06-11-2012, 03:52 PM
They dislike the Patriots because they got caught cheating. I saw a Steelers player give a huge shout out to Eli after the Super Bowl. Why would they like some players and some teams but not the Patriots?

They have been elite with the exception of a title ever since.

jakegibbs
06-11-2012, 03:55 PM
if it didnt give them an unfair advantage why were they penalized so steeply. why would it even be against the rules? lmfao</P>


BB wasn't even suspended.* They just suspended the Saints HC for a year.</P>


They filmed other teams signaling at thats a violation.* But to suggest that the Pats are in some kind of decline because they can't "cheat" any more is pure fantasy.* Its real "grassy knoll" stuff.</P>


Plus, they have been an elite team ever since.</P>


The opinions of Don Shula (who hates the Pats) and the Pittsburgh Steelers (who hate the Pats, and except for this past season have been owned by the Pats) are to be dismissed out of hand for their lack of objectivity.</P>

and i dont disagree with any of that.

but u cannot dismiss that the defense DID drop off a cliff and have been some of the worst ranking defenses in the league for several years now.

i am not saying thats solely bc of the spygate thing, but i am saying it prob def was a factor.

Makes it a lot easier if you know the red zone offense they've put in for 1 game & can teach your defense how to stop them from scoring TD's. That's what the Pat's did against the greatest show on turf anyway. How'd that SB turn out?

buddy33
06-11-2012, 03:58 PM
Let me make something clear. I do think Brady is a very good QB and the Patriots are a very good team. I just think they where guilty of taping teams and gaining an advantage and that's why they where punished. Since then they do have a great record and put up great stats. I'm not into fantasy football some could care less about those things. I like Super Bowl wins. Like the one the Giants just had.

Morehead State
06-11-2012, 03:58 PM
if it didnt give them an unfair advantage why were they penalized so steeply. why would it even be against the rules? lmfao</P>


BB wasn't even suspended. They just suspended the Saints HC for a year.</P>


They filmed other teams signaling at thats a violation. But to suggest that the Pats are in some kind of decline because they can't "cheat" any more is pure fantasy. Its real "grassy knoll" stuff.</P>


Plus, they have been an elite team ever since.</P>


The opinions of Don Shula (who hates the Pats) and the Pittsburgh Steelers (who hate the Pats, and except for this past season have been owned by the Pats) are to be dismissed out of hand for their lack of objectivity.</P>


and i dont disagree with any of that. but u cannot dismiss that the defense DID drop off a cliff and have been some of the worst ranking defenses in the league for several years now. i am not saying thats solely bc of the spygate thing, but i am saying it prob def was a factor.</P>


They lost some of their best players on defense. Asante Samuel, Richard Seymour, Ty Law etc.. and they did a poor job of replacing them. Or is it your contention that Spygate was helping them draft too?</P>


You all just have to accept that the Pats were great before the controversy and they were great after.</P>


As is always the case, a few plays are the difference between winning SB's and losing. It was a few plays that won them a few as well. It all evens out.</P>


Spygate had little or no effect on the team before the scandel, or after. The facts just don't support any other position.</P>

lawl
06-11-2012, 05:22 PM
if it didnt give them an unfair advantage why were they penalized so steeply.
why would it even be against the rules? lmfao

Because the general fanbase overreacts.

The NFL is all about keeping its fans.

Jeff Fisher said it is no different or worse than Peyton Manning looking at the sideline and remembering defensive signs. Just noone knows about it. davidkan, a former member of these boards and college coach also didn't find it to be a big deal.

lawl
06-11-2012, 05:27 PM
I'm sorry, but didn't they break all kinds of records in 2007? I know they have been good since, but 2007 they where at their best. they got caught in 2007 then proceeded to have arguably the greatest offensive performance of all time.

gmen0820
06-11-2012, 05:58 PM
I'd agree that Spygate was overblown, too.

And going back to that Rams SB, keep in mind that Belichick had arguably one of the absolute best gameplans in NFL history for that defense. The fact that he was so innovative in creating a gameplan that specifically targeted a non QB player was unheard of, and certainly not seen against. And let's not also forget that Martz is an extremely stubborn coach.

The Rams had success with their second half installations. I had seen somewhere that players lobbied for adjustments in the first half as well, because Belichick committed his whole scheme to eliminating Faulk, seeing him as the life supply of the offense (even with two HoF receivers). Martz is incredibly stubborn, he doesn't even let QBs adjust the plays at the LoS, and of course it should be evident that his criticism of the Pats surely had a lot to do with his personal bias to his team and reputation, which has fallen off a cliff since.

Belichick is probably the best head coach in NFL history. He is a true student of the game, and one of the most disciplined coaches in the history of any sport. He has his system, and he follows it with the utmost consistency (as seen by his "head scratching" moves throughout his career). Was Spygate a violation against the rules, yeah, so he was punished.

But even with all the distraction he had caused his team, and adversity he put his team through, he has still kept the NFLs most recent dynasty on incredibly consistent level of high standard play for the past 4 years.

Drez
06-11-2012, 06:09 PM
if it didnt give them an unfair advantage why were they penalized so steeply. why would it even be against the rules? lmfao</p>


BB wasn't even suspended. They just suspended the Saints HC for a year.</p>


They filmed other teams signaling at thats a violation. But to suggest that the Pats are in some kind of decline because they can't "cheat" any more is pure fantasy. Its real "grassy knoll" stuff.</p>


Plus, they have been an elite team ever since.</p>


The opinions of Don Shula (who hates the Pats) and the Pittsburgh Steelers (who hate the Pats, and except for this past season have been owned by the Pats) are to be dismissed out of hand for their lack of objectivity.</p>

and i dont disagree with any of that.

but u cannot dismiss that the defense DID drop off a cliff and have been some of the worst ranking defenses in the league for several years now.

i am not saying thats solely bc of the spygate thing, but i am saying it prob def was a factor.
Take a look at their personnel on defense since then. Pioli leaving is a bigger cause of their defensive decline than not being able to cheat (though, I'm sure it helped some).

buffyblue
06-12-2012, 10:06 AM
*




Complete nonsense.

This is football. They are a TEAM.

He doesn't run, block and catch the ball.

</P>


And they lost.</P>


Teams that lose big games sometimes don't have a complete team effort.* Brady carries that team and its not enough.* You want to win champiuonships, you have to play as a team.* He's one of the truly great QB's of all team but the rest of the team is average at best.</P>


The Pats used to in years past.</P>




Teams that win bigs games sometimes dont have a complete team effort either.

You're saying a whole bunch of nothing.


</P>


Put it this way Lawl.* We wouldn't have won a SB this year without a great performance by our defense and ST's.* By definition, no player "carried this team on his back".</P>


Thats the premise of this debate.* My point is also that I can't think of a single SB winner that had one player "carry the team on his back" throughout their playoff run.</P>


Ben was probably the closest in 2008 that I can remember, but even there they still had a great defense. (althought they didn't play like it in the 4th quarter of the SB)</P>

Funny that you bring up Ben Rothlisberger as an example because the throw to Santonio Holmes was about as off kilter as the one Tom Brady made to Wes Welker the exception being that Santonio Holmes made the catch. The biggest play in that game was the amazing play that James Harrison made when he intercepted Kurt Warner in the red zone and took it to the house for the TD right before halftime. That was the game changing play. Ben Rothlisberger has awful perfomances in SuperBowls and his defense carries him as well as the other players on offense.

Ben Rothlisberger has never taken a team to SuperBowl without a defense ranked in top 5. That maybe a little misleading because Ben Rothlisberger has never had a defense in NFL that wasn’t top 5.

Eli Manning in both SuperBowls had to bring the team back after the defense tried to give the game away. Lets face it, if Wes Welker holds onto that ball and SuperBowl is won NE Patriots then we would have tons of posts on here about how NY Giants defense collapsed and lost that SuperBowl.

Whether someone is a homer or a hater, there is no denying the fact Eli Manning carried us this year. What he did was a thing of beauty.

buffyblue
06-12-2012, 10:09 AM
I'd agree that Spygate was overblown, too.

And going back to that Rams SB, keep in mind that Belichick had arguably one of the absolute best gameplans in NFL history for that defense. The fact that he was so innovative in creating a gameplan that specifically targeted a non QB player was unheard of, and certainly not seen against. And let's not also forget that Martz is an extremely stubborn coach.

The Rams had success with their second half installations. I had seen somewhere that players lobbied for adjustments in the first half as well, because Belichick committed his whole scheme to eliminating Faulk, seeing him as the life supply of the offense (even with two HoF receivers). Martz is incredibly stubborn, he doesn't even let QBs adjust the plays at the LoS, and of course it should be evident that his criticism of the Pats surely had a lot to do with his personal bias to his team and reputation, which has fallen off a cliff since.

Belichick is probably the best head coach in NFL history. He is a true student of the game, and one of the most disciplined coaches in the history of any sport. He has his system, and he follows it with the utmost consistency (as seen by his "head scratching" moves throughout his career). Was Spygate a violation against the rules, yeah, so he was punished.

But even with all the distraction he had caused his team, and adversity he put his team through, he has still kept the NFLs most recent dynasty on incredibly consistent level of high standard play for the past 4 years.

I completely agree with this statement.

Bill Bellichek is probably the greatest coach in NFL history.

buffyblue
06-12-2012, 10:12 AM
if it didnt give them an unfair advantage why were they penalized so steeply. why would it even be against the rules? lmfao</P>


BB wasn't even suspended.* They just suspended the Saints HC for a year.</P>


They filmed other teams signaling at thats a violation.* But to suggest that the Pats are in some kind of decline because they can't "cheat" any more is pure fantasy.* Its real "grassy knoll" stuff.</P>


Plus, they have been an elite team ever since.</P>


The opinions of Don Shula (who hates the Pats) and the Pittsburgh Steelers (who hate the Pats, and except for this past season have been owned by the Pats) are to be dismissed out of hand for their lack of objectivity.</P>


and i dont disagree with any of that. but u cannot dismiss that the defense DID drop off a cliff and have been some of the worst ranking defenses in the league for several years now. i am not saying thats solely bc of the spygate thing, but i am saying it prob def was a factor.</P>


They lost some of their best players on defense.* Asante Samuel, Richard Seymour, Ty Law etc..* and they did a poor job of replacing them.* Or is it your contention that Spygate was helping them draft too?</P>


You all just have to accept that the Pats were great before the controversy and they were great after.</P>


As is always the case, a few plays are the difference between winning SB's and losing.* It was a few plays that won them a few as well.* It all evens out.</P>


Spygate had little or no effect on the team before the scandel, or after.* The facts just don't support any other position.</P>

I totally agree with this post also.

buddy33
06-12-2012, 10:25 AM
The Giants defense tried to give the Super Bowl away? Seriously? The defense in both Super Bowls held the Patriots to well below their average in scoring.

If spying on teams was not such a big deal why do it? Why get penalized and have a draft pick taken away for nothing? Why haven't the other 31 teams been doing it?

Morehead State
06-12-2012, 10:29 AM
The Giants defense tried to give the Super Bowl away? Seriously? The defense in both Super Bowls held the Patriots to well below their average in scoring. If spying on teams was not such a big deal why do it? Why get penalized and have a draft pick taken away for nothing? Why haven't the other 31 teams been doing it?</P>


How many times are you going to ask the same question?</P>

buddy33
06-12-2012, 10:42 AM
Why? Is there a limit?

Maybe it's because I have yet to get an answer.

Morehead State
06-12-2012, 10:48 AM
Why? Is there a limit? Maybe it's because I have yet to get an answer.</P>


I've answered every time. You keep asking and changing it slightly, hoping to get a different response.</P>


If it wasn't a big deal why did they punish them?</P>


If it wasn't such a big deal why did they do it?</P>


</P>


Asked and answered your honor.</P>


And yes...there is a limit and Morehead has ruled that you have exceeded it.</P>

buddy33
06-12-2012, 10:50 AM
Well honestly it wasn't in response to you but all you have said is that YOU don't think it's a big deal.

Morehead State
06-12-2012, 11:05 AM
Well honestly it wasn't in response to you but all you have said is that YOU don't think it's a big deal.</P>


Its not a big deal because.....</P>


1. The Pats performance has been consistently outstanding both before and after the controversy. Demonstrating that the "advantage" of videotaping opposing sideline signals is no real advantage at all.</P>


2. All teams try to steal other team's signals. the Pats chose to videotape them in order to steal them which is a violation of NFL rules. But its unreasonable to suggest that its a real advantage at all.</P>


3. Many players and former coaches have said that it gives no real advantage at all. Only Don Shula (who was desperately trying to discredit the Pats in case they had a 19-0 season and passed the Dolphins record of 17-0) claimed otherwise.</P>


4. Because I said so.</P>

giantsfan420
06-12-2012, 11:58 AM
Well honestly it wasn't in response to you but all you have said is that YOU don't think it's a big deal.</P>


Its not a big deal because.....</P>


1. The Pats performance has been consistently outstanding both before and after the controversy.* Demonstrating that the "advantage" of videotaping opposing sideline signals is no real advantage at all.</P>


2.* All teams try to steal other team's signals.* the Pats chose to videotape them in order to steal them which is a violation of NFL rules.* But its unreasonable to suggest that its a real advantage at all.</P>


3. Many players and former coaches have said that it gives no real advantage at all.* Only Don Shula (who was desperately trying to discredit the Pats in case they had a 19-0 season and passed the Dolphins record of 17-0)* claimed otherwise.</P>


4.* Because I said so.</P>

1 is wrong. their defense has sucked since spygate. thats not the only cause, but it certainly has played a part in it. the d has been consistently terrible and not being able to film opposing teams practices/hand signals will do that to ya.
and 3 is wrong as well. "many players"...find me 3 players (hyperbole, even if u could find 3, 99% know it gave NE an unfair advantage) that have said its not a big deal. fact is, almost every single player, coach, fan, analyst has stated it gave NE an advantage. dont try and act like ur opinion is shared by, well, anyone really...they broke the rules, it gave them an unfair (in the sense that other teams werent practicing what NE was doing) advantage.
and 4 is always wrong, no explanation needed there I dont think...

gmen0820
06-12-2012, 12:22 PM
2001: 24th ranked total defense

2002: 23rd ranked total defense

2003: 7th ranked total defense

2004: 9th ranked total defense

2005: 26th ranked total defense*

2006: 6th ranked total defense

Post Spygate:*

2007: 4th ranked total defense

2008: 10th ranked total defense

2009: 11th ranked total defense*

2010: 25th ranked total defense

2011: 31st ranked total defense*

3 of Belichick's top 6 Patriot defenses have come in the 5 seasons following Spygate. I don't see any correlation between the two.

Morehead State
06-12-2012, 12:57 PM
2001: 24th ranked total defense 2002: 23rd ranked total defense 2003: 7th ranked total defense 2004: 9th ranked total defense 2005: 26th ranked total defense 2006: 6th ranked total defense Post Spygate: 2007: 4th ranked total defense 2008: 10th ranked total defense 2009: 11th ranked total defense 2010: 25th ranked total defense 2011: 31st ranked total defense 3 of Belichick's top 6 Patriot defenses have come in the 5 seasons following Spygate. I don't see any correlation between the two.</P>


I'm telling you, these guys are grasping at straws with this Spygate thing. </P>


Their basic premise is thatthe Patsare somehow negatively impacted by the fact that they can't "cheat" any more. Its pure nonsense. They were an elite NFL team before the controversy and have been an elite NFL team since.</P>


Any objective standard supports that.</P>

giantsfan420
06-12-2012, 01:12 PM
2001: 24th ranked total defense 2002: 23rd ranked total defense 2003: 7th ranked total defense 2004: 9th ranked total defense 2005: 26th ranked total defense* 2006: 6th ranked total defense Post Spygate:* 2007: 4th ranked total defense 2008: 10th ranked total defense 2009: 11th ranked total defense* 2010: 25th ranked total defense 2011: 31st ranked total defense* 3 of Belichick's top 6 Patriot defenses have come in the 5 seasons following Spygate. I don't see any correlation between the two.</P>


I'm telling you,* these guys are grasping at straws with this Spygate thing. </P>


Their basic premise is that*the Pats*are somehow negatively impacted by the fact that they* can't "cheat" *any more.* Its pure nonsense.* They were an elite NFL team before the controversy and have been an elite NFL team since.</P>


Any objective standard supports that.</P>

no. my one and only premise is that spygate gave NE some advantage. it effected the games inwhich the pats violated the rules.
i may have been incorrect about their d and it correlating as strongly to spygate as gmen pointed out. i have no issue being wrong. i dont think im god and cant be wrong.

any objective standard realizes that what ne did played a role in those games. to deny that is moronic, and i doubt anyone else would share ur opinion that it had absolutely no bearing on anything and it was victimless

Morehead State
06-12-2012, 01:14 PM
2001: 24th ranked total defense 2002: 23rd ranked total defense 2003: 7th ranked total defense 2004: 9th ranked total defense 2005: 26th ranked total defense 2006: 6th ranked total defense Post Spygate: 2007: 4th ranked total defense 2008: 10th ranked total defense 2009: 11th ranked total defense 2010: 25th ranked total defense 2011: 31st ranked total defense 3 of Belichick's top 6 Patriot defenses have come in the 5 seasons following Spygate. I don't see any correlation between the two.</P>


I'm telling you, these guys are grasping at straws with this Spygate thing. </P>


Their basic premise is thatthe Patsare somehow negatively impacted by the fact that they can't "cheat" any more. Its pure nonsense. They were an elite NFL team before the controversy and have been an elite NFL team since.</P>


Any objective standard supports that.</P>


no. my one and only premise is that spygate gave NE some advantage. it effected the games inwhich the pats violated the rules. i may have been incorrect about their d and it correlating as strongly to spygate as gmen pointed out. i have no issue being wrong. i dont think im god and cant be wrong. any objective standard realizes that what ne did played a role in those games. to deny that is moronic, and i doubt anyone else would share ur opinion that it had absolutely no bearing on anything and it was victimless</P>


How? What evidence do you have? My point is that there is no evidence to support your view.</P>

giantsfan420
06-12-2012, 01:14 PM
2001: 24th ranked total defense

2002: 23rd ranked total defense

2003: 7th ranked total defense

2004: 9th ranked total defense

2005: 26th ranked total defense*

2006: 6th ranked total defense

Post Spygate:*

2007: 4th ranked total defense

2008: 10th ranked total defense

2009: 11th ranked total defense*

2010: 25th ranked total defense

2011: 31st ranked total defense*

3 of Belichick's top 6 Patriot defenses have come in the 5 seasons following Spygate. I don't see any correlation between the two.

we also dont know when their violations started. perhaps it accounted for some of their success eariler than 07. they were caught several weeks into the season i believe in 07...but the correlation is not nearly as strong as i had recalled thanks for clarifying that gmen

giantsfan420
06-12-2012, 01:16 PM
2001: 24th ranked total defense 2002: 23rd ranked total defense 2003: 7th ranked total defense 2004: 9th ranked total defense 2005: 26th ranked total defense* 2006: 6th ranked total defense Post Spygate:* 2007: 4th ranked total defense 2008: 10th ranked total defense 2009: 11th ranked total defense* 2010: 25th ranked total defense 2011: 31st ranked total defense* 3 of Belichick's top 6 Patriot defenses have come in the 5 seasons following Spygate. I don't see any correlation between the two.</P>


I'm telling you,* these guys are grasping at straws with this Spygate thing. </P>


Their basic premise is that*the Pats*are somehow negatively impacted by the fact that they* can't "cheat" *any more.* Its pure nonsense.* They were an elite NFL team before the controversy and have been an elite NFL team since.</P>


Any objective standard supports that.</P>


no. my one and only premise is that spygate gave NE some advantage. it effected the games inwhich the pats violated the rules. i may have been incorrect about their d and it correlating as strongly to spygate as gmen pointed out. i have no issue being wrong. i dont think im god and cant be wrong. any objective standard realizes that what ne did played a role in those games. to deny that is moronic, and i doubt anyone else would share ur opinion that it had absolutely no bearing on anything and it was victimless</P>


How?* What evidence do you have?* My point is that there is no evidence to support your view.</P>

theres no evidence that supports ur stance.

lack of evidence is not lack of guilt. they were caught and penalized for breaking a rule that is setup to keep the playing field level...how would any evidence even be needed to prove that it did have an effect?
how can u say it didnt? u have absolutely no proof whatsoever that it didnt...at least i have the fact they were caught.
and if it didnt have any effect why would NE do it for 6 yrs????? their continuous violation of the rule is proof that they felt at least that it was worth it enough to continue its practice

buddy33
06-12-2012, 01:17 PM
I don't think anyone is trying to say that spying was the only reason for their success, but I thinks it's silly to think it couldn't have helped them. Apparently the NFL thought it was serious enough to fine them and get rid of the evidence.

Morehead State
06-12-2012, 01:17 PM
2001: 24th ranked total defense 2002: 23rd ranked total defense 2003: 7th ranked total defense 2004: 9th ranked total defense 2005: 26th ranked total defense 2006: 6th ranked total defense Post Spygate: 2007: 4th ranked total defense 2008: 10th ranked total defense 2009: 11th ranked total defense 2010: 25th ranked total defense 2011: 31st ranked total defense 3 of Belichick's top 6 Patriot defenses have come in the 5 seasons following Spygate. I don't see any correlation between the two. we also dont know when their violations started. perhaps it accounted for some of their success eariler than 07. they were caught several weeks into the season i believe in 07...but the correlation is not nearly as strong as i had recalled thanks for clarifying that gmen</P>


Again...I just don't see the evidence.</P>

giantsfan420
06-12-2012, 01:21 PM
2001: 24th ranked total defense 2002: 23rd ranked total defense 2003: 7th ranked total defense 2004: 9th ranked total defense 2005: 26th ranked total defense* 2006: 6th ranked total defense Post Spygate:* 2007: 4th ranked total defense 2008: 10th ranked total defense 2009: 11th ranked total defense* 2010: 25th ranked total defense 2011: 31st ranked total defense* 3 of Belichick's top 6 Patriot defenses have come in the 5 seasons following Spygate. I don't see any correlation between the two. we also dont know when their violations started. perhaps it accounted for some of their success eariler than 07. they were caught several weeks into the season i believe in 07...but the correlation is not nearly as strong as i had recalled thanks for clarifying that gmen</P>


Again...I just don't see the evidence.</P>

i wouldnt brag about that point...matt walsh, employee and cameraman who taped opposing teams practices came forward, admitted to taping other teams practices...he had some sort of confidentiallity agreement and immunity. the tapes were destroyed.

if u want the evidence file a foir to access goodells archives lol...dunno how u cant simply come to terms that it had an effect on the games. now dont misconstrue that, as u have done throughout, that it means it was the sole or even significant factor in NE's success. it means that it gave NE an advantage, however small or large it was...to deny that premise is just moronic. sorry, i cant think of another word as fitting, not calling u moronic, just this particular stance of urs

if it didnt have any benefit or effect, why would NE continue the practice for 6 yrs?? oh yeah nfl teams always waste important and limited time on things that have no effect on the games...(sarcasm)

buddy33
06-12-2012, 01:24 PM
I meant it to seem like the spying was the only reason for their success. I have said that Brady is a very good QB and I think BB is a very old coach. I juts think it's silly to believe that they broke he rules and paid a penalty without gaining an advantage.

giantsfan420
06-12-2012, 01:26 PM
I meant it to seem like the spying was the only reason for their success. I have said that Brady is a very good QB and I think BB is a very old coach. I juts think it's silly to believe that they broke he rules and paid a penalty without gaining an advantage.

i dont know how or why anything more would need to be stated.

and bb is meticulous as they come. that team wouldnt waste time on anything that didnt benefit their chances at success

buddy33
06-12-2012, 01:30 PM
Yeah I think we all now they are a good team, but even they could use a little advantage. Maybe it's that lack of an advantage that has been the difference. I just don't buy that it didn't help at all and because it was such a not factor they paid the price for it.

Morehead State
06-12-2012, 01:37 PM
2001: 24th ranked total defense 2002: 23rd ranked total defense 2003: 7th ranked total defense 2004: 9th ranked total defense 2005: 26th ranked total defense 2006: 6th ranked total defense Post Spygate: 2007: 4th ranked total defense 2008: 10th ranked total defense 2009: 11th ranked total defense 2010: 25th ranked total defense 2011: 31st ranked total defense 3 of Belichick's top 6 Patriot defenses have come in the 5 seasons following Spygate. I don't see any correlation between the two. we also dont know when their violations started. perhaps it accounted for some of their success eariler than 07. they were caught several weeks into the season i believe in 07...but the correlation is not nearly as strong as i had recalled thanks for clarifying that gmen</P>


Again...I just don't see the evidence.</P>


</P>


**** Vermiel..</P>


"Personally, I don't think it had any effect on the game," Vermeil said. "That stuff's been going on forever and I don't think you gain from it.</P>


</P>


</P>


Bill Cowher....</P>


"Oh, heck no! I mean honestly, the taping that was involved in that story, was the taping of Tom Brady making some pretty accurate throws, and that's what beat us," said Cowher. "That's the only taping that I remember. You know what? Listen, all that stuff at this point, I think a lot of it is overblown. Did they know the signals maybe of our Monday night when we came up there? You know, so what. Sometimes I thought we knew some plays because they got in certain formations. The bottom line is you've got to execute." </P>


"The bottom line is they completed passes and they beat one-on-one situations better than we were able to defend them. So you know what? The game is still played between the lines, the game is still played by men, and it comes down to executing. Certainly anticipation helps, and certainly if you can know some things in a pre-snap that can help you execute, so be it. But right now, all those things are moot points because everybody's got communication. The defense has it, the offense has it, so all this 'signal calling/stealing' of the years past are that - in the past." </P>


</P>


</P>


Tony Dungy....</P>


•: "I don't think it was an advantage, but it's just disappointing to me whenever anything comes out (and) the public perception of the game is hurt."</P>


</P>


And BTW, Jimmy Johnson said he did the same thing and most teams did. The Pats just got turned in by Mangini.</P>


</P>

buddy33
06-12-2012, 01:39 PM
So you found some quotes. I said some players and a former coach had a problem and you said they where bitter. What if these guys you found just don't want to throw them under the bus? What if they did the same thing and can't say anything bad about it?

gmen0820
06-12-2012, 01:40 PM
Well let's carry all this forward.

We know NE gained an advantage in some way, because they continued the practice, but with lack of correlation, it's hard to grasp just how much. NE remains a winning franchise, the defense continues to show consistent inconsistency in rankings, and they have still made two SBs.

Was it overblown by the league? I think it was in hindsight. Do I fault the league for the punishments? No, not at all. I'm looking at everything 5 years after the fact, and discovering very marginal, to no significant signs of advantage.

Did NE think they were benefitting more than they were? That's the only logical conclusion I can reach, but that there makes their intentions guilty for continuation of prohibited practice, only justifiable in my eyes by the fact that they HAVE continued to be an AFC powerhouse, and they HAVE continued to reach SBs (albeit not winning appearances, but there are a lot of uncontrollable things that thank god went our way), and they HAVE been able to stare in the ugly face of the awful adversity they were challenged to beat.

So I find it safe to say it was overblown, although at the time it is justifiable that it certainly didn't feel like it to some.

gmen0820
06-12-2012, 01:44 PM
So you found some quotes. I said some players and a former coach had a problem and you said they where bitter. What if these guys you found just don't want to throw them under the bus? What if they did the same thing and can't say anything bad about it?If anything, it would show that there are two sides to everything so if you are very opposed to this issue, you better be prepared to build and support a solid argument that doesn't predicate itself on ambiguity.

Morehead State
06-12-2012, 01:44 PM
So you found some quotes. I said some players and a former coach had a problem and you said they where bitter. What if these guys you found just don't want to throw them under the bus? What if they did the same thing and can't say anything bad about it?</P>


All three were guys who were beaten by the Pats in key moments. They have a reason to be bitter and still say that it had no effect.</P>


They have credibility for that reason.</P>

giantsfan420
06-12-2012, 01:45 PM
Well let's carry all this forward.

We know NE gained an advantage in some way, because they continued the practice, but with lack of correlation, it's hard to grasp just how much. NE remains a winning franchise, the defense continues to show consistent inconsistency in rankings, and they have still made two SBs.

Was it overblown by the league? I think it was in hindsight. Do I fault the league for the punishments? No, not at all. I'm looking at everything 5 years after the fact, and discovering very marginal, to no significant signs of advantage.

Did NE think they were benefitting more than they were? That's the only logical conclusion I can reach, but that there makes their intentions guilty for continuation of prohibited practice, only justifiable in my eyes by the fact that they HAVE continued to be an AFC powerhouse, and they HAVE continued to reach SBs (albeit not winning appearances, but there are a lot of uncontrollable things that thank god went our way), and they HAVE been able to stare in the ugly face of the awful adversity they were challenged to beat.

So I find it safe to say it was overblown, although at the time it certainly didn't feel like it.
well said. the continuance of the violation is a point that shouldnt be overlooked. they continued to do it, so they must have believed it gave them some sort of advantage. how large or small of an advantage, we'll never know really...but to simply say it had no bearing on anything is completely illogical and imo moronic

buddy33
06-12-2012, 01:46 PM
Wouldn't anyone be bitter if they where beaten by someone who later got caught cheating?

lawl
06-12-2012, 05:30 PM
Its completely possible that they are still doing it

Morehead State
06-12-2012, 07:51 PM
Its completely possible that they are still doing it</P>


Its completely possible that EVERYONE is still doing it.</P>

buffyblue
06-13-2012, 11:52 AM
The Giants defense tried to give the Super Bowl away? Seriously? The defense in both Super Bowls held the Patriots to well below their average in scoring.

If spying on teams was not such a big deal why do it? Why get penalized and have a draft pick taken away for nothing? Why haven't the other 31 teams been doing it?

NY Giants offense in SuperBowl XLII started the game with the longest opening drive in SuperBowl history at 9:59 and although NE Patriots scored on the subsequent drive, they didnt put it in the endzone till the second quarter. That opening drive by NY Giants set the tone for the game.

NY offense in SuperBowl XLVI had the ball for 38 minutes. After the defense collapsed and gave up 17 straight points, Eli Manning took NY Giants on and 8 minute drive to score field goal, give NY Giants defense a rest and take that game back from Tom Brady. Eli Manning was brilliant in SuperBowl XLVI.

In both SuoerBowls, the defense let the game get out of hand and Eli Manning had to reign it in and have game winning drives at the end of the 4th quarter. Both times, NE Patriots got the ball back with very littke time remaining.

The fact that NE Patriots have been a better team since spygate broke is evidence of little they actually benefited from filming.

Lambeau12
06-13-2012, 12:03 PM
I hope we can get that championship belt back lol. This year will be awesome, I can feel it already.

buddy33
06-13-2012, 01:34 PM
I'm sorry but to act as if the defense was throwing away either Super Bowl is just wrong. The Patriots in both Super Bowls had high powered offenses and where held o about half of their average points per game. Yes, Eli had two great drives, and yes, they scored last to win those games. That does not take away from what the defense was able to do in both Super Bowls and by the way the Patriots finished both Super Bowls on offense meaning the Giants defense held on to save the win.

buffyblue
06-13-2012, 02:02 PM
I'm sorry but to act as if the defense was throwing away either Super Bowl is just wrong. The Patriots in both Super Bowls had high powered offenses and where held o about half of their average points per game. Yes, Eli had two great drives, and yes, they scored last to win those games. That does not take away from what the defense was able to do in both Super Bowls and by the way the Patriots finished both Super Bowls on offense meaning the Giants defense held on to save the win.

Not taking away from the defense because they did make big plays in both SuperBowl XLII as well as SuperBowl XLVI but in no way did our defense dominate NE offense. In both games we scored first and had to score at the end in order to win. The defense was on its heels at the end of the game both times and was able to stop NE Patriots offense at end of game because Eli Manning and NY Giants offense scored and gave the ball back to NE England Patriots with very little time left.

The biggest defensive play for us in SuperBowl XLVI was the dropped pass by Wes Welker.

buddy33
06-13-2012, 02:06 PM
Right, so a team that only scored about half their average was not dominated.

Oh, and what was the Giants offense doing when the Patriots did score those 17 points? See, it's a team sport. They had their ups and downs but they won the game. The defense absolutely was huge in both Super Bowls stopping that offense.

buddy33
06-13-2012, 02:07 PM
The biggest defensive play in the last Super Bowl was the Safety that put points on the board for the Giants.

Should we say the biggest play on offense was getting the Bradshaw fumble back?

Morehead State
06-13-2012, 02:45 PM
The Giants defense tried to give the Super Bowl away? Seriously? The defense in both Super Bowls held the Patriots to well below their average in scoring. If spying on teams was not such a big deal why do it? Why get penalized and have a draft pick taken away for nothing? Why haven't the other 31 teams been doing it? NY Giants offense in SuperBowl XLII started the game with the longest opening drive in SuperBowl history at 9:59 and although NE Patriots scored on the subsequent drive, they didnt put it in the endzone till the second quarter. That opening drive by NY Giants set the tone for the game. NY offense in SuperBowl XLVI had the ball for 38 minutes. After the defense collapsed and gave up 17 straight points, Eli Manning took NY Giants on and 8 minute drive to score field goal, give NY Giants defense a rest and take that game back from Tom Brady. Eli Manning was brilliant in SuperBowl XLVI. In both SuoerBowls, the defense let the game get out of hand and Eli Manning had to reign it in and have game winning drives at the end of the 4th quarter. Both times, NE Patriots got the ball back with very littke time remaining. The fact that NE Patriots have been a better team since spygate broke is evidence of little they actually benefited from filming.</P>


Out of hand? They held the highest scoring team in NFL history to 14 points in SB 42 and then another high scoring team to 17 points this year.</P>


You are in pure Fantasyland with this one.</P>

buffyblue
06-13-2012, 08:21 PM
You guys are in pure fantasy land if you actually think those SuperBowl victories was due to defenseive domination. The defense did over achieve and played well but the biggest reason Tom Brady and NE Patriots didn't score more points is because Eli Manning and NY Giants offense kept the ball out of their hands.

Homer or hater whichever you may be really doesn't matter because there is no denying that it was Eli Manning that stepped up and took SuperBowl XLVI back. After that first drive of the second half, our defense was done and Eli Manning slowed the game back and kept Tom Brady on the sidelines.

buffyblue
06-13-2012, 08:23 PM
*double post*

buffyblue
06-13-2012, 08:27 PM
The biggest defensive play in the last Super Bowl was the Safety that put points on the board for the Giants.

Should we say the biggest play on offense was getting the Bradshaw fumble back?

Kind of proves my point that what you claim was the biggest defensive play was a call that could have gone either way.

buddy33
06-13-2012, 11:34 PM
No, it was intentional grounding. It was a Saftey and that is a fact.

As far as the Giants defense in both Super Bowl they clearly where dominating. There is no other way to describe it when you shut down a potent offense.

Um, the Giants offense did hold the ball, for a long time and that did help the defense out. It was also the defense forcing the Patriots to punt the ball and stall them when they did have the ball that gave the offense the opportunity to have the ball in the 1st
place.

In 2007 the Patriots where the greatest offense to ever play the game and they where stopped by the defense. Anyone who saw that game knows that. This past Super Bowl the defense once again held the Patriots well under their averages on offense. Go look at the box score of the game.

buffyblue
06-14-2012, 05:54 AM
It was a call that could have gone either way. However, it is special teams that you should be applauding for burying NE Patriots back there on the punt.

The defense did not dominate in either SuperBowl. They overachieved and played a very good game but they benefited largely from Eli Manning and the offense.

At what point did NY Giants stall NE Patriots offense when NE England Patriots scored 17 straight points and Tom Brady broke the record for most consecutive completions in a SuperBowl? It was Eli Manning that subsequently took the NY Giants downfield for over 8 minutes on the next drive to score a field goal and give the “dominating” NY Giants defense that was exhausted a much needed rest. Eli Manning then took over 6 minutes on the next NY Giants possession to score another field goal giving the “dominant” NY Giants defense another much needed rest. Eli Manning knows full well to run down the clock to keep the defense fresh as possible for the end of the game because they are not to be trusted to hold a lead. The regular season collapse against the Philadelphia Eagles when they gave up 4 TDs in seven minutes and the giving up against Green Bay Packers in Giants Stadium with 50 seconds left to lose the game are evidence of that. The way they quit against NO Orleans Saints was despicaple and lets not forget how many leads they blew in the 2009 season.

Granted, the defense did get healthy and step up at the end of the regular season overachieved throughout the playoffs and the SuperBowl but they did not dominate in SuperBowl XLVI. We have the best d-line in football but the rest of our defense is very flawed and below average.

Look at the box score for SuperBowl XLVI. NE Patriots scored 17 points in 22 minutes and were a dropped pass from Wes Welker away from wrapping the game up.

NE England Patriots sacked Eli Manning more than NY Giants sacked Tom Brady.

Defense did an admirable job all things considered and played well above their ability. However, it is clear as a Carolina Blue sky that Eli Manning handed in one of the greatest SuperBowl performances by a QB in the history of the game and once again he led NY Giants and took us to The Promised Land.

I bELIeve.

buddy33
06-14-2012, 08:02 AM
It could not have gone either way.Brady threw the ball away while under pressure in the end zone. That is a Safety and is not even debatable.

So the defense gave them 2 points to start with the Safety which was also what gave them great field position for their next drive to score a TD. You want to thank the special teams for pinning Brady deep and praise the offense yet they where the ones that where forced to punt after they had the ball to start the game. So the 1st 9 points of the game are an example of how the defense helped them win.

The Giants had the ball 5 times in the 1st half. Let's exclude 1 because it was a the end of the half and they took a knee. So the offense scored once in the 1st half and it was set up by the Safety. So the Giants defense held the high powered Patriots to only 10 points in the 1st half and where responsible for scoring 2 points and setting up the other 7. That sounds dominant to me.

During the 17 points that the Patriots scored, the Giants had to punt the ball twice. What happened there? Then they made a field goal. Then the defense forced the Patriots to punt. Then the Giants made another field goal. Then the defense intercepts Brady. The Giants get the ball and then punt. The Giants defense then forces the Patriots to punt again. Then the Giants go ahead with a TD and finish the game off with the defense stopping the Patriots.

It's a team sport and both sides played well and the defense absolutely played well and dominated most of the game.

As far as the 1st time they played in the Super Bowl, they where again absolutely dominating as they stopped the greatest offense ever to play the game.

Oh, and if your going to keep bringing up the Welker drop you can not ignore the Bradshaw fumble that they where lucky to get back.

Morehead State
06-14-2012, 08:36 AM
It could not have gone either way.Brady threw the ball away while under pressure in the end zone. That is a Safety and is not even debatable. So the defense gave them 2 points to start with the Safety which was also what gave them great field position for their next drive to score a TD. You want to thank the special teams for pinning Brady deep and praise the offense yet they where the ones that where forced to punt after they had the ball to start the game. So the 1st 9 points of the game are an example of how the defense helped them win. The Giants had the ball 5 times in the 1st half. Let's exclude 1 because it was a the end of the half and they took a knee. So the offense scored once in the 1st half and it was set up by the Safety. So the Giants defense held the high powered Patriots to only 10 points in the 1st half and where responsible for scoring 2 points and setting up the other 7. That sounds dominant to me. During the 17 points that the Patriots scored, the Giants had to punt the ball twice. What happened there? Then they made a field goal. Then the defense forced the Patriots to punt. Then the Giants made another field goal. Then the defense intercepts Brady. The Giants get the ball and then punt. The Giants defense then forces the Patriots to punt again. Then the Giants go ahead with a TD and finish the game off with the defense stopping the Patriots. It's a team sport and both sides played well and the defense absolutely played well and dominated most of the game. As far as the 1st time they played in the Super Bowl, they where again absolutely dominating as they stopped the greatest offense ever to play the game. Oh, and if your going to keep bringing up the Welker drop you can not ignore the Bradshaw fumble that they where lucky to get back.</P>


You've hit the nail on the head. It IS a team sport. As a matter of fact football is the ultimate team sport.</P>


To suggest that anyone carried the team on his back to win that SB is nonsense. Its beyond nonsense. It demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of how the game is played.</P>

giantsfan420
06-14-2012, 10:05 AM
It could not have gone either way.Brady threw the ball away while under pressure in the end zone. That is a Safety and is not even debatable. So the defense gave them 2 points to start with the Safety which was also what gave them great field position for their next drive to score a TD. You want to thank the special teams for pinning Brady deep and praise the offense yet they where the ones that where forced to punt after they had the ball to start the game. So the 1st 9 points of the game are an example of how the defense helped them win. The Giants had the ball 5 times in the 1st half. Let's exclude 1 because it was a the end of the half and they took a knee. So the offense scored once in the 1st half and it was set up by the Safety. So the Giants defense held the high powered Patriots to only 10 points in the 1st half and where responsible for scoring 2 points and setting up the other 7. That sounds dominant to me. During the 17 points that the Patriots scored, the Giants had to punt the ball twice. What happened there? Then they made a field goal. Then the defense forced the Patriots to punt. Then the Giants made another field goal. Then the defense intercepts Brady. The Giants get the ball and then punt. The Giants defense then forces the Patriots to punt again. Then the Giants go ahead with a TD and finish the game off with the defense stopping the Patriots. It's a team sport and both sides played well and the defense absolutely played well and dominated most of the game. As far as the 1st time they played in the Super Bowl, they where again absolutely dominating as they stopped the greatest offense ever to play the game. Oh, and if your going to keep bringing up the Welker drop you can not ignore the Bradshaw fumble that they where lucky to get back.</P>


You've hit the nail on the head.* It IS a team sport.* As a matter of fact football is the ultimate team sport.</P>


To suggest that anyone carried the team on his back to win that SB is nonsense.* Its beyond nonsense.* It demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of how the game is played.</P>

yeah seriously. he should know that when it comes to eli carrying the team, "players can not carry their team....

you can only say a player carried his team and not have your understanding of football challenged when its someones besides eli...get with the MS program already pal

buffyblue
06-14-2012, 04:04 PM
Since when does the expression "put the team on his back" equate to being a one man team?

We aren't literally saying ten of our guys were piled up on Eli's back.* We are saying Eli was the difference.* Without Eli, this team would not have made it to the playoffs, let alone win a SB.* He was the MVP of our team.* His play carried our team to victory, etc.




Exactly. Your post is perfectly stated.

buffyblue
06-14-2012, 04:08 PM
It's even hard to say one play meant the season. I mean yeah, at the time that play against the Jets could be called a season saver, but so could the JPP block. I mean they had a lot of 4th quarter come backs this year and considering that they just made that means any one of them where just as important.

I'm just glad they won.

One play may not make a difference? How about when the RomoSexual overthrew Miles Austin who was wide open because out “dominant” and “veteran” defensive backs couldn’t figure out what defense we were supposed to be in? Yeah. Okay.

buddy33
06-14-2012, 04:12 PM
Or the play by a defensive player to block the field goal.

Like I said, it's hard to say just one play.

buffyblue
06-14-2012, 04:12 PM
Tom Brady also hasn't won anything since "spy gate".

They beat 1 team last year with a winning record and that was because of a dropped pass in the end zone and a missed field goal. That's why they made it to the Super Bowl.

They won the dvision be because they compiled a 13-3 record. The made it to SuperBowl XLVI because their defense back made an awesome play by ripping the ball out of Lee Evan’s hands in the endzzone. they are a great team with perhaps the greatest QB of all time leading them.

buffyblue
06-14-2012, 04:14 PM
Seriously? Maybe it gave the Patriots an unfair advantage. Apparently it was a big enough deal that they where fined and had a pick taken away. Hey, 0-2 in the Super Bowl since they got caught.</P>


The only reason the Pats don't have 2 more SB's is us.* They have no real answer for our pass rush.</P>


We held them twice to under 20 ponts in the SB. Both times they were prolific scoring teams.* </P>


Trust me, they've seen everything we've ever done on film.* Is it your view that *filming our "walk-throughs" would have had any difference?</P>


If so, *you're just in a fantasy world.</P>

The reasont hey don;t have 2 more SuperBowl rings is because they have no answer for Eli Manning in the 4th quarter.

buddy33
06-14-2012, 04:15 PM
I said its hard to say one play meant the season. Where did I say make a difference?

buffyblue
06-14-2012, 04:16 PM
if it didnt give them an unfair advantage why were they penalized so steeply. why would it even be against the rules? lmfao</P>


BB wasn't even suspended.* They just suspended the Saints HC for a year.</P>


They filmed other teams signaling at thats a violation.* But to suggest that the Pats are in some kind of decline because they can't "cheat" any more is pure fantasy.* Its real "grassy knoll" stuff.</P>


Plus, they have been an elite team ever since.</P>


The opinions of Don Shula (who hates the Pats) and the Pittsburgh Steelers (who hate the Pats, and except for this past season have been owned by the Pats) are to be dismissed out of hand for their lack of objectivity.</P>

So you discount the opinion of Bill Cowher who happenned to be P[ittsburgh Steelers coach for quite awhile on this subject too?

buddy33
06-14-2012, 04:16 PM
If you think Eli won the Super Bowl by himself I don't know what to tell you.

buffyblue
06-14-2012, 04:17 PM
Why? Is there a limit? Maybe it's because I have yet to get an answer.</P>


I've answered every time.* You keep asking and changing it slightly, hoping to get a different response.</P>


If it wasn't a big deal why did they punish them?</P>


If it wasn't such a big deal why did they do it?</P>


*</P>


Asked and answered your honor.</P>


And yes...there is a limit and Morehead has ruled that you have exceeded it.</P>

Well it was a big deal or they wouldn’t have watsed their time doing it. However, due to their continued success, they apparently didn’t need to do it.

buffyblue
06-14-2012, 04:29 PM
It could not have gone either way.Brady threw the ball away while under pressure in the end zone. That is a Safety and is not even debatable. So the defense gave them 2 points to start with the Safety which was also what gave them great field position for their next drive to score a TD. You want to thank the special teams for pinning Brady deep and praise the offense yet they where the ones that where forced to punt after they had the ball to start the game. So the 1st 9 points of the game are an example of how the defense helped them win. The Giants had the ball 5 times in the 1st half. Let's exclude 1 because it was a the end of the half and they took a knee. So the offense scored once in the 1st half and it was set up by the Safety. So the Giants defense held the high powered Patriots to only 10 points in the 1st half and where responsible for scoring 2 points and setting up the other 7. That sounds dominant to me. During the 17 points that the Patriots scored, the Giants had to punt the ball twice. What happened there? Then they made a field goal. Then the defense forced the Patriots to punt. Then the Giants made another field goal. Then the defense intercepts Brady. The Giants get the ball and then punt. The Giants defense then forces the Patriots to punt again. Then the Giants go ahead with a TD and finish the game off with the defense stopping the Patriots. It's a team sport and both sides played well and the defense absolutely played well and dominated most of the game. As far as the 1st time they played in the Super Bowl, they where again absolutely dominating as they stopped the greatest offense ever to play the game. Oh, and if your going to keep bringing up the Welker drop you can not ignore the Bradshaw fumble that they where lucky to get back.</P>


You've hit the nail on the head.* It IS a team sport.* As a matter of fact football is the ultimate team sport.</P>


To suggest that anyone carried the team on his back to win that SB is nonsense.* Its beyond nonsense.* It demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of how the game is played.</P>

Eli Manning and NY Giants offense controlling the TOP for 38 minutes keeping Tom Brady on the sidelines and allowing NY Giants defense to rest is domination.

NY defense giving up 17 points in 22 minutes, relying on a dropped pass by a player on opposssing offense and repeatedly having to rely on their own teams offense to control and dictate the tempo as well as direction of the game is not domination.

It is obvious you understand nothing about the game and I highly doubt that you ever played it.

I bELIeve.

buffyblue
06-14-2012, 04:31 PM
If you think Eli won the Super Bowl by himself I don't know what to tell you.

If you actually think that is what I stated and not whats is face moorehead’s interpretation then I don’t know what to tell you except to redirtect to the start of the post-

"The team stepped up huge but Eli Manning carried us and pulled out 4th quarter comebacks during the regular season to keep us in it. Eli shouldered the load and carried the team through so.e tough times and injuries last season. With the exception of Tom Brady and a healthy Peyton Manning, I don't think there is another QB in NFL that could do what Eli Manning did with us last season. "

buddy33
06-14-2012, 04:44 PM
Clearly Eli was awesome in both Super Bowls and he was deserving of both MVP's, but the defense was dominant in both games gong against great offensive power. You say the Patriots scored 17 points in a row but leave out that the Giants punted twice in that time frame. Also the last, and only points the Patriots scored in the second half of the last Super Bowl where on the 1st drive. So how exactly did the defense try to give the game away as you suggested earlier? By shutting out the Patriots for the last 26+ minutes?

Morehead State
06-14-2012, 05:10 PM
Seriously? Maybe it gave the Patriots an unfair advantage. Apparently it was a big enough deal that they where fined and had a pick taken away. Hey, 0-2 in the Super Bowl since they got caught.</P>


The only reason the Pats don't have 2 more SB's is us. They have no real answer for our pass rush.</P>


We held them twice to under 20 ponts in the SB. Both times they were prolific scoring teams. </P>


Trust me, they've seen everything we've ever done on film. Is it your view that filming our "walk-throughs" would have had any difference?</P>


If so, you're just in a fantasy world.</P>


The reasont hey don;t have 2 more SuperBowl rings is because they have no answer for Eli Manning in the 4th quarter.</P>


How many quarters are there in a game?</P>

Morehead State
06-14-2012, 05:12 PM
Clearly Eli was awesome in both Super Bowls and he was deserving of both MVP's, but the defense was dominant in both games gong against great offensive power. You say the Patriots scored 17 points in a row but leave out that the Giants punted twice in that time frame. Also the last, and only points the Patriots scored in the second half of the last Super Bowl where on the 1st drive. So how exactly did the defense try to give the game away as you suggested earlier? By shutting out the Patriots for the last 26+ minutes?</P>


Justin Tuck should have been the MVP of SB 42. The defense held the highest scoring team in NFL history to 14 points.</P>


It should have been a defensive player. Sports writers tend to be morons.</P>

Morehead State
06-14-2012, 05:14 PM
If you think Eli won the Super Bowl by himself I don't know what to tell you. If you actually think that is what I stated and not whats is face moorehead’s interpretation then I don’t know what to tell you except to redirtect to the start of the post- "The team stepped up huge but Eli Manning carried us and pulled out 4th quarter comebacks during the regular season to keep us in it. Eli shouldered the load and carried the team through so.e tough times and injuries last season. With the exception of Tom Brady and a healthy Peyton Manning, I don't think there is another QB in NFL that could do what Eli Manning did with us last season. "</P>


I like my interpretation better. It gave us pages and pages of debate after a very boring original post.</P>


3 months after we won the SB, some guy starts a thread saying.."Wow, we won the SB". And I turned that into thirteen pages. The OP never got so much attention in his life.</P>


I'm there for all of you, Don't forget that.</P>

buffyblue
06-14-2012, 05:34 PM
Clearly Eli was awesome in both Super Bowls and he was deserving of both MVP's, but the defense was dominant in both games gong against great offensive power. You say the Patriots scored 17 points in a row but leave out that the Giants punted twice in that time frame. Also the last, and only points the Patriots scored in the second half of the last Super Bowl where on the 1st drive. So how exactly did the defense try to give the game away as you suggested earlier? By shutting out the Patriots for the last 26+ minutes?

That is part of the point I am stating. The defense was able to come up big in the last 26 minutes because after NE Patriots scored to start 3rd quarter, Eli Manning mehodically ate the clock up and drove down field to score. He gave that defense a much needed rest. The defense subsequently was able to stop NE Patriots and then Eli Manning once again methodically ate up the clock while taking us down field to score another field goal.

Lets say that NE Patriots defense made a huge stop after NE Patriots scored to open 3rd quarter and they got the ball back in Tom Brady’s hands, I don’t think our defense would have stopped them. Looking at our defense gasping for breath coming off the field after NE Patriots scored to start third quarter and the close up of the look of utter confusion on Justin Tuck’s face was very indicative that our defense was in trouble big time and need some help fast. The very next close up of
Eli Manning on the sidelines talking to Kevin Gillbride and David Carr and how he was intensly nodding confidently told us that help was on the way and that he was about to take the game back and that is exactly what Eli Manning did.

As I stated before our defense overachieved and made some terrific plays. However, in my opinion they were able to do that because of Eli Manning and our offense controlling TOP and Eli Manning dictating the tempo and direction of that game. Granted, the defense had to make some big plays in SuperBowl XLVI and at times they rose to the occassion but they hardly dominated NE Patriots offense.

We could not have won SuperBowl XLVI without the defensive efort we recieved at times but they were bailed out a few times by Eli Manning and they would nbot have been inj the position they were in to make those plays if they had been on the field for any longer than they were. Even with the short time our defense was on the field, they lucked out with a wide open Wes Welker missing that catch that would have wrapped it up. I will concede that that on the NY giants previous offense series that the drop by Mario Manningham on the right sideline would have had us sitting pretty if he had hauled that one in.

It is quite clear that Eli Manning fully understands the limitations of our defense and he consistently controls the tempo and direction of the game to make it much easier on them. That is just one of the facts that is evidence on how he carried NY Giants on his back and shouldered the load the last season and throughout the playoffs and SuperBowl.

I bELIieve.

buffyblue
06-14-2012, 05:37 PM
If you think Eli won the Super Bowl by himself I don't know what to tell you. If you actually think that is what I stated and not whats is face moorehead’s interpretation then I don’t know what to tell you except to redirtect to the start of the post- "The team stepped up huge but Eli Manning carried us and pulled out 4th quarter comebacks during the regular season to keep us in it. Eli shouldered the load and carried the team through so.e tough times and injuries last season. With the exception of Tom Brady and a healthy Peyton Manning, I don't think there is another QB in NFL that could do what Eli Manning did with us last season. "</P>


I like my interpretation better.* It gave us pages and pages of debate after a very boring original post.</P>


3 months after we won the SB, some guy starts a thread saying.."Wow, we won the SB".* And I turned that into thirteen pages.* The OP never got so much attention in his life.</P>


I'm there for all of you,* Don't forget that.</P>

Wow. A very boring post that was able to captivate your attention and throw you into a tizzy this entire time. Whats next for you, chewing gum and rubbing your belly at the same time, lol............

The great part of all this is that it is so nice to have these debates about how we won SuperBowl.

I bELIeve.

buddy33
06-14-2012, 06:18 PM
Oh brother! Eli could not control the clock without the defense forcing the Patriots to punt. Without the defense shutting a great offense out for the final 26 minutes they possibly lose. The defense scored 2 points for the Giants up for their 1st TD after the Safety.

You said they tried to give the game away. I have never heard of an defense giving a game away when they hold a high powered offense to way under their average scoring and shut them out for the final 26 minutes of a game. It just makes no sense at all to make that statement.

Oh, and like I said before, if you want to keep bringing up the Welker drop you have to also me film the Bradshaw fumble.

buffyblue
06-14-2012, 06:40 PM
Eli Manning and NY Giants offense although not scoring, took up 6:37 seconds off the clock to start the game. Tom Brady was on the sidelines for 6 and a half minutes without touching the ball.
Steve Weatherford delivered a great punt that had NE Patriots backed up. NY Giants defense stepped onto that field for their first series of SuperBowl XLVI under optimal conditions because of Eli Manning and NY Giants offense as well as Special Teams play. They were spoon fed and put into position for that safety. BTW, it was a call that could have gone either way.

I have never heard of anyone claiming that a defense “dominated” another team that they allowed to score 17 points in 22 minutes and basically lucked out because a typically sure handed reciever dropped a ball that would have virtually put the game out of reach. Funny how the Lee Evans TD breakup is blamed on him and NY Giants fans don’t give any credit to the defensive back for making a great play on the ball but the Wes Welker drop is completely forgotten about in the hopes of defending the stance of the “dominant” defense of NY Giants.

NY Giants offense recovered the fumble and took care of their own gaffe. NY defense did nothing to cause the Wes Welker drop. He was wide open because the “dominant” defense let him behind them again.

You can rail all you want to about the “dominant defenseive display” of NY Giants but that was not the case. They made some good plays and they played above their ability and they were nowhere near “dominant.”


Eli Manning in SuperBowl XLVI once again bailed out a very flawed defense, put NY Giants on his back and took care of business with another 4th quarter TD drive to win the game.

I bELIeve.

Morehead State
06-14-2012, 10:06 PM
Eli Manning and NY Giants offense although not scoring, took up 6:37 seconds off the clock to start the game. Tom Brady was on the sidelines for 6 and a half minutes without touching the ball. Steve Weatherford delivered a great punt that had NE Patriots backed up. NY Giants defense stepped onto that field for their first series of SuperBowl XLVI under optimal conditions because of Eli Manning and NY Giants offense as well as Special Teams play. They were spoon fed and put into position for that safety. BTW, it was a call that could have gone either way. I have never heard of anyone claiming that a defense “dominated” another team that they allowed to score 17 points in 22 minutes and basically lucked out because a typically sure handed reciever dropped a ball that would have virtually put the game out of reach. Funny how the Lee Evans TD breakup is blamed on him and NY Giants fans don’t give any credit to the defensive back for making a great play on the ball but the Wes Welker drop is completely forgotten about in the hopes of defending the stance of the “dominant” defense of NY Giants. NY Giants offense recovered the fumble and took care of their own gaffe. NY defense did nothing to cause the Wes Welker drop. He was wide open because the “dominant” defense let him behind them again. You can rail all you want to about the “dominant defenseive display” of NY Giants but that was not the case. They made some good plays and they played above their ability and they were nowhere near “dominant.” Eli Manning in SuperBowl XLVI once again bailed out a very flawed defense, put NY Giants on his back and took care of business with another 4th quarter TD drive to win the game. I bELIeve.</P>


What about the other 38 minutes?</P>

byron
06-14-2012, 10:18 PM
Eli Manning and NY Giants offense although not scoring, took up 6:37 seconds off the clock to start the game. Tom Brady was on the sidelines for 6 and a half minutes without touching the ball. Steve Weatherford delivered a great punt that had NE Patriots backed up. NY Giants defense stepped onto that field for their first series of SuperBowl XLVI under optimal conditions because of Eli Manning and NY Giants offense as well as Special Teams play. They were spoon fed and put into position for that safety. BTW, it was a call that could have gone either way. I have never heard of anyone claiming that a defense “dominated” another team that they allowed to score 17 points in 22 minutes and basically lucked out because a typically sure handed reciever dropped a ball that would have virtually put the game out of reach. Funny how the Lee Evans TD breakup is blamed on him and NY Giants fans don’t give any credit to the defensive back for making a great play on the ball but the Wes Welker drop is completely forgotten about in the hopes of defending the stance of the “dominant” defense of NY Giants. NY Giants offense recovered the fumble and took care of their own gaffe. NY defense did nothing to cause the Wes Welker drop. He was wide open because the “dominant” defense let him behind them again. You can rail all you want to about the “dominant defenseive display” of NY Giants but that was not the case. They made some good plays and they played above their ability and they were nowhere near “dominant.” Eli Manning in SuperBowl XLVI once again bailed out a very flawed defense, put NY Giants on his back and took care of business with another 4th quarter TD drive to win the game. I bELIeve.</P>


What about the other 38 minutes?</P> love is blind ....they never happened

buddy33
06-14-2012, 10:41 PM
I can't tell you how wrong you are to say that Safety could have gone any other way. The rule is that if a QB is being pressured and just throws the ball away it is intentional grounding. When it happens in the end zone it is a Safety. There are no two ways about it.

So the defense scored 2 points and set hem up for their 1st TD. The Giants offense stalled twice during the 17 points the Patriots scored. By the way, allowing the Patriots to only score 17 points was a great accomplishment. Not only that, THEY SHUT THEM OUT FOR THE FINAL 26 MiNUTES! Another great accomplishment. You tried to say they gave the game away. Giving up only 17 points to a high powered offense that has a QB that you yourself said is one of the greatest is great defense. Shutting a team out for the last 26 minutes of a game is dominating defense.

Eli played great, but did not bail the defense out.

buffyblue
06-15-2012, 12:15 AM
I can't tell you how wrong you are to say that Safety could have gone any other way. The rule is that if a QB is being pressured and just throws the ball away it is intentional grounding. When it happens in the end zone it is a Safety. There are no two ways about it.

So the defense scored 2 points and set hem up for their 1st TD. The Giants offense stalled twice during the 17 points the Patriots scored. By the way, allowing the Patriots to only score 17 points was a great accomplishment. Not only that, THEY SHUT THEM OUT FOR THE FINAL 26 MiNUTES! Another great accomplishment. You tried to say they gave the game away. Giving up only 17 points to a high powered offense that has a QB that you yourself said is one of the greatest is great defense. Shutting a team out for the last 26 minutes of a game is dominating defense.

Eli played great, but did not bail the defense out.

Eli Manning bailed out NY Giants defense repeatedly in that game just as he has to do all season. Wes Welker dropping that pass also bailed out NY Giants defense because they blew the coverage on that play big time.

I understand that it just irks you to face the truth and that is fine. No worries. The defense played well over their ability but did n ot dominate. Eli Manning did what Eli Manning always does and he did dominate SuperBowl XLVI.

I bELIeve.

buffyblue
06-15-2012, 12:15 AM
I can't tell you how wrong you are to say that Safety could have gone any other way. The rule is that if a QB is being pressured and just throws the ball away it is intentional grounding. When it happens in the end zone it is a Safety. There are no two ways about it.

So the defense scored 2 points and set hem up for their 1st TD. The Giants offense stalled twice during the 17 points the Patriots scored. By the way, allowing the Patriots to only score 17 points was a great accomplishment. Not only that, THEY SHUT THEM OUT FOR THE FINAL 26 MiNUTES! Another great accomplishment. You tried to say they gave the game away. Giving up only 17 points to a high powered offense that has a QB that you yourself said is one of the greatest is great defense. Shutting a team out for the last 26 minutes of a game is dominating defense.

Eli played great, but did not bail the defense out.

Eli Manning bailed out NY Giants defense repeatedly in that game just as he has to do all season. Wes Welker dropping that pass also bailed out NY Giants defense because they blew the coverage on that play big time.

I understand that it just irks you to face the truth and that is fine. No worries. The defense played well over their ability but did n ot dominate. Eli Manning did what Eli Manning always does and he did dominate SuperBowl XLVI.

I bELIeve.

Roswell777
06-15-2012, 05:37 AM
I can't tell you how wrong you are to say that Safety could have gone any other way. The rule is that if a QB is being pressured and just throws the ball away it is intentional grounding. When it happens in the end zone it is a Safety. There are no two ways about it.

So the defense scored 2 points and set hem up for their 1st TD. The Giants offense stalled twice during the 17 points the Patriots scored. By the way, allowing the Patriots to only score 17 points was a great accomplishment. Not only that, THEY SHUT THEM OUT FOR THE FINAL 26 MiNUTES! Another great accomplishment. You tried to say they gave the game away. Giving up only 17 points to a high powered offense that has a QB that you yourself said is one of the greatest is great defense. Shutting a team out for the last 26 minutes of a game is dominating defense.

Eli played great, but did not bail the defense out.

Eli Manning bailed out NY Giants defense repeatedly in that game just as he has to do all season. Wes Welker dropping that pass also bailed out NY Giants defense because they blew the coverage on that play big time.

I understand that it just irks you to face the truth and that is fine. No worries. The defense played well over their ability but did n ot dominate. Eli Manning did what Eli Manning always does and he did dominate SuperBowl XLVI.

I bELIeve.

I didn't read all 14 pages of this thread, but is it your opinion that the Giants won a 21 - 17 game against an excellent offense solely by playing well on offense themselves?

buddy33
06-15-2012, 07:38 AM
Eli did not bail the defense out of the Super Bowl. I don't know what game you watched. They held a high scoring offense to only 17 points. They also shut them out for just over he last 26 minutes of the game. I'm sorry but that is not bailing a team out. Why didn't the offense score twice when they had the ball when the Patriots scored their 17 points? Does that mean the offense let the defense down? Let's also not forget that the defense scored 2 points and they set the offense up for heir 1st TD.

You are stuck on the Welker drop. That's what it was, a drop. Just like the fumble was recovered by the Giants.

Oh and the defense that you say over achieved did so for the entire post season shutting down 2 of the best offense in the NFL.

Morehead State
06-15-2012, 09:56 AM
I can't tell you how wrong you are to say that Safety could have gone any other way. The rule is that if a QB is being pressured and just throws the ball away it is intentional grounding. When it happens in the end zone it is a Safety. There are no two ways about it. So the defense scored 2 points and set hem up for their 1st TD. The Giants offense stalled twice during the 17 points the Patriots scored. By the way, allowing the Patriots to only score 17 points was a great accomplishment. Not only that, THEY SHUT THEM OUT FOR THE FINAL 26 MiNUTES! Another great accomplishment. You tried to say they gave the game away. Giving up only 17 points to a high powered offense that has a QB that you yourself said is one of the greatest is great defense. Shutting a team out for the last 26 minutes of a game is dominating defense. Eli played great, but did not bail the defense out. Eli Manning bailed out NY Giants defense repeatedly in that game just as he has to do all season. Wes Welker dropping that pass also bailed out NY Giants defense because they blew the coverage on that play big time. I understand that it just irks you to face the truth and that is fine. No worries. The defense played well over their ability but did n ot dominate. Eli Manning did what Eli Manning always does and he did dominate SuperBowl XLVI. I bELIeve.</P>


We scored 21 points against the 31st ranked defense in football.</P>


You are out on a limb on this one. Its just a completely unreasonable position you're taking here.</P>


It was a tough defensive game. To say that any offensive player "dominated" that game is just crazy talk.</P>

buffyblue
06-15-2012, 10:41 AM
I can't tell you how wrong you are to say that Safety could have gone any other way. The rule is that if a QB is being pressured and just throws the ball away it is intentional grounding. When it happens in the end zone it is a Safety. There are no two ways about it. So the defense scored 2 points and set hem up for their 1st TD. The Giants offense stalled twice during the 17 points the Patriots scored. By the way, allowing the Patriots to only score 17 points was a great accomplishment. Not only that, THEY SHUT THEM OUT FOR THE FINAL 26 MiNUTES! Another great accomplishment. You tried to say they gave the game away. Giving up only 17 points to a high powered offense that has a QB that you yourself said is one of the greatest is great defense. Shutting a team out for the last 26 minutes of a game is dominating defense. Eli played great, but did not bail the defense out. Eli Manning bailed out NY Giants defense repeatedly in that game just as he has to do all season. Wes Welker dropping that pass also bailed out NY Giants defense because they blew the coverage on that play big time. I understand that it just irks you to face the truth and that is fine. No worries. The defense played well over their ability but did n ot dominate. Eli Manning did what Eli Manning always does and he did dominate SuperBowl XLVI. I bELIeve.</P>


We scored 21 points against the 31st ranked defense in football.</P>


You are out on a limb on this one.* Its just a completely unreasonable position you're taking here.</P>


It was a tough defensive game.* To say that any offensive player "dominated" that game is just crazy talk.</P>

To say that NY Giants defense dominated is idiocy.

The reason NE England Patriots were held to 17 points is because Eli Manning and NY Giants offense controlled TOP for 38 minutes and kept them on them on the sidelines. Eli Manning has known since the last game of 2007 season that winning TOP is the way to go against NE Patriots because our defense is unable to hold them in a shootout. So the way to beat them is to slow the game down and keep the score under 30 points is what he has done each game against NE Patriots since that loss and we have won all 3.

Eli Manning dominated that game and orchestrated that win. Our offense repeatedly bailed out our defense.

buffyblue
06-15-2012, 10:42 AM
Eli Manning and NY Giants offense although not scoring, took up 6:37 seconds off the clock to start the game. Tom Brady was on the sidelines for 6 and a half minutes without touching the ball. Steve Weatherford delivered a great punt that had NE Patriots backed up. NY Giants defense stepped onto that field for their first series of SuperBowl XLVI under optimal conditions because of Eli Manning and NY Giants offense as well as Special Teams play. They were spoon fed and put into position for that safety. BTW, it was a call that could have gone either way. I have never heard of anyone claiming that a defense “dominated” another team that they allowed to score 17 points in 22 minutes and basically lucked out because a typically sure handed reciever dropped a ball that would have virtually put the game out of reach. Funny how the Lee Evans TD breakup is blamed on him and NY Giants fans don’t give any credit to the defensive back for making a great play on the ball but the Wes Welker drop is completely forgotten about in the hopes of defending the stance of the “dominant” defense of NY Giants. NY Giants offense recovered the fumble and took care of their own gaffe. NY defense did nothing to cause the Wes Welker drop. He was wide open because the “dominant” defense let him behind them again. You can rail all you want to about the “dominant defenseive display” of NY Giants but that was not the case. They made some good plays and they played above their ability and they were nowhere near “dominant.” Eli Manning in SuperBowl XLVI once again bailed out a very flawed defense, put NY Giants on his back and took care of business with another 4th quarter TD drive to win the game. I bELIeve.</P>


What about the other 38 minutes?</P> love is blind ....they never happened

Whatever. Save your insulting stupid comments for someone else.

buddy33
06-15-2012, 10:44 AM
How did the Giants offense get the ball to hold it so long? Oh that's right, the Giants defense stopped the high powered Patriots offense most of the game and forced them to give the ball back to the Giants offense.

buffyblue
06-15-2012, 10:45 AM
Eli Manning and NY Giants offense although not scoring, took up 6:37 seconds off the clock to start the game. Tom Brady was on the sidelines for 6 and a half minutes without touching the ball. Steve Weatherford delivered a great punt that had NE Patriots backed up. NY Giants defense stepped onto that field for their first series of SuperBowl XLVI under optimal conditions because of Eli Manning and NY Giants offense as well as Special Teams play. They were spoon fed and put into position for that safety. BTW, it was a call that could have gone either way. I have never heard of anyone claiming that a defense “dominated” another team that they allowed to score 17 points in 22 minutes and basically lucked out because a typically sure handed reciever dropped a ball that would have virtually put the game out of reach. Funny how the Lee Evans TD breakup is blamed on him and NY Giants fans don’t give any credit to the defensive back for making a great play on the ball but the Wes Welker drop is completely forgotten about in the hopes of defending the stance of the “dominant” defense of NY Giants. NY Giants offense recovered the fumble and took care of their own gaffe. NY defense did nothing to cause the Wes Welker drop. He was wide open because the “dominant” defense let him behind them again. You can rail all you want to about the “dominant defenseive display” of NY Giants but that was not the case. They made some good plays and they played above their ability and they were nowhere near “dominant.” Eli Manning in SuperBowl XLVI once again bailed out a very flawed defense, put NY Giants on his back and took care of business with another 4th quarter TD drive to win the game. I bELIeve.</P>


What about the other 38 minutes?</P>

As I have stated previously, the way to play NE England Patriots is to slow the game down and not get into a shootout. Our defense is not going to win a high scoring game against NE Patriots. Eli Manning and the coaching staff know this and they have gameplaned accordingly. We just don’t have a good enough defense to shut them down if it were a fast paced hiogh scoring game.

buddy33
06-15-2012, 10:47 AM
Right. That's why they stopped 2 of the best offenses in the league last year.

Morehead State
06-15-2012, 10:54 AM
Eli Manning and NY Giants offense although not scoring, took up 6:37 seconds off the clock to start the game. Tom Brady was on the sidelines for 6 and a half minutes without touching the ball. Steve Weatherford delivered a great punt that had NE Patriots backed up. NY Giants defense stepped onto that field for their first series of SuperBowl XLVI under optimal conditions because of Eli Manning and NY Giants offense as well as Special Teams play. They were spoon fed and put into position for that safety. BTW, it was a call that could have gone either way. I have never heard of anyone claiming that a defense “dominated” another team that they allowed to score 17 points in 22 minutes and basically lucked out because a typically sure handed reciever dropped a ball that would have virtually put the game out of reach. Funny how the Lee Evans TD breakup is blamed on him and NY Giants fans don’t give any credit to the defensive back for making a great play on the ball but the Wes Welker drop is completely forgotten about in the hopes of defending the stance of the “dominant” defense of NY Giants. NY Giants offense recovered the fumble and took care of their own gaffe. NY defense did nothing to cause the Wes Welker drop. He was wide open because the “dominant” defense let him behind them again. You can rail all you want to about the “dominant defenseive display” of NY Giants but that was not the case. They made some good plays and they played above their ability and they were nowhere near “dominant.” Eli Manning in SuperBowl XLVI once again bailed out a very flawed defense, put NY Giants on his back and took care of business with another 4th quarter TD drive to win the game. I bELIeve.</P>


What about the other 38 minutes?</P>


love is blind ....they never happened Whatever. Save your insulting stupid comments for someone else.</P>


Getting a little sensative now. A tad defensive. I like it. It means we've won. Especially when you go after Byron.</P>


</P>


I especially like the "we can't get into a shootout with the Pats because our "defense" can't stop them.</P>


Teams aviod shootouts when they feel their "offense" can't keep up.</P>


The first rule of getting out of a hole is...."stop digging".</P>


Now step away from the shovel son.</P>

buffyblue
06-15-2012, 11:33 AM
Eli Manning and NY Giants offense although not scoring, took up 6:37 seconds off the clock to start the game. Tom Brady was on the sidelines for 6 and a half minutes without touching the ball. Steve Weatherford delivered a great punt that had NE Patriots backed up. NY Giants defense stepped onto that field for their first series of SuperBowl XLVI under optimal conditions because of Eli Manning and NY Giants offense as well as Special Teams play. They were spoon fed and put into position for that safety. BTW, it was a call that could have gone either way. I have never heard of anyone claiming that a defense “dominated” another team that they allowed to score 17 points in 22 minutes and basically lucked out because a typically sure handed reciever dropped a ball that would have virtually put the game out of reach. Funny how the Lee Evans TD breakup is blamed on him and NY Giants fans don’t give any credit to the defensive back for making a great play on the ball but the Wes Welker drop is completely forgotten about in the hopes of defending the stance of the “dominant” defense of NY Giants. NY Giants offense recovered the fumble and took care of their own gaffe. NY defense did nothing to cause the Wes Welker drop. He was wide open because the “dominant” defense let him behind them again. You can rail all you want to about the “dominant defenseive display” of NY Giants but that was not the case. They made some good plays and they played above their ability and they were nowhere near “dominant.” Eli Manning in SuperBowl XLVI once again bailed out a very flawed defense, put NY Giants on his back and took care of business with another 4th quarter TD drive to win the game. I bELIeve.</P>


What about the other 38 minutes?</P>


love is blind ....they never happened Whatever. Save your insulting stupid comments for someone else.</P>


Getting a little sensative now.** A tad defensive.** I like it.* It means we've won. Especially when you go after Byron.</P>


*</P>


I especially like the "we can't get into a shootout with the Pats because our "defense" can't stop them.</P>


Teams aviod shootouts when they feel their "offense" can't keep up.</P>


The first rule of getting out of a hole is...."stop digging".</P>


Now step away from the shovel son.</P>

Nah not sensitive. Just not gonna deal with the insults. Save them for someone else.

Our defense often collapses when we get into shootouts. Defense did more than collapse against Green Bay Packers in regular season game. They laid down and offerred no ressistance when Aaron Rodgers drove them downfield with ease for the winning FG. Defense collapsed in the last regular season game against New England in 2007. Defense quit on national television against New Orleans Saints in what may have been the most embarrassing display ever for a NY Giants defense. Defense gave up lead after in 2009 and were the cause for most of our losses. Heck, Osi Umenyora decided to go “All In” and play this past season only after it was apparent that we had a shot. Our defense let Vince Young bounce them around put together a drive that was pure brilliance. Yeah, our defense let Vince young do that in our house on a Sunday night game on National TV. If we were not in the playoff hunt he would have continued to nurse his injury and cry about being underpaid and in the poor house.
We are the first team that has given up more points during the regular season than we scored and won SuperBowl.

It is apparent that Eli Manning understands the flaws and weaknesses in our defense and that is why he is playing the style of ball that he has been. He knows to orchestrate long drives and to give the defense a rest when needed.

So stay on the Eli Manning hate wagon and look at this defense with rose colored glasses all you want. Keep bringing up Ben Rothlisberger because he actually wins in great part because of his defense while Eli Manning wins in spite of his.

byron
06-15-2012, 11:39 AM
Eli Manning and NY Giants offense although not scoring, took up 6:37 seconds off the clock to start the game. Tom Brady was on the sidelines for 6 and a half minutes without touching the ball. Steve Weatherford delivered a great punt that had NE Patriots backed up. NY Giants defense stepped onto that field for their first series of SuperBowl XLVI under optimal conditions because of Eli Manning and NY Giants offense as well as Special Teams play. They were spoon fed and put into position for that safety. BTW, it was a call that could have gone either way. I have never heard of anyone claiming that a defense “dominated” another team that they allowed to score 17 points in 22 minutes and basically lucked out because a typically sure handed reciever dropped a ball that would have virtually put the game out of reach. Funny how the Lee Evans TD breakup is blamed on him and NY Giants fans don’t give any credit to the defensive back for making a great play on the ball but the Wes Welker drop is completely forgotten about in the hopes of defending the stance of the “dominant” defense of NY Giants. NY Giants offense recovered the fumble and took care of their own gaffe. NY defense did nothing to cause the Wes Welker drop. He was wide open because the “dominant” defense let him behind them again. You can rail all you want to about the “dominant defenseive display” of NY Giants but that was not the case. They made some good plays and they played above their ability and they were nowhere near “dominant.” Eli Manning in SuperBowl XLVI once again bailed out a very flawed defense, put NY Giants on his back and took care of business with another 4th quarter TD drive to win the game. I bELIeve.</P>


What about the other 38 minutes?</P>


love is blind ....they never happened Whatever. Save your insulting stupid comments for someone else.</P>


I wasresponding to MH just meantas alittlejoke didn't mean toinsult ya !...sorry... football is a team game you don't win without everybodys effort you take out any one play from any given game andhistory changes... it took everybody and every play last year...I said it early in the thread prop up Eli all you want but there many players who steped up last year and helped make it all happen....</P>

lawl
06-15-2012, 11:41 AM
Eli Manning and NY Giants offense although not scoring, took up 6:37 seconds off the clock to start the game. Tom Brady was on the sidelines for 6 and a half minutes without touching the ball. Steve Weatherford delivered a great punt that had NE Patriots backed up. NY Giants defense stepped onto that field for their first series of SuperBowl XLVI under optimal conditions because of Eli Manning and NY Giants offense as well as Special Teams play. They were spoon fed and put into position for that safety. BTW, it was a call that could have gone either way. I have never heard of anyone claiming that a defense “dominated” another team that they allowed to score 17 points in 22 minutes and basically lucked out because a typically sure handed reciever dropped a ball that would have virtually put the game out of reach. Funny how the Lee Evans TD breakup is blamed on him and NY Giants fans don’t give any credit to the defensive back for making a great play on the ball but the Wes Welker drop is completely forgotten about in the hopes of defending the stance of the “dominant” defense of NY Giants. NY Giants offense recovered the fumble and took care of their own gaffe. NY defense did nothing to cause the Wes Welker drop. He was wide open because the “dominant” defense let him behind them again. You can rail all you want to about the “dominant defenseive display” of NY Giants but that was not the case. They made some good plays and they played above their ability and they were nowhere near “dominant.” Eli Manning in SuperBowl XLVI once again bailed out a very flawed defense, put NY Giants on his back and took care of business with another 4th quarter TD drive to win the game. I bELIeve.</P>


What about the other 38 minutes?</P>


love is blind ....they never happened Whatever. Save your insulting stupid comments for someone else.</P>


Getting a little sensative now.** A tad defensive.** I like it.* It means we've won. Especially when you go after Byron.</P>


*</P>


I especially like the "we can't get into a shootout with the Pats because our "defense" can't stop them.</P>


Teams aviod shootouts when they feel their "offense" can't keep up.</P>


The first rule of getting out of a hole is...."stop digging".</P>


Now step away from the shovel son.</P>

Nah not sensitive. Just not gonna deal with the insults. Save them for someone else.

Our defense often collapses when we get into shootouts. Defense did more than collapse against Green Bay Packers in regular season game. They laid down and offerred no ressistance when Aaron Rodgers drove them downfield with ease for the winning FG. Defense collapsed in the last regular season game against New England in 2007. Defense quit on national television against New Orleans Saints in what may have been the most embarrassing display ever for a NY Giants defense. Defense gave up lead after in 2009 and were the cause for most of our losses. Heck, Osi Umenyora decided to go “All In” and play this past season only after it was apparent that we had a shot. Our defense let Vince Young bounce them around put together a drive that was pure brilliance. Yeah, our defense let Vince young do that in our house on a Sunday night game on National TV. If we were not in the playoff hunt he would have continued to nurse his injury and cry about being underpaid and in the poor house.
We are the first team that has given up more points during the regular season than we scored and won SuperBowl.

It is apparent that Eli Manning understands the flaws and weaknesses in our defense and that is why he is playing the style of ball that he has been. He knows to orchestrate long drives and to give the defense a rest when needed.

So stay on the Eli Manning hate wagon and look at this defense with rose colored glasses all you want. Keep bringing up Ben Rothlisberger because he actually wins in great part because of his defense while Eli Manning wins in spite of his.

You saying that a defense collapses in a shootout is a redundancy.

Of course both defenses collapsed, otherwise it wouldn't be a shootout

Morehead State
06-15-2012, 11:45 AM
Eli Manning and NY Giants offense although not scoring, took up 6:37 seconds off the clock to start the game. Tom Brady was on the sidelines for 6 and a half minutes without touching the ball. Steve Weatherford delivered a great punt that had NE Patriots backed up. NY Giants defense stepped onto that field for their first series of SuperBowl XLVI under optimal conditions because of Eli Manning and NY Giants offense as well as Special Teams play. They were spoon fed and put into position for that safety. BTW, it was a call that could have gone either way. I have never heard of anyone claiming that a defense “dominated” another team that they allowed to score 17 points in 22 minutes and basically lucked out because a typically sure handed reciever dropped a ball that would have virtually put the game out of reach. Funny how the Lee Evans TD breakup is blamed on him and NY Giants fans don’t give any credit to the defensive back for making a great play on the ball but the Wes Welker drop is completely forgotten about in the hopes of defending the stance of the “dominant” defense of NY Giants. NY Giants offense recovered the fumble and took care of their own gaffe. NY defense did nothing to cause the Wes Welker drop. He was wide open because the “dominant” defense let him behind them again. You can rail all you want to about the “dominant defenseive display” of NY Giants but that was not the case. They made some good plays and they played above their ability and they were nowhere near “dominant.” Eli Manning in SuperBowl XLVI once again bailed out a very flawed defense, put NY Giants on his back and took care of business with another 4th quarter TD drive to win the game. I bELIeve.</P>


What about the other 38 minutes?</P>


love is blind ....they never happened Whatever. Save your insulting stupid comments for someone else.</P>


Getting a little sensative now. A tad defensive. I like it. It means we've won. Especially when you go after Byron.</P>


</P>


I especially like the "we can't get into a shootout with the Pats because our "defense" can't stop them.</P>


Teams aviod shootouts when they feel their "offense" can't keep up.</P>


The first rule of getting out of a hole is...."stop digging".</P>


Now step away from the shovel son.</P>


Nah not sensitive. Just not gonna deal with the insults. Save them for someone else. Our defense often collapses when we get into shootouts. Defense did more than collapse against Green Bay Packers in regular season game. They laid down and offerred no ressistance when Aaron Rodgers drove them downfield with ease for the winning FG. Defense collapsed in the last regular season game against New England in 2007. Defense quit on national television against New Orleans Saints in what may have been the most embarrassing display ever for a NY Giants defense. Defense gave up lead after in 2009 and were the cause for most of our losses. Heck, Osi Umenyora decided to go “All In” and play this past season only after it was apparent that we had a shot. Our defense let Vince Young bounce them around put together a drive that was pure brilliance. Yeah, our defense let Vince young do that in our house on a Sunday night game on National TV. If we were not in the playoff hunt he would have continued to nurse his injury and cry about being underpaid and in the poor house. We are the first team that has given up more points during the regular season than we scored and won SuperBowl. It is apparent that Eli Manning understands the flaws and weaknesses in our defense and that is why he is playing the style of ball that he has been. He knows to orchestrate long drives and to give the defense a rest when needed. So stay on the Eli Manning hate wagon and look at this defense with rose colored glasses all you want. Keep bringing up Ben Rothlisberger because he actually wins in great part because of his defense while Eli Manning wins in spite of his.</P>


Well come to the Eli Thought Police. The list grows longer.</P>


Do you realize how foolish you are being? You are saying that since I think our defense played well in the playoffs, that it makes me an Eli hater.</P>


You sir are a moron.</P>

buffyblue
06-15-2012, 12:03 PM
Eli Manning and NY Giants offense although not scoring, took up 6:37 seconds off the clock to start the game. Tom Brady was on the sidelines for 6 and a half minutes without touching the ball. Steve Weatherford delivered a great punt that had NE Patriots backed up. NY Giants defense stepped onto that field for their first series of SuperBowl XLVI under optimal conditions because of Eli Manning and NY Giants offense as well as Special Teams play. They were spoon fed and put into position for that safety. BTW, it was a call that could have gone either way. I have never heard of anyone claiming that a defense “dominated” another team that they allowed to score 17 points in 22 minutes and basically lucked out because a typically sure handed reciever dropped a ball that would have virtually put the game out of reach. Funny how the Lee Evans TD breakup is blamed on him and NY Giants fans don’t give any credit to the defensive back for making a great play on the ball but the Wes Welker drop is completely forgotten about in the hopes of defending the stance of the “dominant” defense of NY Giants. NY Giants offense recovered the fumble and took care of their own gaffe. NY defense did nothing to cause the Wes Welker drop. He was wide open because the “dominant” defense let him behind them again. You can rail all you want to about the “dominant defenseive display” of NY Giants but that was not the case. They made some good plays and they played above their ability and they were nowhere near “dominant.” Eli Manning in SuperBowl XLVI once again bailed out a very flawed defense, put NY Giants on his back and took care of business with another 4th quarter TD drive to win the game. I bELIeve.</P>


What about the other 38 minutes?</P>


love is blind ....they never happened Whatever. Save your insulting stupid comments for someone else.</P>


Getting a little sensative now.** A tad defensive.** I like it.* It means we've won. Especially when you go after Byron.</P>


*</P>


I especially like the "we can't get into a shootout with the Pats because our "defense" can't stop them.</P>


Teams aviod shootouts when they feel their "offense" can't keep up.</P>


The first rule of getting out of a hole is...."stop digging".</P>


Now step away from the shovel son.</P>


Nah not sensitive. Just not gonna deal with the insults. Save them for someone else. Our defense often collapses when we get into shootouts. Defense did more than collapse against Green Bay Packers in regular season game. They laid down and offerred no ressistance when Aaron Rodgers drove them downfield with ease for the winning FG. Defense collapsed in the last regular season game against New England in 2007. Defense quit on national television against New Orleans Saints in what may have been the most embarrassing display ever for a NY Giants defense. Defense gave up lead after in 2009 and were the cause for most of our losses. Heck, Osi Umenyora decided to go “All In” and play this past season only after it was apparent that we had a shot. Our defense let Vince Young bounce them around put together a drive that was pure brilliance. Yeah, our defense let Vince young do that in our house on a Sunday night game on National TV. If we were not in the playoff hunt he would have continued to nurse his injury and cry about being underpaid and in the poor house. We are the first team that has given up more points during the regular season than we scored and won SuperBowl. It is apparent that Eli Manning understands the flaws and weaknesses in our defense and that is why he is playing the style of ball that he has been. He knows to orchestrate long drives and to give the defense a rest when needed. So stay on the Eli Manning hate wagon and look at this defense with rose colored glasses all you want. Keep bringing up Ben Rothlisberger because he actually wins in great part because of his defense while Eli Manning wins in spite of his.</P>


Well come to the Eli Thought Police.* The list grows longer.</P>


Do you realize how foolish you are being?** You are saying that since I think our defense played well in the playoffs, that it makes me an Eli hater.</P>


You sir are a moron.</P>

I am not being foolish and i do agree that they did play way better in the playoffs. Granted that was because we got players back toward the end of the year. Coach Coughlin had that talk and helped develop Justin Tuck into a leader. Coach Fewell had that talk with Antrell Rolle and Antrell Rolle responded and matured and became the mature lockerroom voice and leader that we needed him to be. I know that the dfense made a super improvement and played their best ball throughout the playoffs and SuperBowl. However, we never know what we are going to get from the defense. We do know what we are going to get from Eli Manning and the offense.

You are an Eli Manning hater because you jump into every thread at every opportunity to argue against his praise just for the purpose of argueing because it is apparent you have something agaginst the guy. It is more than subjective. Maybe you are mad because he has way surrpassed Phil Simms. Maybe you are mad because there is no debate that Eli Manning is the greatest QB in the history of NY Giants. I dont’ know why you hate him. It is not really important. It is your own personal issue. Go get some help for it.

Since you want to start insulting me on a message board I have nothing further to state to you. If you want to insult me again at least man up and come say it to me in person.