PDA

View Full Version : Bradshaw scoring could've been the worst gaff ever



pica01
02-06-2012, 08:25 PM
When the Giants got a 1st down I got up and said to everyone in the room-"ok,we don't want to score".that was obvious.but I said,"there is no reason to even hand it off.Eli should kneel twice and center the second and we can kick a 25 yarder at the gun.Admit it,when Bradshaw scored and gave Brady 57 seconds you were livid.Fortunately,this defense is better than the one that rodgers went the length of the field in 4 plays earlier this yr in a minute.I remember turning to my buddy when we got inside the 20 at the end and saying "Geez,wouldn't it be great if we could kick a chip shot at the gun to win it and not give them any chance?'To think we got that and somehow screwed it up was incredible.Kneel down.Kneel down again in the middle.Kick a 25 yd field goal.game over.But nooooo....instead we got 57 seconds of torture.Pisarchiks reverse spin handoff to Csonka lead to the victory formation.Had Brady pulled off a miracle... well,you know.Why hand off?You know the answer.you don't.Coughlin,Eli and Bradshaw knew it too.And did it anyway.had The pats pulled off a miracle it would've went down as the biggest bonehead play ever,in any sport.Just thought I'd say what alot of us were thinking during those 57 seconds of torture.

slipknottin
02-06-2012, 08:26 PM
i have no problem with bradshaw scoring.

juice33s
02-06-2012, 08:26 PM
Not really, what if he downs it and then we botch the FG?

repeatchamps
02-06-2012, 08:28 PM
Not really, what if he downs it and then we botch the FG?
</P>


Yup, there are two sides to every coin.</P>

Gmen DLS
02-06-2012, 08:32 PM
It's easy to say that it was the correct thing to do now that we know the outcome, but I think you have to take the score. That touchdown was a sure score, the field goal is never 100%.

ashleymarie
02-06-2012, 08:33 PM
i have no problem with bradshaw scoring.</P>


</P>


Me either.</P>

PrideofNY
02-06-2012, 08:34 PM
"You PLAY to WIN the GAME."



Brady would have gotten the ball either way. I'd rather be up 4 than up 1 in that instance.

swimeasy
02-06-2012, 08:37 PM
Coughlin in an interview said Eli had told
Bradshaw not to score which is why he hesitated but then couldn't stop
his momentum. TC was pretty humble about saying that he had missed it,
but also talked about how either way there were risks (as mentioned missed field goal).

NYG 5
02-06-2012, 08:46 PM
Gronkowski getting the rebound on that hail mary would have been the worst gaff ever. when i saw the ball bounce and hang up in the ear with that behemoth standing under it, my heart stopped.


The Botched Snap II would have been terrible, but giving up a hail mary would have made half the population of new york jump off the nearest building.

MikeIsaGiant
02-06-2012, 08:50 PM
I was scared of brady moving the chains to be honest.


But our defense proved themselves worthy!

miked1958
02-06-2012, 08:51 PM
"You PLAY to WIN the GAME."



Brady would have gotten the ball either way. I'd rather be up 4 than up 1 in that instance.

Well I think they meant if u go down on 2nd down then they have to burn last timeout. On third down u can either kneel again and then let the clock run down to 4-5 seconds, call your last timeout and kick to win the game. Or u try to run it again on third down and try for the TD which would kill more time if u score or if not let it run down on 4th and kick..

Hindsight AB is trained to score. When they parted the Red sea he was shocked and tried to score

NYSPORTS
02-06-2012, 08:52 PM
Anybody recall the Romo screwup in the playoffs against Seattle at the 2?

Take the points and if the defense blew it, they didn't deserve it.

pica01
02-06-2012, 08:54 PM
Do you really think the chances of botching a 25 yard field goal are higher than brady going 80 yards in a minute with a timeout.A 25 yarder from the middle is a 98% sucess situation.I really didn't post this expecting that anyone would defend scoring a td,especially since Coughlin has said it was a mistake that he knew could've blown up in his face.If they missed a 25 yarder NOONE would have questioned what Coughlin did.If the Pats went 80 yards in a minute to win Coughlin would have gone down in infamy.We gave the Pats a chance.Everyone,from Coughlin to BB agrees.We did exactly what BBel wanted us to do.And the 1st responses to my post say they had no problem.I give up.Rediculous posts are active.Serious posts about football get responses like these.I expected,yeah,i was pissed.instead,I get posts defending the indefensible.Come on guys.

logan9839
02-06-2012, 08:55 PM
When he scored I cheered, but immediatly said too soon. I was so happy to see our D step up.

To be honest, I have no idea what the right decision is...take the score when you can get it I guess.

Pakman
02-06-2012, 08:55 PM
If this...could've been...if Romo..if Brady..If Gronk..If Terell Thomas...if Cruz

If this..if that..

Means nothing!!!!

WE ARE THE CHAMPS!!!!

bflo23
02-06-2012, 08:58 PM
Bradshaw said nobody talked about downing himself in the huddles. He said as Eli handed it to him, eli told him to down himself and then it was kind of too late with his hesitation and he fell in.

A botch snap, hold or kick and the game is over and Giants lose. It happens.

bflo23
02-06-2012, 09:01 PM
Do you really think the chances of botching a 25 yard field goal are higher than brady going 80 yards in a minute with a timeout.A 25 yarder from the middle is a 98% sucess situation.I really didn't post this expecting that anyone would defend scoring a td,especially since Coughlin has said it was a mistake that he knew could've blown up in his face.If they missed a 25 yarder NOONE would have questioned what Coughlin did.If the Pats went 80 yards in a minute to win Coughlin would have gone down in infamy.We gave the Pats a chance.Everyone,from Coughlin to BB agrees.We did exactly what BBel wanted us to do.And the 1st responses to my post say they had no problem.I give up.Rediculous posts are active.Serious posts about football get responses like these.I expected,yeah,i was pissed.instead,I get posts defending the indefensible.Come on guys.

A Giants FG wouldn't end the game... It would give Brady 20 seconds to get in FG range to win the game for the Patriots. A crazy play and out of bounds and the Pats can win the game with a FG.

GameTime
02-06-2012, 09:04 PM
When the Giants got a 1st down I got up and said to everyone in the room-"ok,we don't want to score".that was obvious.but I said,"there is no reason to even hand it off.Eli should kneel twice and center the second and we can kick a 25 yarder at the gun.Admit it,when Bradshaw scored and gave Brady 57 seconds you were livid.Fortunately,this defense is better than the one that rodgers went the length of the field in 4 plays earlier this yr in a minute.I remember turning to my buddy when we got inside the 20 at the end and saying "Geez,wouldn't it be great if we could kick a chip shot at the gun to win it and not give them any chance?'To think we got that and somehow screwed it up was incredible.Kneel down.Kneel down again in the middle.Kick a 25 yd field goal.game over.But nooooo....instead we got 57 seconds of torture.Pisarchiks reverse spin handoff to Csonka lead to the victory formation.Had Brady pulled off a miracle... well,you know.Why hand off?You know the answer.you don't.Coughlin,Eli and Bradshaw knew it too.And did it anyway.had The pats pulled off a miracle it would've went down as the biggest bonehead play ever,in any sport.Just thought I'd say what alot of us were thinking during those 57 seconds of torture.</P>


didnt read your post...but</P>


if Wes welker catches that pass...</P>


if the the Pats recover even one of the two fumbles</P>


if Mannigham doesnt catch that pass....</P>


oh wait....it all worked out and the Giants won the SB.....so its a moot point....</P>


</P>

FlyingTruck
02-06-2012, 09:06 PM
If our defense couldn't hold them off for 57 seconds then we didn't deserve to win anyway.

nhpgiantsfan
02-06-2012, 09:08 PM
Do you really think the chances of botching a 25 yard field goal are higher than brady going 80 yards in a minute with a timeout.A 25 yarder from the middle is a 98% sucess situation.I really didn't post this expecting that anyone would defend scoring a td,especially since Coughlin has said it was a mistake that he knew could've blown up in his face.If they missed a 25 yarder NOONE would have questioned what Coughlin did.If the Pats went 80 yards in a minute to win Coughlin would have gone down in infamy.We gave the Pats a chance.Everyone,from Coughlin to BB agrees.We did exactly what BBel wanted us to do.And the 1st responses to my post say they had no problem.I give up.Rediculous posts are active.Serious posts about football get responses like these.I expected,yeah,i was pissed.instead,I get posts defending the indefensible.Come on guys.

You're crazy. You say "NO ONE" would have questioned Coughlin if they botched the FG. And that he would have gone down in infamy if NE scored. Well let me ask you this. What would you have said today if he left 6 points on the table and DeOssie snaps it over Weatherford's head, or Tynes misses it. Never knowing if our defense who played great the whole post season could've held them from driving 80 yards in 57 seconds. How do you think Coughlin's legacy would have gone down if he lost the SB by taking a knee on the 1 yard line when the opposition was opening a whole for you, only to have his team miss the FG and lose the SB.

Did you catch the end of the Raven/Patriot game, or do you remember Trey Junkin...

Here, I'll remind you: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrhRZ0EcpRs

One Eyed Willie
02-06-2012, 09:12 PM
It's easy to say that it was the correct thing to do now that we know the outcome, but I think you have to take the score. That touchdown was a sure score, the field goal is never 100%.
Amen! Take the TD &amp; Play some D!!

bflo23
02-06-2012, 09:15 PM
And Brady has struggled all year with long passes because he doesn't have deep threat game breaking receivers. With Gronk hurt and Patriots don't have real deep threats, I will take my chances with Brady trying to go 80 yards with 1 minute. Patriots offense is dink and dunking and 1 minutes isn't enough time for them especially when Gronk is hurt.

Big Blue 418
02-06-2012, 09:21 PM
Do you guys remember the AFC title game ? Tyrnes scares me

I trust our defense not to give up a td with less than a minute to

Ruttiger711
02-06-2012, 09:25 PM
Do you guys remember the AFC title game ? Tyrnes scares me I trust our defense not to give up a td with less than a minute to</P>


Tynes' field goals last night were good by about a foot. </P>


</P>


I felt more confident in being up 4 for damn sure. </P>

Voldamort
02-06-2012, 09:27 PM
I had no problem with this

pica01
02-06-2012, 09:27 PM
Again,I'm just stunned that fans are debating what happened.Coughlin didn't want to score a td.BBel wanted us to score.It was the Pats only chance.You can't defend a 25 yard fg at the gun.2 kneel downs bring it to 5 seconds.25 yard FG's don't get blocked.Distance and low kicks get blocked.Remember the last extra point you saw blocked?Remember the last extra point Tynes missed?He holds the Giant record for consecutive PAT's made,so don't bother.The Giants would convert a 25 yard fg indoors from the middle what,98 times out of a hundred?Brady will go 80 yards with a timeout alot more than twice given 100 chances.It wasn't what Coughlin wanted yet you guys are defending what happened?It was a mistake.I'm stunned anyone would say otherwise considering Eli was yelling don't score,don't score.Even Bradshaw,if he was here,would admit it was a bonehead play.Yet,I see fans saying they had no problem.I'm very disappointed.I expect more from Giant fans.

Big Blue 418
02-06-2012, 09:27 PM
Do you guys remember the AFC title game ? Tyrnes scares me I trust our defense not to give up a td with less than a minute to</P>


Tynes' field goals last night were good by about a foot. </P>


*</P>


I felt more confident in being up 4 for damn sure.* </P>

this ... You take the points . Less than a minute to only one time , Brady needs a td , I trust my d there more than Tynes .... We saw the afc title game no fg is a given

GameTime
02-06-2012, 09:32 PM
Again,I'm just stunned that fans are debating what happened.Coughlin didn't want to score a td.BBel wanted us to score.It was the Pats only chance.You can't defend a 25 yard fg at the gun.2 kneel downs bring it to 5 seconds.25 yard FG's don't get blocked.Distance and low kicks get blocked.Remember the last extra point you saw blocked?Remember the last extra point Tynes missed?He holds the Giant record for consecutive PAT's made,so don't bother.The Giants would convert a 25 yard fg indoors from the middle what,98 times out of a hundred?Brady will go 80 yards with a timeout alot more than twice given 100 chances.It wasn't what Coughlin wanted yet you guys are defending what happened?It was a mistake.I'm stunned anyone would say otherwise considering Eli was yelling don't score,don't score.Even Bradshaw,if he was here,would admit it was a bonehead play.Yet,I see fans saying they had no problem.I'm very disappointed.<FONT color=#000080 size=4>I expect more from Giant fans.</FONT></P>


fortunately what you expect from Giants fansdoesnt really matter.</P>


BTW...Cundiff missed a 32 yarder. Anything can happen. Bradshaw scores. A FG needs a good snap a good hold and a good kick.....</P>


they won dude....why are you so hot on the WHAT IFs......up by 4 was not a bad deal at that point anyway....</P>


apparently it worked out pretty well.....right?</P>

pica01
02-06-2012, 09:57 PM
again, Coughlin didn't want to score and he's not defending what happened.ITS NOT WHAT HE WANTED TO DO!He wanted to run the clock down and kick at the gun.It obviously is the best percentage play.There's a big difference between the 32 and 38 yarders tynes made from the left hash and a 25 yard glorified extra pt from the middle.And you guys who say you trust the D to stop Brady going 80 yards in a minute more than kicking a 25 yarder indoors from a middle hash placement didn't watch the same games this year I did.I saw romo and rodgers do just that earlier this year,among others.Geez,I'm sorry but you guys are idiots.Reverse the roles.The Pats could run the clock and kick from 25 yards at the gun to win or give Eli the ball back with 57 seconds and 1 TO at the 20.No brainer,right?We gave the Pats a chance.No arguement.Yet,you argue.Stop it!

GameTime
02-06-2012, 10:00 PM
again, Coughlin didn't want to score and he's not defending what happened.ITS NOT WHAT HE WANTED TO DO!He wanted to run the clock down and kick at the gun.It obviously is the best percentage play.There's a big difference between the 32 and 38 yarders tynes made from the left hash and a 25 yard glorified extra pt from the middle.And you guys who say you trust the D to stop Brady going 80 yards in a minute more than kicking a 25 yarder indoors from a middle hash placement didn't watch the same games this year I did.I saw romo and rodgers do just that earlier this year,among others.Geez,I'm sorry <FONT color=#000080 size=4>but you guys are idiots</FONT>.Reverse the roles.The Pats could run the clock and kick from 25 yards at the gun to win or give Eli the ball back with 57 seconds and 1 TO at the 20.No brainer,right?We gave the Pats a chance.No arguement.Yet,you argue.Stop it!</P>


in his interveiw he said it was on him and he didnt make it clear what he wanted to do. Then he proceeded to say you never know whats happens during a FG attempt and that the points and being 4 ahead was a good thing. He also said there were a few scenarios that could have takne place down there. Dont know when you heard TC say he wnated him to kneel. Maybe I missed that.</P>


BTW....**** you .....idiot</P>

NYSPORTS
02-06-2012, 10:01 PM
Do you really think the chances of botching a 25 yard field goal are higher than brady going 80 yards in a minute with a timeout.A 25 yarder from the middle is a 98% sucess situation.I really didn't post this expecting that anyone would defend scoring a td,especially since Coughlin has said it was a mistake that he knew could've blown up in his face.If they missed a 25 yarder NOONE would have questioned what Coughlin did.If the Pats went 80 yards in a minute to win Coughlin would have gone down in infamy.We gave the Pats a chance.Everyone,from Coughlin to BB agrees.We did exactly what BBel wanted us to do.And the 1st responses to my post say they had no problem.I give up.Rediculous posts are active.Serious posts about football get responses like these.I expected,yeah,i was pissed.instead,I get posts defending the indefensible.Come on guys.

Ridiculous isn't spelled with an (RE) and the Giants almost botched the FG against the 49ers while Romo screwed it up against the Seahawks.

Hello!!!!!

buddy33
02-06-2012, 10:12 PM
I'm glad he scored. A lot of bad things can happen on a kick.

Carl Banks thought it was the right thing to take the points and trust the defense.

pica01
02-06-2012, 10:12 PM
Everyones defending what happened as if Coughlin wanted to score a TD.HE DIDN'T!The mistake he made was not just having Eli kneel twice and center the ball.You're arguing that scoring the td was the right play.He said Eli told Bradshaw not to score.Eli screamed don't score,don't score!Bradshaw tried not to score.And most replies here are defending scoring the TD.THE PEOPLE WHO SCORED THE TD ADMIT IT WAS A MISTAKE!They're not defending what happened.Why are you?

G-Man67
02-06-2012, 10:15 PM
Billy Cundiff, Matt Bryant, Scott Norwood, Jay Feeley, Folk ... listen i personally prefer to let the game be decided by football players .... ALL IN !!!!

NYGRealityCheck
02-06-2012, 10:24 PM
Rofl, thought this would be put to bed already.

The Giants won either way. There is no real core reason to argue this. They won....
It's like arguing whether to sit in the passenger seat or the shotgun... Don't matter as long as the car gets there in one piece.

dave56dj
02-06-2012, 10:27 PM
If mario doesnt make that catch it could have been bad

if welker makes that catch it could have been bad

if we dont recover two fumbles it could have been bad

if they dont call intentional grounding it could have been bad

if boothe doesnt hold it could have been good

if we get that PI on mario it could have been good.

UMMM IF's dont matter - there is only what actually happened - THANKS FOR THE REVISIONIST HISTORY - but no thanks.

Great win Blue.

stormblue
02-06-2012, 10:50 PM
it doesn't matter which scenario is better ; running the clock and kicking a FG , or score a TD and make them drive 80 yards.
both cases have their merit .

the problem here is the fact that there was no plan or directive. a crucial time at the end of the game and the head coach was not directly involved in what was going on.

if the plan was to run out the clock and kick a field goal then taking a knee a few times in the middle of the field would have sufficed.why would you hand off into a running play and risk a fumble. you wouldn't you just take a knee.
there was no plan.
happily , the hail mary finally hit the ground and we could all breathe again.

pica01
02-06-2012, 10:58 PM
OK,i give up.Me,as a fan,never feels more helpless than when a opposing team lines up to kick a chip shot to win a game at the gun or in overtime.It's totally out of my teams hands.My only chance is that they screw it up,ala romo.I'll just ask this.When was the last time Coughlins Giants missed an extra pt or botched a 25 yard field goal.Think hard,cause it hasn't happened.When was the last time a team went 80 yards in the last minute of a half or game to score against the Giants.Well,without much thought I remember the Packers and Cowboys getting the ball with less than a minute remaining and getting points.Both times they gained 60 yards in 4 plays.I just started posting here a couple weeks ago expecting intelligent football talk.I don't suffer fools or homers easily and I'm especially surprized at the response to this post.the td was a mistake.Everyone knows it from Coughlin on down.We dodged a bullet.Yet,here,fans defend it when the offenders have already coped a plea.Why?

giantsfan420
02-06-2012, 11:04 PM
OK,i give up.Me,as a fan,never feels more helpless than when a opposing team lines up to kick a chip shot to win a game at the gun or in overtime.It's totally out of my teams hands.My only chance is that they screw it up,ala romo.I'll just ask this.When was the last time Coughlins Giants missed an extra pt or botched a 25 yard field goal.Think hard,cause it hasn't happened.When was the last time a team went 80 yards in the last minute of a half or game to score against the Giants.Well,without much thought I remember the Packers and Cowboys getting the ball with less than a minute remaining and getting points.Both times they gained 60 yards in 4 plays.I just started posting here a couple weeks ago expecting intelligent football talk.I don't suffer fools or homers easily and I'm especially surprized at the response to this post.the td was a mistake.Everyone knows it from Coughlin on down.We dodged a bullet.Yet,here,fans defend it when the offenders have already coped a plea.Why?

you have made the same mistake this whole thread. had we kneeled it and kicked the fg, NE STILL WOULD HAVE 20-25 seconds to get 40 yards. 30 yards to have a 60 yard attempt indoors with a kicker who can do that.

we'd prob have to squib after the fg as to not give them a chance to return it for a td or get in fg range. the squib coulda went out of bounds as tynes already did that once this season.

dont get me wrong, i personally wanted to run as much clock as possible, make NE burn their time outs, and then kick the fg. STILL, 20-25 seconds for Brady is enough time for him to get them in FG range.

the diff ultimately was, score the td, go up by 4 and give NE 57 seconds, or kick the fg and give ne 25 seconds to try and kick a gw fg.

if anything, i would have rather bradshaw down himself at the 1. make NE burn the final time out, then see if u can score the td. if u can't then kick the fg.

also, bradshaw had put the ball on the carpet already in the game. so that factors into it.

i have no issue with what happened, the only issue i have is they let a situation you absolutely must have a plan for play out w/o a plan. thats the only issue, and guess what, its moot. we won!

pica01
02-06-2012, 11:09 PM
I really didn't expect this to launch an arguement.I thought I was just pointing out that those last 57 seconds were torture that we could have avoided.I didn't realize that giving Brady the ball with a TO and 80 yards to go was preferable to some fans over a 25 yard Fg indoors that tynes makes 98 times out of a hundred.Stupid me.

nhpgiantsfan
02-06-2012, 11:09 PM
Please provide a link to where TC actually says he didn't want AB to score.

I know for me personally as a fan I could deal with Brady driving the 87 yards and winning the game a lot better than I would be able to deal with losing cause we kneeled on the one yard line and then missed a field goal. So please you must have stated 6 times that TC said he didn't want to score, so please put up a link, because I watched every interview last night and all I heard him do was dance around the subject. Oh by the way I haven't heard one analyst on the TV today agree with your point.

I remember Trey Junkin, one of the best long snappers in the game.

LT_was_good
02-06-2012, 11:10 PM
The idea of a FG attempt had me terrified. I was glad it didn't come to that. I think the happy medium would have been if Bradshaw went down, Pats burned their last timeout, then the Giants ran it in on 3rd down (I imagine NE still would have let them score with 50 seconds left). Then they have 0 timeouts and a few less seconds.

PRFan
02-06-2012, 11:19 PM
I agree, down it to make them burn the time out and then try for the TD on third down if not the FG on the 4th, it didn't turn out that was and the TD made us champions.
Let it go.

nhpgiantsfan
02-06-2012, 11:20 PM
The best scenario would have been if Nicks could've stayed in bounds after his first down catch.

yoeddy
02-06-2012, 11:22 PM
again, Coughlin didn't want to score and he's not defending what happened.ITS NOT WHAT HE WANTED TO DO!He wanted to run the clock down and kick at the gun.It obviously is the best percentage play.There's a big difference between the 32 and 38 yarders tynes made from the left hash and a 25 yard glorified extra pt from the middle.And you guys who say you trust the D to stop Brady going 80 yards in a minute more than kicking a 25 yarder indoors from a middle hash placement didn't watch the same games this year I did.I saw romo and rodgers do just that earlier this year,among others.Geez,I'm sorry but you guys are idiots.Reverse the roles.The Pats could run the clock and kick from 25 yards at the gun to win or give Eli the ball back with 57 seconds and 1 TO at the 20.No brainer,right?We gave the Pats a chance.No arguement.Yet,you argue.Stop it!

On the other hand, you would be comfortable with a 1pt lead, giving Brady 20 seconds to get within FG range and having Stephen Gostkowski - the NFL's most accurate kicker - kicking indoors?

And I'm sure if Coughlin was 100% sure he wanted Bradshaw to take a knee at the 1, he wouldn't have "forgotten" to tell him...

Giants869011
02-06-2012, 11:23 PM
Could have been horrible lol , heard on ESPN about Eli specifically telling Bradshaw not to score on the play... But it all worked out and we are the champs!

ALL IN!!!

SouthernGiant56
02-06-2012, 11:24 PM
Who cares? We won and that is all that matters. Just enjoy it.

ghwriter1976
02-06-2012, 11:32 PM
I would have preferred Nicks to stay in bounds too, so that the Patriots would have to burn another time out before scoring. 57 seconds and a timeout for Tom Brady is an eternity, but Eli was saying in an interview today that despite telling Bradshaw not to score, he preferred the touchdown since anything could happen on a field goal attempt.

The Cowboys and Packers both played the "let them score" game in the Super Bowl before and failed, so the ending of this one was par for the course...

pica01
02-06-2012, 11:42 PM
Bradshaw scored on 2nd down at the one minute mark.NE had one TO remaining.Had Eli kneeled the Pats would have called TO at about the same 57 second mark.On 3rd down if Eli knelt starting at, say a minute on the clock the 40 second play clock would start at around 50-52 seconds.at one on the play clock the giants could use thier last TO.AT MOST,there would be 10 seconds left on the game clock.AT MOST,they would kick off with under 10 seconds left.Maybe less.You,not me,have viewed this thread from a false premise.I appreciate however your plan comment.If you don't want to score,why hand off at all?KNeel twice,center the ball,kick the chip shot.Obviously Bradshaw didn't want to score and messed up.I can't understand why people are defending what happened.The defendants have pleaded guilty.They did it.They admit it.I was just commenting about what a disaster it could have been.I didn't expect a debate on the merits of what happened.It was not what the Giants wanted to do.No arguement.Yet idiots argue the merits.Coughlin didn't want a TD.BBel wanted us to score a td.And here People say scoring the Td was good.And i'm wasting my time pointing out the obvious to idiots.

pica01
02-06-2012, 11:44 PM
the 1st down was more important than the clock running.

bashful
02-06-2012, 11:48 PM
Thought the same thing at first. However, lets say he kicks the field goal. NE will have about 48 sec left on the clock. We kickoff ball on twenty only needs about only needs 50 yds to get in FG range to win the game. Either way is a gamble. In this instance I might go for the TD and make them score.109 on the clock.

yoeddy
02-06-2012, 11:48 PM
Bradshaw scored on 2nd down at the one minute mark.NE had one TO remaining.Had Eli kneeled the Pats would have called TO at about the same 57 second mark.On 3rd down if Eli knelt starting at, say a minute on the clock the 40 second play clock would start at around 50-52 seconds.at one on the play clock the giants could use thier last TO.AT MOST,there would be 10 seconds left on the game clock.AT MOST,they would kick off with under 10 seconds left.Maybe less.You,not me,have viewed this thread from a false premise.I appreciate however your plan comment.If you don't want to score,why hand off at all?KNeel twice,center the ball,kick the chip shot.Obviously Bradshaw didn't want to score and messed up.I can't understand why people are defending what happened.The defendants have pleaded guilty.They did it.They admit it.I was just commenting about what a disaster it could have been.I didn't expect a debate on the merits of what happened.It was not what the Giants wanted to do.No arguement.Yet idiots argue the merits.Coughlin didn't want a TD.BBel wanted us to score a td.And here People say scoring the Td was good.And i'm wasting my time pointing out the obvious to idiots.

If Eli knelt at the 1 minute mark, why would the play-clock not have started til the 52 second mark?

Btw - personally, I would have considered it a bigger gaff to give up an 80 yard TD drive in 57 seconds than to score a go-ahead TD with 57 seconds left...

Ruttiger711
02-06-2012, 11:49 PM
Stupid me.

Now you're making sense.

But seriously your hanging your hat on saying TC didn't want a td - show me anywhere that says this, quotes him saying this, whatever... His interviews after the game and anything ive seen has him saying you take the points.

lnp12
02-06-2012, 11:49 PM
Everyones defending what happened as if Coughlin wanted to score a TD.HE DIDN'T!The mistake he made was not just having Eli kneel twice and center the ball.You're arguing that scoring the td was the right play.He said Eli told Bradshaw not to score.Eli screamed don't score,don't score!Bradshaw tried not to score.And most replies here are defending scoring the TD.THE PEOPLE WHO SCORED THE TD ADMIT IT WAS A MISTAKE!They're not defending what happened.Why are you? a few things...
1) Couglin said that he NEVER told bradshaw to take a knee...eli didn't say not to score until AFTER he had already handed him the ball when he realized the defense was going to let him score. that's why it looks like he tries to stop but his momentum just carried him in. he had NOT been instructed by his coach to take a knee, so if he had taken a knee and something terrible happens, Coughlin definitely wouldn't have been happy.

2) you keep saying what a chip shot this FG would be and how it was a 98% shot...yes that's true but there are far too many instances in NFL history where kickers miss easy FGs, the most recent being Cundiff but I'm surprised no one's pointed out Gary Anderson....dude hadn't missed a kick ALL SEASON and he misses one in the NFC championship game that would have put his team up by 10, not nearly as much pressure as being down by 2 with a minute left in the super bowl. In theory, it is a chip shot. In reality, not so much.

yoeddy
02-06-2012, 11:51 PM
Bradshaw scored on 2nd down at the one minute mark.NE had one TO remaining.Had Eli kneeled the Pats would have called TO at about the same 57 second mark.On 3rd down if Eli knelt starting at, say a minute on the clock the 40 second play clock would start at around 50-52 seconds.at one on the play clock the giants could use thier last TO.AT MOST,there would be 10 seconds left on the game clock.AT MOST,they would kick off with under 10 seconds left.Maybe less.You,not me,have viewed this thread from a false premise.I appreciate however your plan comment.If you don't want to score,why hand off at all?KNeel twice,center the ball,kick the chip shot.Obviously Bradshaw didn't want to score and messed up.I can't understand why people are defending what happened.The defendants have pleaded guilty.They did it.They admit it.I was just commenting about what a disaster it could have been.I didn't expect a debate on the merits of what happened.It was not what the Giants wanted to do.No arguement.Yet idiots argue the merits.Coughlin didn't want a TD.BBel wanted us to score a td.And here People say scoring the Td was good.And i'm wasting my time pointing out the obvious to idiots.

If Eli knelt at the 1 minute mark, why would the play-clock not have started til the 52 second mark?

GmenFan1980
02-06-2012, 11:56 PM
Everyones defending what happened as if Coughlin wanted to score a TD.HE DIDN'T!The mistake he made was not just having Eli kneel twice and center the ball.You're arguing that scoring the td was the right play.He said Eli told Bradshaw not to score.Eli screamed don't score,don't score!Bradshaw tried not to score.And most replies here are defending scoring the TD.THE PEOPLE WHO SCORED THE TD ADMIT IT WAS A MISTAKE!They're not defending what happened.Why are you? a few things...
1) Couglin said that he NEVER told bradshaw to take a knee...eli didn't say not to score until AFTER he had already handed him the ball when he realized the defense was going to let him score. that's why it looks like he tries to stop but his momentum just carried him in. he had NOT been instructed by his coach to take a knee, so if he had taken a knee and something terrible happens, Coughlin definitely wouldn't have been happy.

2) you keep saying what a chip shot this FG would be and how it was a 98% shot...yes that's true but there are far too many instances in NFL history where kickers miss easy FGs, the most recent being Cundiff but I'm surprised no one's pointed out Gary Anderson....dude hadn't missed a kick ALL SEASON and he misses one in the NFC championship game that would have put his team up by 10, not nearly as much pressure as being down by 2 with a minute left in the super bowl. In theory, it is a chip shot. In reality, not so much.


I'm sorry I didn't read anything else posted besides this so......

+1 well said. We won and they lost. Lets go cheer our asses off for our guys tomorrow http://boards.giants.com/emoticons/emotion-2.gif

pica01
02-07-2012, 12:03 AM
Eli said he preferred the Td?Company man to the last,gotta love him.Don't score,don't score...he scored...I was with him all the way.If he had thrown that pass Brady threw behind Welker being called a Welker drop I'm positive that post game Eli would've taken complete responsiblity and said he made a bad throw.which it was.Welker was wide open.A good pass was an easy completion.Catchable-yeah.Drop-well thats tough.That incompletion blame was 50-50 between Brady and Welker.Eli would have taken all the blame.He would have said that if he threw an accurate pass it would have been an easy catch and he would be correct.Did Brady say anything to take Welker off the griddle?Not even close....didn't even mention he could've made a better throw.

pica01
02-07-2012, 12:45 AM
ok guys-this is getting out of hand.Coughlin didn't tell Bradshaw not to score.During the TO Bradshaw wasn't on the sideline with the coach.Eli was,and Coughlin said Eli told Bradshaw not to score.And Eli screamed don't score.And Bradshaw tried not to score.The plan was not to score a TD.It was to kick a fg at the gun or just before from extra point distance.Afterwards,Coughlin talked about how what happened was on his head and then added that even a short fg wasn't a sure thing.But seriously,it didn't go down the way Coughlin wanted and we survived.Had the Pats pulled a miracle he knows he would have lots of explaining.Finally,if Eli knealt on 2nd down at the 1 minute mark the pats would have called thier last TO at around 58 seconds.Taking a knee to center the ball on third down the 40 second clock wouldn't start until the ref goes in,seperates the players,gets the ball and places it down at the new line of scrimm.that would put the game clock and play clock within 5 to 10 seconds at the most.At worst,the giants would kickoff with 5 seconds left.I can't believe my original post is being debated.A 25 yard FG indoors at the gun vs giving one of the best offenses in the league 57 seconds and a TO to go 80 yards.It's a no brainer.I've learned there are,however,alot a fans here with no brain.That's it,I'm done.It's a great day to be a Giants fan.

abjr
02-07-2012, 12:48 AM
Let's assume Bradshaw did stop at the one yard line forcing the Patriots to use their last time out on second down with :57 left.

On third down Eli takes a knee and lets the play clock run down to one second and uses the Giants last time out with :18 left (I think it's a :40 play clock there?).

On 4th down Tynes comes out and kicks a 19-20 yard field goal putting us up 18-17 with :14 seconds left.

Assuming Tynes boots it deep enough for a touch back. I think I'd rather have left them with :14 seconds and no time outs left and having to go about 45 yards for a realistic FG attempt than with :57 and 1 time out left.

Is my math correct there? Trying to figure out how low we could have actually run the clock down to.

Either way, we won, but I don't envy BB having to decide to just let us score.

GMen869007
02-07-2012, 12:50 AM
While everybody was busy yelling in anger that Bradshaw didn't lay down on the 1 yard line, I was cheering my head off!

Scoring is never a guarantee, not even at the 1 yard line. Ideally, we run the clock down and score a last second field goal and win. But what if we botch the snap? What if Tynes misses the chip shot due to the hold or whatever other factor? What if we commit a penalty that pushes us back? What if we fumble the football?

I saw no problem in going up by at least 4 and forcing Brady to score a TD in under a minute starting deep within his own territory.

Hoova0797
02-07-2012, 01:27 AM
No, biggest gaff ever would have been a shanked field goal, mishandled hold (Tony Romo), or allowing a team to score a TD with 57 seconds starting at their own 20 (Giants - Packers '11).

Defense wins championships, right? I don't care how good a QB is, if you can't hold a team from scoring in less than a minute in a Superbowl starting from their own 20, you don't deserve to be Superbowl champions....I wanted to score the TD!

JJC7301
02-07-2012, 01:40 AM
i have no problem with bradshaw scoring.
+1. And if they decide to run it again on the next play and fumble, what do we say then?

Or if something goes wrong on the FG attempt like a high or low snap (i.e. Trey Junkin), or if it gets blocked.

If you don't feel comfortable putting you D on the field with less than a minute left and a 4 point lead, then it's just over-analyzing IMO.

calzonesays
02-07-2012, 03:29 AM
Hindsight is 20/20.

Maybe Bradshaw scoring was the reason we won the SB as opposed to him taking a knee. What if we milked the clock down to 0:02 seconds and the snap got botched or Tynes missed a FG? Then AB would have been called a choker and an idiot and ran out of town. Always take the points. Have faith in your defense to not allow a 80 Yards + TD in 50 seconds.

I do think the Clock operators at Indy were pretty friendly to us. On the TD 3 or 4 extra seconds ran off before it stopped. You know Irsay prolly gave them a little wink wink and said you can bleed off a few extra seconds if you want! 3 extra seconds ran off another time after Brady spiked the ball on the drive. But considering the phantom holding call on Boothe that killed our drive + gave NE 7 points, id say 7 seconds is fair!

JMFP2
02-07-2012, 03:46 AM
Like others have mentioned, I was totally fine with the TD. Giants at that point were trailing....take the points, take the lead, and make the Patriots drive down the field for a TD to beat you.</P>


No such thing as an automatic field goal.</P>

Toadofsteel
02-07-2012, 03:52 AM
I still would have wanted the 6 on a silver platter. Going ahead by 4 points means that the pats HAVE to get it into the end zone to win, as opposed to just get into FG range.

And after what happened to Billy Cundiff... at the very least if Brady scored, Bradshaw was still just doing his job, what he was trained to do. If Brady completed that hail mary, yeah i'd be sad that the giants would have lost but at the same time i can respect Brady for what he can do. On the other hand, if Tynes pulled a Cundiff (heheheh... "pulled") at the end of the game, I would be livid.

giantsfan420
02-07-2012, 04:04 AM
pica is 100% wrong bout kicking it at the gun or leaving NE under 10 seconds.

had we knelt it instead of run it, and ran down the clock, NE would have around 20 seconds. pica is assuming a kneel down takes as much time as bradshaw running it coming to a stop at the 1 and falling slowly into the endzone. that last play bradshaw scored took around 8 seconds or so.

i still woulda preferred the fg attempt and give ne around 15-20 seconds w/ no time outs to try and get in fg range, but whatever it made for an awesome ending. its like eli proved he was even better than we thought than brady bc eli leads us to score with a min left, brady couldnt

BillTheGreek
02-07-2012, 04:48 AM
Don't forget " Murphy's Law "...........Take the TD

BillTheGreek
02-07-2012, 04:51 AM
Like others have mentioned, I was totally fine with the TD.* Giants at that point were trailing....take the points, take the lead, and make the Patriots drive down the field for a TD to beat you.</P>


No such thing as an automatic field goal.</P>
100% Right
Don't forget" Murphy's Law "...........Take the TD

MikeyMike01
02-07-2012, 05:16 AM
You take the 7 points when they're there for the taking. Period.

All these what-if scenarios don't matter. Take the points, play some defense. The end.

NYGinIN
02-07-2012, 06:09 AM
In one sense, I'd rather Bradshaw score and take the points and let the defense do its job rather than attempt a field goal and risk losing to a bad snap, a blocked field goal, or a chippy miss just like the Ravens game. Take the points when you can. A field goal would have kept the pats in the game too where as a touchdown made it necessary for the pats to drive all the way down the field for 6. Granted, I know the pats have an amazing offense and was a little scared myself. Either way, it all worked out in the end.

OX1
02-07-2012, 06:15 AM
Take the points every time. Brady said he would rather have the ball last with time on the clock. How did that work out for him?? I also can't believe the lack of faith in our D............

swimeasy
02-07-2012, 06:22 AM
Eli talking about the play:

http://www.cbs.com/late_night/late_show/video/?pid=qpUxQBUn55UGltSjqscjOMgE4wZqcud5

GameTime
02-07-2012, 10:22 AM
ok guys-this is getting out of hand.Coughlin didn't tell Bradshaw not to score.During the TO Bradshaw wasn't on the sideline with the coach.Eli was,and Coughlin said Eli told Bradshaw not to score.And Eli screamed don't score.And Bradshaw tried not to score.The plan was not to score a TD.It was to kick a fg at the gun or just before from extra point distance.Afterwards,Coughlin talked about how what happened was on his head and then added that even a short fg wasn't a sure thing.But seriously,it didn't go down the way Coughlin wanted and we survived.Had the Pats pulled a miracle he knows he would have lots of explaining.Finally,if Eli knealt on 2nd down at the 1 minute mark the pats would have called thier last TO at around 58 seconds.Taking a knee to center the ball on third down the 40 second clock wouldn't start until the ref goes in,seperates the players,gets the ball and places it down at the new line of scrimm.that would put the game clock and play clock within 5 to 10 seconds at the most.At worst,the giants would kickoff with 5 seconds left.I can't believe my original post is being debated.A 25 yard FG indoors at the gun vs giving one of the best offenses in the league 57 seconds and a TO to go 80 yards.It's a no brainer.I've learned there are,however,alot a fans here with no brain.That's it,I'm done.It's a great day to be a Giants fan.</P>


you are talking "what ifs".....ok "what if" they miss the FG....you would be crying from here to kingdom come saying..'they should have just got the points...they should have just got the points. Tynes sucks. Too much risk with the snap and hold. TC you idiot"....</P>


you are down by two pointin the SB!!!! THE SUPERBOWL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ...You get the points to take the lead....especially when the its a 4 point lead.</P>


say what you want about Eli and TC towing the company line but they both were happy with the pints and said the call down there could have gone either way as far as stratedgy goes. </P>


How come Belichck didnt let them score on the first handoff to Bradsahw??.....hmmmm</P>


because its football and the basic idea is to keep the team from scoring and to score points when yuo can...</P>


in the imortal words of Herm Edwards.."YOU PLAY TO WIN THE GAME"...</P>


thats waht the Giants did.....</P>

G-Man67
02-07-2012, 10:31 AM
The idea of a FG attempt had me terrified.* I was glad it didn't come to that.* I think the happy medium would have been if Bradshaw went down, Pats burned their last timeout, then the Giants ran it in on 3rd down (I imagine NE still would have let them score with 50 seconds left).* Then they have 0 timeouts and a few less seconds.


i was literally shaking when Tynes lined up vs. SF for the winning FG ... people that are saying short FGs are automatic, clearly have not followed the Giants for many years ... and the snap on our winner vs. SF was not good



finally, tie game, i agree with all who are saying it was a mistake to score with 57 seconds, but we were behind ... we were losing the Super Bowl ... priority #1 is to get the lead ... and while i wouldnt have had an issue with him kneeling at the 1 ... i certainly wouldn't have felt that the game was over and it would have been up to our non-football players to win it ... DeOssie, Weatherford and Tynes ... let's put it this way ... he kneels at the 1, i'm still trying to run it in on the next play to avoid the dramatic FG

easterbeast
02-07-2012, 10:34 AM
he should have kneeled at the one to force them to burn their last timeout........but the defense came up huge at the end!!

GCGiant
02-07-2012, 10:36 AM
I think he shoulda run in place at the 1 inch line...or to the side...kill as much time as possible...but you gotta take the points.

Kinda like somebody said earlier...ask Romo if he woulda preferred they scored a TD on that FG blotch of his...or ask him how often a critical FG is blocked.

Gotta take the points. I wonder, however, why they didn't consider him patting his hand on the ground as a sign of him saying..."OK, I want to be down right here"...giving himself up.

Oh well...it's all water under the bridge now.

pica01
02-08-2012, 12:40 PM
OK-we'll agree to disagree.If Eli takes a knee in the middle at the 2 the 40 second clock starts at about 52 seconds.We kick an extra point FG at 12 seconds leaving about 9- 10 seconds.we would have to kickoff.The Pats would get 1 play.TYNES IS 325 FOR 325 ON EXTRA POINTS.100 %.Yes,something could have gone wrong,but 325 for 325 is fact.Had Branch caught that pass or Brady led him with it we would had to live thru 4 or 5 passes into our endzone from inside our 30,maybe closer.He had lots of room to run.we dodged a bullet.It could've happened.Even without that,if gronkowski was standing 2 feet further left on the hail mary,well,we'de be discussing the worst loss in the history of sports.325 for 325.It is what it is.Even if you disagree with me that the TD was a mistake,you have to agree the extra pt fg was the safer option.And those 57 seconds of terror wouldn't have occured.And those 57 seconds could've been alot worse had Brady connected with Branch.I'll say one last thing.Eli and our recievers would have done much more with that minute.Roles reversed,there isn't anyone here who would have prefered the Pats kicking a FG over scoring the td and at least giving us a chance.You can't defend against an extra point Fg.You're helpless.Sure,after 325 strait Tynes could've missed #326.The ? is.What's more likely?Missing after 325 strait made or the Pats going 80 yrds in 57 seconds?There is no arguement that can be made against the FG being the better % option.And before you say Romo,Cundiff,Norwood,Junkin etc. just remember.325 for 325.Nothing in football is a 100% certainty.But I'm certain that we wouldn't stop the Pats going 80 yrds in 57 seconds 325 strait times.I realize there are fans and experts too,that say score the TD.To me,the extra pt fg is a no brainer.And after reading this post I don't see how anyone who disagrees could refute my position.I check back to see you try.Remember,325 for 325 including this postseason.career stats say 317 for 317.I added aprrox 8 for this postseason.Fire away.

Ruttiger711
02-08-2012, 12:54 PM
just a request to find your space bar</P>

GameTime
02-08-2012, 01:10 PM
OK-we'll agree to disagree.<FONT color=#000080 size=5>If </FONT>Eli takes a knee in the middle at the 2 the 40 second clock starts at about 52 seconds.We kick an extra point FG at 12 seconds leaving about 9- 10 seconds.we would have to kickoff.The Pats would get 1 play.TYNES IS 325 FOR 325 ON EXTRA POINTS.100 %.Yes,something <FONT color=#000080 size=5>could have</FONT> gone wrong,but 325 for 325 is fact.<FONT color=#000080 size=5>Had</FONT> Branch caught that pass or Brady led him with it we would had to live thru 4 or 5 passes into our endzone from inside our 30,maybe closer.He had lots of room to run.we dodged a bullet.<FONT color=#000080 size=5>It could've happened</FONT>.Even without that,<FONT color=#000080 size=5>if</FONT> gronkowski was standing 2 feet further left on the hail mary,well,we'de be discussing the worst loss in the history of sports.325 for 325.It is what it is.Even if you disagree with me that the TD was a mistake,you have to agree the extra pt fg was the safer option.And those 57 seconds of terror wouldn't have occured.And those 57 seconds <FONT color=#000080 size=5>could've been</FONT> alot worse had Brady connected with Branch.I'll say one last thing.Eli and our recievers would have done much more with that minute.Roles reversed,there isn't anyone here who would have prefered the Pats kicking a FG over scoring the td and at least giving us a chance.You can't defend against an extra point Fg.You're helpless.Sure,after 325 strait Tynes <FONT color=#000080 size=5>could've missed</FONT> #326.The ? is.What's more likely?Missing after 325 strait made or the Pats going 80 yrds in 57 seconds?There is no arguement that can be made against the FG being the better % option.And before you say Romo,Cundiff,Norwood,Junkin etc. just remember.325 for 325.Nothing in football is a 100% certainty.<FONT color=#000080 size=5>But I'm certain that we wouldn't stop the Pats going 80 yrds in 57 seconds 325 strait times</FONT>.I realize there are fans and experts too,that say score the TD.To me,the extra pt fg is a no brainer.And after reading this post I don't see how anyone who disagrees could refute my position.I check back to see you try.Remember,325 for 325 including this postseason.career stats say 317 for 317.I added aprrox 8 for this postseason.Fire away.</P>


OK....."ifs' ..."could haves"..."would haves"....mean absolutely nothing. Gronkowski ALMOST catching the tip means nothing. Youcan argue until you are blue (pun intended) in the face and it meansnothing. You cant agrue what "could have " happened.Because what happened is Bradshaw scored and the Giants D held up and they are champs. You can "what if" the game to death!!! "What if" Gronkowski wasnt hurt. "What if" Blackburn doesnt make the pick..."What if" the Giants dont get the fumbles back...etc. "What ifs and maybes" are all bull**** at the end of the day,</P>


Oh yeah....they didnt have to stop Brady and the Patsoffense 325 times. They only had to do it once....</P>


ITS THE SUPER BOWL YOU PLAY TO WIN. YOU OUT COACH YOURSELF AND YOU ARE ****ED!!!!</P>


One last thing...according to your"what ifs"....."what if" something did go wrong on a the hypothetical FG you talk about. Youy would most certainly be crying that Bradshaw should have just score.....</P>

Husky
02-08-2012, 01:22 PM
With a 1 pt lead, you're one PI or completion away from possibly losing the game by a FG. Plus, as had been mentioned, the FG, while probable, wasn't guaranteed. It wsn't as though we just had to run out the clock, we had to score. FWIW, Gostkowski missed a 27 yarder under ideal conditions, this season. The TD was a guaranteed lead.

Roosevelt
02-08-2012, 01:26 PM
When the Giants got a 1st down I got up and said to everyone in the room-"ok,we don't want to score".that was obvious.but I said,"there is no reason to even hand it off.Eli should kneel twice and center the second and we can kick a 25 yarder at the gun.Admit it,when Bradshaw scored and gave Brady 57 seconds you were livid.Fortunately,this defense is better than the one that rodgers went the length of the field in 4 plays earlier this yr in a minute.I remember turning to my buddy when we got inside the 20 at the end and saying "Geez,wouldn't it be great if we could kick a chip shot at the gun to win it and not give them any chance?'To think we got that and somehow screwed it up was incredible.Kneel down.Kneel down again in the middle.Kick a 25 yd field goal.game over.But nooooo....instead we got 57 seconds of torture.Pisarchiks reverse spin handoff to Csonka lead to the victory formation.Had Brady pulled off a miracle... well,you know.Why hand off?You know the answer.you don't.Coughlin,Eli and Bradshaw knew it too.And did it anyway.had The pats pulled off a miracle it would've went down as the biggest bonehead play ever,in any sport.Just thought I'd say what alot of us were thinking during those 57 seconds of torture.

I totally disagree.

Remember the Cowboys missing the fieldgoal from the 1 1/2 yard line?

You have to score there.

I figured we were going to intercept Brady. I wasn't worried.

pica01
02-08-2012, 01:30 PM
I'm wrong,Tynes isn't 325 for 325.He's made 140 strait ex-pts as a Giant,hasn't missed in 4 yrs and is 311 for 317 career.My point still stands.140 strait.325 strait?that's what you get when you use wikipedia.My bad.Nothings 100% certain in the NFL.But Tynes is 99% plus as a Giant on extra points.57 seconds.80 yards.Nowwhere near 99%.Bad things can happen.Blown coverages,pass interference,deflections etc.Yeah,bad things can happen on extra pts too,but I'll take my chances.Wow,even the NFL is the 99% vs the 1%.Smile,that was a good line.Not that you haven't been smiling since around 10pm sunday night because THE GIANTS ARE SUPERBOWL CHAMPIONS AGAIN.Even the most optimistic fan,especially after the 2nd Redskin game couldn't have seen this coming.Fool me once,shame on you,fool me twice,shame on me.I'll never doubt this team again no matter how bad they look at times and face it,that D at times this yr was as bad as any longtime Giant fan has ever seen.But when the Dline got healthy they turned it around.And Eli is the best big game QB this side of Montana I've ever seen.2 championships in 4 yrs.We've been blessed.And the Philly daily news back page monday morn asked,"why is it never us".How sweet it is!

GameTime
02-08-2012, 01:35 PM
I'm wrong,Tynes isn't 325 for 325.He's made 140 strait ex-pts as a Giant,hasn't missed in 4 yrs and is 311 for 317 career.<FONT color=#000080 size=5>My point</FONT> still stands.140 strait.325 strait?that's what you get when you use wikipedia.My bad.Nothings 100% certain in the NFL.But Tynes is 99% plus as a Giant on extra points.57 seconds.80 yards.Nowwhere near 99%.Bad things can happen.Blown coverages,pass interference,deflections etc.Yeah,bad things can happen on extra pts too,but I'll take my chances.Wow,even the NFL is the 99% vs the 1%.Smile,that was a good line.Not that you haven't been smiling since around 10pm sunday night because THE GIANTS ARE SUPERBOWL CHAMPIONS AGAIN.Even the most optimistic fan,especially after the 2nd Redskin game couldn't have seen this coming.Fool me once,shame on you,fool me twice,shame on me.I'll never doubt this team again no matter how bad they look at times and face it,that D at times this yr was as bad as any longtime Giant fan has ever seen.But when the Dline got healthy they turned it around.And Eli is the best big game QB this side of Montana I've ever seen.2 championships in 4 yrs.We've been blessed.And the Philly daily news back page monday morn asked,"why is it never us".How sweet it is!</P>


your "point" is tiresome and at this stage totally redundant....[:)]</P>


just enjoy the win already and stop with the Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday morning armchair coaching already.....[B]</P>

BillTheGreek
02-08-2012, 01:43 PM
I'm wrong,Tynes isn't 325 for 325.He's made 140 strait ex-pts as a Giant,hasn't missed in 4 yrs and is 311 for 317 career.<FONT color=#000080 size=5>My point</FONT> still stands.140 strait.325 strait?that's what you get when you use wikipedia.My bad.Nothings 100% certain in the NFL.But Tynes is 99% plus as a Giant on extra points.57 seconds.80 yards.Nowwhere near 99%.Bad things can happen.Blown coverages,pass interference,deflections etc.Yeah,bad things can happen on extra pts too,but I'll take my chances.Wow,even the NFL is the 99% vs the 1%.Smile,that was a good line.Not that you haven't been smiling since around 10pm sunday night because THE GIANTS ARE SUPERBOWL CHAMPIONS AGAIN.Even the most optimistic fan,especially after the 2nd Redskin game couldn't have seen this coming.Fool me once,shame on you,fool me twice,shame on me.I'll never doubt this team again no matter how bad they look at times and face it,that D at times this yr was as bad as any longtime Giant fan has ever seen.But when the Dline got healthy they turned it around.And Eli is the best big game QB this side of Montana I've ever seen.2 championships in 4 yrs.We've been blessed.And the Philly daily news back page monday morn asked,"why is it never us".How sweet it is!</P>


your "point" is tiresome and at this stage totally redundant....[:)]</P>


just enjoy the win already and stop with the Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday morning armchair coaching already.....[B]</P>



YOUR RIGHT !
ENJOY THE WIN !

Toadofsteel
02-08-2012, 02:22 PM
25-yard FG from the gun, 98% chance.

Taking 6 points being given to you on a silver platter: 100% chance.

Having the funniest sb pic of a running back falling ***-first into the end zone: priceless.

And I agree that if the defense couldn't run out 57 seconds + 1 timeout against a shortpass-happy Brady, they didn't deserve to win. I'd rather win it with a defense that was getting stronger especially after rallying around the blackburn INT, than to trust Tynes to not pull a Cundiff (heheheh, "pull")

nygsb42champs
02-08-2012, 02:23 PM
I had not problem with the TD. To many negative things can happen on a field goal.

SweetZombieJesus
02-08-2012, 02:44 PM
Certainly the worst SB winning score ever! Not exactly Plax catching a wide open pass in XLII...

LOL, I wanted them to take a knee and run out the clock to kick the FG.

But I still say more can go wrong on 1-3 goal line runs -- Joe Pisarcik, anybody? Bad snaps, bad handoffs, Bradshaw gets stripped (they were going for the strip on every play all game). Don't even let Brady get any time left, don't give him the chance.

It worked out, I'll let it go and we all get the funniest SB winning score in history.

nhpgiantsfan
02-08-2012, 02:49 PM
Tynes may be 99% for extra points but other things also have to factor in. Just 2 weeks ago against the 49'ers, DeOssie who is usually a great longsnapper, delivered a tough snap that, Weatherford had to make a great play on, Thank God. I am glad we took the six. And for the record, nobody on the Giants said "don't score" before the play started. Eli said himself, that they really weren't expecting the Pats to let them walk in. It wasnt until after the handoff that Eli saw what was happening and shouted "don't score". </P>

pica01
02-08-2012, 03:26 PM
OK guys,don't get mad at me.Sports from a fans standpoint is always about the what ifs.We,as Giant fans are just spitballing here from the winning side.All I'm saying is that the what ifs would have been harder to explain had the Pats pulled off a miracle.IBe truthfull,we all thought this would be a close game that might come down to who got the ball last.If I told you before the game that the Giants would be lining up to kick an extra pt type fg at or near the gun and the Pats wouldn't get the ball back or get one play from thier 20,you would've considered that,given a close game,the best case senario.Am i wrong?Not a 30 yarder from the hash.Not cundiff outdoors from 32 from the left hash.Romo.That was 1 time vs hundreds of sucesses in the same spot.This was an extra point kick.we didn't want to score.The pats wanted us to score.Roles reversed,we would have wanted the Pats to score.At least it would give us a chance.Comeon guys,you know how helpless you feel when an opponent lines up in OT to kick a 30 yarder.35-40,maybe he'll miss.even 25 or 30 yards a bad shank might miss.This was an extra pt.20 yards from the middle if Eli kneels at the 2.There is no defense against an extra point.You're helpless.If your opponent executes this 99 % kick you lose.Everyones defending something WE DIDN'T WANT TO DO.We did WHAT THE PAT'S WANTED US TO DO.It gave them thier only chance.If we blew a 20 yard fg no one could blame Coughlin.It was by far the best,safest % play.Gee,Bradshaw looked overjoyed holding his head in his hands on the bench after scoring,huh?Eli screaming "don't score,don't score".Bradshaw trying to go down.It all worked out in the end.But it's not what we wanted or should have wanted.And coughlin didn't defend it.He pointed out the FG wasn't a sure thing,but he admitted that when we scored his first thought was,quote,"this could really come down on my head". Again,roles reversed,you want the Pats to score and give us a minute or run the clock inside 10 seconds and kick a 20 yarder.If Coughlin decided he wanted the TD I could understand fans here defending that decision,right or wrong.You guys,however,are defending scoring the TD as if to defend Coughlin.Coughlin agrees with my viewpoint,wanted to set up the Fg and doesn't need to be defended.He did admit,however,that he didn't clearly tell his team what he wanted to do.He sortof halfwayed it.He could've had eli kneel twice but then you're talking about a 25 yarder.I'm sure in hindsight he knows he should've told Eli to tell Bradshaw in the huddle that if the Pats allowed him to score to stop at the one.That was his mistake and he knows it.Picture it,Bradshaw stops at the one and just stands there.I wonder what the pats,under instructions to let him score would've done.Talk about what ifs.It might"ve been one of the most bizarre plays in NFL history.The pat's were just standing around.If Bradshaw,told in the huddle not to score, stopped at the one and with no one even pursuing him,just stood there and waited till the defenders realized what was happening before taking a knee it could've been very pro bowlish.But again,Coughlin wanted to do it my way.You guys should be agreeing with me and coach.Roles reversed,what do you want to happen?Pats 20 yarder or td and 57 seconds to go 80 yards?So I ask again,what are you guys thinking?

nhpgiantsfan
02-08-2012, 03:39 PM
I dont know why you keep saying Coughlin wanted to do it that way. You have no proof of that. They called safe plays that they assumed the Patriots would stop. But he never once said to anyone on the sideline or to Eli, not to score.. You are just plain assuming he didnt want to score. Yes they were taking the conservative approach with the plan being to eat clock and kick. BUT....</P>


He never said "dont take the free points if the Patrios are going to give them to you!!"</P>


</P>


So stop saying crap like "you guys should be agreeing with me and Coach" because Coach clearly stated, that they NEVER discussed what to do in the event the Patriots let them score.</P>


Stop making stuff up.</P>

jhamburg
02-08-2012, 03:40 PM
You take the 7 points when they're there for the taking. Period.

All these what-if scenarios don't matter. Take the points, play some defense. The end.

You guys don't get it. You can't win this argument with anecdotes and "common sense", you have to actually do rigorous analysis here. If you do the math, chances of Pats scoring a TD in 57 seconds + 1 TO > (chances of us missing the fg OR pats scoring a FG/TD in 20 seconds + no timeouts). That is all that matters, not some bull**** wisdom about "you always take the points"

nhpgiantsfan
02-08-2012, 03:42 PM
Oh and to say that Coughlin wouldn't be blamed if they did miss the gimmie FG. This statement leaves me speechless. I know you are new to these boards but, I assume you are familiar with the NY media somewhat. </P>


He would get absolutely destroyed!!</P>


</P>

G-Man67
02-08-2012, 03:51 PM
Oh and to say that Coughlin wouldn't be blamed if they did miss the gimmie FG.* This statement leaves me speechless.* I know you are new to these boards but, I assume you are familiar with the NY media somewhat.* </P>


He would get absolutely destroyed!!</P>


*</P>

coughlin would have been crucified if we just took knees and tynes had a cundiff moment and missed 25-30 yard FG



and the people citing Tynes XP stats, are fooling themselves ... i'm about a 65% free throw shooter , but if somebody said 1 free throw for $1MM ... my breathing wouldnt be right ... i might choke and leave it short ... my mechanics might suffer ... i might aim it instead of freely letting it leave my hand ... i realize DeOssie, Weatherford and Tynes are pros, but you can't tell me that their hearts wouldn't be skipping several beats during the Super Bowl winning FG try



now, i'm not going to lie, i would have preferred Bradshaw kneel at the 1, but on the very next play i would have wanted us to try to get the TD and a 4 point lead and to not leave it up to our 3 non-football players to execute

jhamburg
02-08-2012, 03:54 PM
Oh and to say that Coughlin wouldn't be blamed if they did miss the gimmie FG.* This statement leaves me speechless.* I know you are new to these boards but, I assume you are familiar with the NY media somewhat.* </P>


He would get absolutely destroyed!!</P>


*</P>

coughlin would have been crucified if we just took knees and tynes had a cundiff moment and missed 25-30 yard FG



and the people citing Tynes XP stats, are fooling themselves ... i'm about a 65% free throw shooter , but if somebody said 1 free throw for $1MM ... my breathing wouldnt be right ... i might choke and leave it short ... my mechanics might suffer ... i might aim it instead of freely letting it leave my hand ... i realize DeOssie, Weatherford and Tynes are pros, but you can't tell me that their hearts wouldn't be skipping several beats during the Super Bowl winning FG try



now, i'm not going to lie, i would have preferred Bradshaw kneel at the 1, but on the very next play i would have wanted us to try to get the TD and a 4 point lead and to not leave it up to our 3 non-football players to execute



When is the last time you've seen someone miss a game winning/game tying XP?

nhpgiantsfan
02-08-2012, 03:59 PM
I can't remember the last time a team needed and XP to win or tie a SUPERBOWL. But I can imagine the players nerves would be a little different than for every other run of the mill extra point attempt.

G-Man67
02-08-2012, 04:08 PM
Oh and to say that Coughlin wouldn't be blamed if they did miss the gimmie FG.* This statement leaves me speechless.* I know you are new to these boards but, I assume you are familiar with the NY media somewhat.* </P>


He would get absolutely destroyed!!</P>


*</P>

coughlin would have been crucified if we just took knees and tynes had a cundiff moment and missed 25-30 yard FG



and the people citing Tynes XP stats, are fooling themselves ... i'm about a 65% free throw shooter , but if somebody said 1 free throw for $1MM ... my breathing wouldnt be right ... i might choke and leave it short ... my mechanics might suffer ... i might aim it instead of freely letting it leave my hand ... i realize DeOssie, Weatherford and Tynes are pros, but you can't tell me that their hearts wouldn't be skipping several beats during the Super Bowl winning FG try



now, i'm not going to lie, i would have preferred Bradshaw kneel at the 1, but on the very next play i would have wanted us to try to get the TD and a 4 point lead and to not leave it up to our 3 non-football players to execute



When is the last time you've seen someone miss a game winning/game tying XP?

well 1st it is not an XP ... i know u might think it's the same difference ... but listen all you have to do is watch tape of our FG vs. SF in OT ... that snap was low ... Weatherford did a great job in fielding it and putting it down ... could have been a disaster ... i can tell you even before that moment my nervous meter was thru the roof and i've been watching football for 35+ years ... if it was all so routine ... i wouldn't have been shaking before we made it in SF

pica01
02-08-2012, 04:11 PM
Coughlins mistake was not anticipating the Pats allowing the TD and telling Eli on the sideline what to tell the guys in the huddle to do if that happened.He pretty much admitted that postgame when he said he didn't specifically tell Bradshaw not to score.Quote"Eli told him".Unsaid but implied was a mea culpa by Coughlin that he didn't give clear instructions if the Pats decided to allow a td.You could tell he regreted that mistake,leading to the "I hope this doesn't come down on my head" as his first thought when we scored.He knew that if the pats somehow pulled of a miracle that saying postgame I didn't want to score a TD but I didn't prepare my players for the Pats allowing the score specifically would be what would come down on his head.Coughlins not even pretending that he wanted to score a TD.And he's admitted he didn't anticipate or give instructions if the Pats layed down.He knows he should have.Imagine postgame if the pats won.Coach Coughlin,why didn't you run the clock and kick the short FG inside 10 seconds?The answer,"well,that's actually what I wanted to do,but.....that's what would have come down on his head.And he knew it.Unless you're saying he wanted the TD.Then you're living in a fantasy world.Coughlin made a big mistake and he knows it.And had it backfired on him he would have taken complete responsiblity post game for it.He wouldn't have defended it.Why are you guys?

pica01
02-08-2012, 04:15 PM
Again,32 yards outdoors on grass from the left hash in the rain isn't 20 yards from the middle indoors on turf.Apples and oranges.Tynes-140 strait and 99%.If Eli kneels at the 2 in the middle IT IS EXACTLY LIKE AN EXTRA POINT!I give up!

Toadofsteel
02-08-2012, 04:19 PM
Whatever man... i'd rather trust my defense than trust Lawrence "Heart Attack" Tynes.

pica01
02-08-2012, 04:20 PM
The NY media doesn't destroy anyone when they do the right thing.the best % thing.If they blew a 20 yarder nobody would blame Coughlin.If the pats went 80 yards,everyone would.

freeoscar
02-08-2012, 04:20 PM
you all must be very young. b/c clearly you don't remember the '03 game against the Cowboys when the Giants kicked a FG to go up 3 and left 11 seconds (and no TOs for Dallas) on the clock. The kicker proceeded to kick it OOB, and the immortal Quincy Carter completed a long out pattern to put Dallas in FG range, which they made, and subsequently won the game in OT.
crazy sh*t happens all the time. if quincy carter can do it w/11 seconds, surely Tom Brady could do it with 20.

nhpgiantsfan
02-08-2012, 04:22 PM
And how would he had answered the question:</P>


Coach, the patriots were trying to give you a 4 point lead in the Super Bowl with a minute to play, and you chose to kneel on the one yard line and kick a field goal instead. Tynes missed the kick, and Patriots won the SuperBowl. Can you please explain your decision, not to take thelead when your opponent was giving it to you.</P>

GameTime
02-08-2012, 04:22 PM
you all must be very young. b/c clearly you don't remember the '03 game against the Cowboys when the Giants kicked a FG to go up 3 and left 11 seconds (and no TOs for Dallas) on the clock. The kicker proceeded to kick it OOB, and the immortal Quincy Carter completed a long out pattern to put Dallas in FG range, which they made, and subsequently won the game in OT. crazy sh*t happens all the time. if quincy carter can do it w/11 seconds, surely Tom Brady could do it with 20.</P>


but he didnt.....did he....</P>


</P>

G-Man67
02-08-2012, 04:22 PM
you all must be very young. b/c clearly you don't remember the '03 game against the Cowboys when the Giants kicked a FG to go up 3 and left 11 seconds (and no TOs for Dallas) on the clock. The kicker proceeded to kick it OOB, and the immortal Quincy Carter completed a long out pattern to put Dallas in FG range, which they made, and subsequently won the game in OT.
crazy sh*t happens all the time. if quincy carter can do it w/11 seconds, surely Tom Brady could do it with 20.

but bad snap = FG miss whether it's 20, 30, 40, 50, dome, field turf, grass, rain, wind, etc., so again Trey Junkin ... i just want my football players determining things, if at all possible, when that much is at stake ... but hats off, you started a compelling thread here

jhamburg
02-08-2012, 04:24 PM
Again,32 yards outdoors on grass from the left hash in the rain isn't 20 yards from the middle indoors on turf.Apples and oranges.Tynes-140 strait and 99%.If Eli kneels at the 2 in the middle IT IS EXACTLY LIKE AN EXTRA POINT!I give up!

Advanced NFL stats model agrees. That dip towards the end is Bradshaw scoring the TD.

http://live.advancednflstats.com/index.php?gameid1=2012020500

freeoscar
02-08-2012, 04:24 PM
you all must be very young. b/c clearly you don't remember the '03 game against the Cowboys when the Giants kicked a FG to go up 3 and left 11 seconds (and no TOs for Dallas) on the clock. The kicker proceeded to kick it OOB, and the immortal Quincy Carter completed a long out pattern to put Dallas in FG range, which they made, and subsequently won the game in OT. crazy sh*t happens all the time. if quincy carter can do it w/11 seconds, surely Tom Brady could do it with 20.</P>


but he didnt.....did he....</P>


*</P>

what? he didn't have the chance, b/c bradshaw scored. that scenario never came to be.

nhpgiantsfan
02-08-2012, 04:25 PM
The NY media doesn't destroy anyone when they do the right thing.the best % thing.If they blew a 20 yarder nobody would blame Coughlin.If the pats went 80 yards,everyone would.</P>


Seriously?? Are you laughing when you type this junk?</P>

Ruttiger711
02-08-2012, 04:25 PM
Again,32 yards outdoors on grass from the left hash in the rain isn't 20 yards from the middle indoors on turf.Apples and oranges.Tynes-140 strait and 99%.If Eli kneels at the 2 in the middle IT IS EXACTLY LIKE AN EXTRA POINT!I give up!</P>


</P>


Just curious - since you're the stat guy, what was the completion percentage for the cowboys BEFORE Romo's flub? What was that on the 2 yard line?... say 5 yards and under.</P>

freeoscar
02-08-2012, 04:27 PM
you all must be very young. b/c clearly you don't remember the '03 game against the Cowboys when the Giants kicked a FG to go up 3 and left 11 seconds (and no TOs for Dallas) on the clock. The kicker proceeded to kick it OOB, and the immortal Quincy Carter completed a long out pattern to put Dallas in FG range, which they made, and subsequently won the game in OT.
crazy sh*t happens all the time. if quincy carter can do it w/11 seconds, surely Tom Brady could do it with 20.

but bad snap = FG miss whether it's 20, 30, 40, 50, dome, field turf, grass, rain, wind, etc., so again Trey Junkin ... i just want my football players determining things, if at all possible, when that much is at stake ... but hats off, you started a compelling thread here

there was no bad snap in that cowboys game. on the kickoff he put it out of bounds. which meant the cowboys just needed 1 mid distance play to get into FG range. Even if Tynes had put the kickoff after bradshaw's TD OOB, the pats would still need 60yds and a TD to win. vs. 1 middle distance completed pass to the sidelines.

jhamburg
02-08-2012, 04:30 PM
you all must be very young. b/c clearly you don't remember the '03 game against the Cowboys when the Giants kicked a FG to go up 3 and left 11 seconds (and no TOs for Dallas) on the clock. The kicker proceeded to kick it OOB, and the immortal Quincy Carter completed a long out pattern to put Dallas in FG range, which they made, and subsequently won the game in OT.
crazy sh*t happens all the time. if quincy carter can do it w/11 seconds, surely Tom Brady could do it with 20.

but bad snap = FG miss whether it's 20, 30, 40, 50, dome, field turf, grass, rain, wind, etc., so again Trey Junkin ... i just want my football players determining things, if at all possible, when that much is at stake ... but hats off, you started a compelling thread here

there was no bad snap in that cowboys game. on the kickoff he put it out of bounds. which meant the cowboys just needed 1 mid distance play to get into FG range. Even if Tynes had put the kickoff after bradshaw's TD OOB, the pats would still need 60yds and a TD to win. vs. 1 middle distance completed pass to the sidelines.

Keep in mind that we're kicking from the 35 now, so it's a lot less tempting to try to get cute with some dribbling squib kick that rolls OOB than it is to just bomb it into the end zone.

Husky
02-08-2012, 04:32 PM
Or one PI call on a desperation pass, like the one that should have been called, at the end of the BUMMER game in SF a few years back.

pica01
02-08-2012, 04:37 PM
IT WAS AN EXTRA POINT!I don't trust Tynes either,but comeon.I do wonder,however,how different this discussion would be if it was Matt Bahr kicking this 20 yarder.20 yards.indoors.Deossi is a professional long snapper.It's all he does.Weatherford is a great holder.Tynes is 99 % on extra pts with 140 made strait.As far as trusting this defense,well,they played great during this run but you must have been watching a different defense,especially a different secondary then I did this year.

GameTime
02-08-2012, 04:39 PM
you all must be very young. b/c clearly you don't remember the '03 game against the Cowboys when the Giants kicked a FG to go up 3 and left 11 seconds (and no TOs for Dallas) on the clock. The kicker proceeded to kick it OOB, and the immortal Quincy Carter completed a long out pattern to put Dallas in FG range, which they made, and subsequently won the game in OT. crazy sh*t happens all the time. <FONT color=#000080 size=6>if quincy carter can do it w/11 seconds, surely Tom Brady could do it with 20.</FONT></P>


but he didnt.....did he....</P>


</P>


what? he didn't have the chance, b/c bradshaw scored. that scenario never came to be.</P>


talking about Brady notcoming back because Quincy Carter did....</P>

GameTime
02-08-2012, 04:41 PM
IT WAS AN EXTRA POINT!I don't trust Tynes either,but comeon.I do wonder,however,how different this discussion would be if it was Matt Bahr kicking this 20 yarder.20 yards.indoors.Deossi is a professional long snapper.It's all he does.Weatherford is a great holder.Tynes is 99 % on extra pts with 140 made strait.As far as trusting this defense,well,they played great during this run but you must have been watching a different defense,especially a different secondary then I did this year.</P>


OK...............OK.....you're right. You should be coach of the year and annoited the next football guru. Bradshaw and the Giants are stupid imgrates(lol) and lucky they won!!!....[;)]</P>


shut up now......[;)]</P>

burier
02-08-2012, 04:41 PM
When the Giants got a 1st down I got up and said to everyone in the room-"ok,we don't want to score".that was obvious.but I said,"there is no reason to even hand it off.Eli should kneel twice and center the second and we can kick a 25 yarder at the gun.Admit it,when Bradshaw scored and gave Brady 57 seconds you were livid.Fortunately,this defense is better than the one that rodgers went the length of the field in 4 plays earlier this yr in a minute.I remember turning to my buddy when we got inside the 20 at the end and saying "Geez,wouldn't it be great if we could kick a chip shot at the gun to win it and not give them any chance?'To think we got that and somehow screwed it up was incredible.Kneel down.Kneel down again in the middle.Kick a 25 yd field goal.game over.But nooooo....instead we got 57 seconds of torture.Pisarchiks reverse spin handoff to Csonka lead to the victory formation.Had Brady pulled off a miracle... well,you know.Why hand off?You know the answer.you don't.Coughlin,Eli and Bradshaw knew it too.And did it anyway.had The pats pulled off a miracle it would've went down as the biggest bonehead play ever,in any sport.Just thought I'd say what alot of us were thinking during those 57 seconds of torture.

seeing as we won isn't this a moot point?

THE_New_York_Giants
02-08-2012, 04:43 PM
The Jets could have won the Superbowl this year.

nhpgiantsfan
02-08-2012, 04:44 PM
Exactly, DeOssie is a great long snapper and even he almost blew it in the San Fransisco game. It can happen to anyone at anytime. Which is exactly why you don't turn down a free 4 point lead in the SuperBowl based on what you think or assume you can do on the following play. nuff said.

jhamburg
02-08-2012, 04:45 PM
IT WAS AN EXTRA POINT!I don't trust Tynes either,but comeon.I do wonder,however,how different this discussion would be if it was Matt Bahr kicking this 20 yarder.20 yards.indoors.Deossi is a professional long snapper.It's all he does.Weatherford is a great holder.Tynes is 99 % on extra pts with 140 made strait.As far as trusting this defense,well,they played great during this run but you must have been watching a different defense,especially a different secondary then I did this year.</P>


OK...............OK.....you're right. You should be coach of the year and annoited the next football guru. Bradshaw and the Giants are stupid imgrates(lol) and lucky they won!!!....[;)]</P>


shut up now......[;)]</P>

OK so why do you think Bradshaw tried to stop then?

GmenFan1980
02-08-2012, 04:47 PM
We won, why does it matter how we got the lead? Jesus, we probably could have blown the pats out and people would still have said....

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_rBdBHhB9Xf4/SKZOpRj2D0I/AAAAAAAAA6w/CGN48zKkvGc/s400/I'm+not+happy.jpg

jhamburg
02-08-2012, 04:51 PM
We won, why does it matter how we got the lead? Jesus, we probably could have blown the pats out and people would still have said....

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_rBdBHhB9Xf4/SKZOpRj2D0I/AAAAAAAAA6w/CGN48zKkvGc/s400/I'm+not+happy.jpg

It has nothing to do with how we feel about winning the game, just a spirited discussion about coaching decisions.

GameTime
02-08-2012, 04:52 PM
IT WAS AN EXTRA POINT!I don't trust Tynes either,but comeon.I do wonder,however,how different this discussion would be if it was Matt Bahr kicking this 20 yarder.20 yards.indoors.Deossi is a professional long snapper.It's all he does.Weatherford is a great holder.Tynes is 99 % on extra pts with 140 made strait.As far as trusting this defense,well,they played great during this run but you must have been watching a different defense,especially a different secondary then I did this year.</P>


OK...............OK.....you're right. You should be coach of the year and annoited the next football guru. Bradshaw and the Giants are stupid imgrates(lol) and lucky they won!!!....[;)]</P>


shut up now......[;)]</P>


OK so why do you think Bradshaw tried to stop then?</P>


I never said what pica was saying was wrong. I was just refuting all the "what ifs" and "could have's".</P>


He tried to stop because Eli was yelling at him to not score. I never dissagreed that not scoring there was the wrong thing to do. It was 2nd down. They could have ran it again after that and scored anyway. My arguement was that since Bradshaw scored going up by 4 points was not such a bad scenario either. You can disect it and argue till you are blue in the face what was right or what was wrong. It worked. They won. </P>


</P>

pica01
02-08-2012, 04:52 PM
Again,Romo,really?That's very much the exception.Do teams miss 20 yarders?yeah.So rarely that when they do nobody ever forgets it.Do great offenses go 80 yards with a to in 57 seconds?A HELL OF LOT MORE FREQUENTLY THAN THE GIANTS MISS 20 YARD FIELD GOALS IN PERFECT CONDITIONS.Trey Junkin,really? A retired player that the Giants brought in off his recliner as an emergency replacement?

GmenFan1980
02-08-2012, 04:54 PM
We won, why does it matter how we got the lead? Jesus, we probably could have blown the pats out and people would still have said....

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_rBdBHhB9Xf4/SKZOpRj2D0I/AAAAAAAAA6w/CGN48zKkvGc/s400/I'm+not+happy.jpg

It has nothing to do with how we feel about winning the game, just a spirited discussion about coaching decisions.

What coaching decision? Didn't bradshaw and Eli both say He(Eli) told bradshaw not to score and his momentum carried him in?

Didn't Coughlin say he never told bradshaw not to score?

and just to go on a mini-rant, bahhhh how long do I have to wait to delete my stupid double post lol

yoeddy
02-08-2012, 04:54 PM
It's all Eli's fault...if he doesn't throw the deep pass to Manningham at the start of the drive, then we probably would have been able to burn more time off the clock before scoring..."Elite" my ***....

jhamburg
02-08-2012, 04:58 PM
IT WAS AN EXTRA POINT!I don't trust Tynes either,but comeon.I do wonder,however,how different this discussion would be if it was Matt Bahr kicking this 20 yarder.20 yards.indoors.Deossi is a professional long snapper.It's all he does.Weatherford is a great holder.Tynes is 99 % on extra pts with 140 made strait.As far as trusting this defense,well,they played great during this run but you must have been watching a different defense,especially a different secondary then I did this year.</P>


OK...............OK.....you're right. You should be coach of the year and annoited the next football guru. Bradshaw and the Giants are stupid imgrates(lol) and lucky they won!!!....[;)]</P>


shut up now......[;)]</P>


OK so why do you think Bradshaw tried to stop then?</P>


*I never said what pica was saying was wrong. I was just refuting all the "what ifs" and "could have's".</P>


He tried to stop because Eli was yelling at him to not score. I never dissagreed that not scoring there was the wrong thing to do. It was 2nd down. They could have ran it again after that and scored anyway. My arguement was that since Bradshaw scored going up by 4 points was not such a bad scenario either. You can disect it and argue till you are blue in the face what was right or what was wrong. It worked. They won. </P>


*</P>

We were likely to win either way. On advanced football stats they had us at 89% chance of winning with 3 kneels and a kick, and 85% chance with scoring the TD. And the 89% was when we were on the 6 yard line instead of the 1/2 yard line, so its actually a little higher than 89%.

GameTime
02-08-2012, 05:02 PM
IT WAS AN EXTRA POINT!I don't trust Tynes either,but comeon.I do wonder,however,how different this discussion would be if it was Matt Bahr kicking this 20 yarder.20 yards.indoors.Deossi is a professional long snapper.It's all he does.Weatherford is a great holder.Tynes is 99 % on extra pts with 140 made strait.As far as trusting this defense,well,they played great during this run but you must have been watching a different defense,especially a different secondary then I did this year.</P>


OK...............OK.....you're right. You should be coach of the year and annoited the next football guru. Bradshaw and the Giants are stupid imgrates(lol) and lucky they won!!!....[;)]</P>


shut up now......[;)]</P>


OK so why do you think Bradshaw tried to stop then?</P>


I never said what pica was saying was wrong. I was just refuting all the "what ifs" and "could have's".</P>


He tried to stop because Eli was yelling at him to not score. I never dissagreed that not scoring there was the wrong thing to do. It was 2nd down. They could have ran it again after that and scored anyway. My arguement was that since Bradshaw scored going up by 4 points was not such a bad scenario either. You can disect it and argue till you are blue in the face what was right or what was wrong. It worked. They won. </P>


</P>


We were likely to win either way. On advanced football stats they had us at 89% chance of winning with 3 kneels and a kick, and 85% chance with scoring the TD. And the 89% was when we were on the 6 yard line instead of the 1/2 yard line, so its actually a little higher than 89%.</P>


I am not a real big X'x and O's guy. I mean I understand the whoe concept and know a decent amount about the ins and outs of the game. So when I discuss things like this its from a layman's perspective. I also hate "what ifs", hindsight, and shoulda coulda woulda scenarios. </P>

jhamburg
02-08-2012, 05:09 PM
IT WAS AN EXTRA POINT!I don't trust Tynes either,but comeon.I do wonder,however,how different this discussion would be if it was Matt Bahr kicking this 20 yarder.20 yards.indoors.Deossi is a professional long snapper.It's all he does.Weatherford is a great holder.Tynes is 99 % on extra pts with 140 made strait.As far as trusting this defense,well,they played great during this run but you must have been watching a different defense,especially a different secondary then I did this year.</P>


OK...............OK.....you're right. You should be coach of the year and annoited the next football guru. Bradshaw and the Giants are stupid imgrates(lol) and lucky they won!!!....[;)]</P>


shut up now......[;)]</P>


OK so why do you think Bradshaw tried to stop then?</P>


*I never said what pica was saying was wrong. I was just refuting all the "what ifs" and "could have's".</P>


He tried to stop because Eli was yelling at him to not score. I never dissagreed that not scoring there was the wrong thing to do. It was 2nd down. They could have ran it again after that and scored anyway. My arguement was that since Bradshaw scored going up by 4 points was not such a bad scenario either. You can disect it and argue till you are blue in the face what was right or what was wrong. It worked. They won. </P>


*</P>


We were likely to win either way. On advanced football stats they had us at 89% chance of winning with 3 kneels and a kick, and 85% chance with scoring the TD. And the 89% was when we were on the 6 yard line instead of the 1/2 yard line, so its actually a little higher than 89%.</P>


*I am not a real big X'x and O's guy. I mean I understand the whoe concept and know a decent amount about the ins and outs of the game. So when I discuss things like this its from a layman's perspective. I also hate "what ifs", hindsight, and shoulda coulda woulda scenarios. </P>

Why participate in the thread then? I mean I think most of us are discussing this because we have an opinion and an interest about football strategy. If you took threads like this away, the forum would just be all "Let's go Giants" and "Fire coughlin!" threads, there would be no real discussion.

chasjay
02-08-2012, 05:16 PM
As crazy as it sounds, the one thing that flashed through my mind as Bradshaw was going through his slow-motion backwards squat, was that he might lay the ball down on the one-foot line (kind of a Cruz-like thing) to keep from carrying the ball into the end zone.

Praise Tebow, that didn't happen!!

GameTime
02-08-2012, 05:16 PM
IT WAS AN EXTRA POINT!I don't trust Tynes either,but comeon.I do wonder,however,how different this discussion would be if it was Matt Bahr kicking this 20 yarder.20 yards.indoors.Deossi is a professional long snapper.It's all he does.Weatherford is a great holder.Tynes is 99 % on extra pts with 140 made strait.As far as trusting this defense,well,they played great during this run but you must have been watching a different defense,especially a different secondary then I did this year.</P>


OK...............OK.....you're right. You should be coach of the year and annoited the next football guru. Bradshaw and the Giants are stupid imgrates(lol) and lucky they won!!!....[;)]</P>


shut up now......[;)]</P>


OK so why do you think Bradshaw tried to stop then?</P>


I never said what pica was saying was wrong. I was just refuting all the "what ifs" and "could have's".</P>


He tried to stop because Eli was yelling at him to not score. I never dissagreed that not scoring there was the wrong thing to do. It was 2nd down. They could have ran it again after that and scored anyway. My arguement was that since Bradshaw scored going up by 4 points was not such a bad scenario either. You can disect it and argue till you are blue in the face what was right or what was wrong. It worked. They won. </P>


</P>


We were likely to win either way. On advanced football stats they had us at 89% chance of winning with 3 kneels and a kick, and 85% chance with scoring the TD. And the 89% was when we were on the 6 yard line instead of the 1/2 yard line, so its actually a little higher than 89%.</P>


I am not a real big X'x and O's guy. I mean I understand the whoe concept and know a decent amount about the ins and outs of the game. So when I discuss things like this its from a layman's perspective. I also hate "what ifs", hindsight, and shoulda coulda woulda scenarios. </P>


Why participate in the thread then? I mean I think most of us are discussing this because we have an opinion and an interest about football strategy. If you took threads like this away, the forum would just be all "Let's go Giants" and "Fire coughlin!" threads, there would be no real discussion.</P>


dont be so smug man. You sound like a bit of *****. I have discussed and I am having some fun with the thread as well.</P>


I can participate in any thread I choose too. I am not disrespecting anyone. I down play my X and O knowledge of the game because I dont want to sound like a know it all. </P>


Whats ur problem????</P>


Run the clock down as much as you can is one strategy in that scenario. However its the SB. No game next week!! You get a TD togo ahead by 4 with 57 seconds left and 80 yards(hopefully) to go for the opposing D. Not a bad a deal either. BTW....it worked....</P>

BillTheGreek
02-08-2012, 05:22 PM
Not really, what if he downs it and then we botch the FG?


True, could have been a botched FG........

Remember Murphy's Law >>>>>>>>>

Ruttiger711
02-08-2012, 05:26 PM
Again,Romo,really?That's very much the exception.Do teams miss 20 yarders?yeah.So rarely that when they do nobody ever forgets it.Do great offenses go 80 yards with a to in 57 seconds?A HELL OF LOT MORE FREQUENTLY THAN THE GIANTS MISS 20 YARD FIELD GOALS <FONT color=#0000ff size=6>IN PERFECT CONDITIONS</FONT>.Trey Junkin,really? A retired player that the Giants brought in off his recliner as an emergency replacement?</P>


</P>


Go watch Tynes field goals made in these perfect conditions... one about 2' from the upright... one seemed less than a foot. </P>

G-Man67
02-08-2012, 05:27 PM
oh you know one thing we are missing here is that if there is a bad snap it doesn't go down as a missed FG or XP ... it is recorded as a failed 2 point conversion or a turned over on downs, so we do need to keep that in mind

pica01
02-08-2012, 05:34 PM
I agree that either option is a positive outcome.My point is that a fg from 20 is the final outcome.99% winning outcome.1% losing.The TD still leaves the final outcome in doubt.57 seconds,1 TO and 80 yards.It's completely hypothetical and many more times then not the Giants stop the Pats and we win.But no one would argue we'de stop them 99% of the time.Well,maybe here.You guys are stubborn.Let's say we missed a 20 yarder and lost.Someone in the media asks Coughlin,"how could you pass up the td for the 20 yard fg".I'll paraphrase what Coughlin could say but picture Parcell in the same situation answering.Parcells,after a disgusted look."Well,my kicker has made this kick the last 140 times we've attempted it and hasn't missed in the last 4 years.Overall this kick historically is sucessful in the 99% range.Do you think giving Brady the ball back with a TO and a minute is the better option?Who let you in here?Anyone else want to ask me about why I set up the 20 yard fg?Didn't think so.Next question.End of story.Sometimes you do everything right and it fails.Had they missed a 20 yarder Coughlin wouldn't have been blamed.had the Pats scored it would have been hard to explain passing up the 99% option.Hence,the Coughlin quote,"I hope this doesn't come down on my head".Had Coughlin wanted to score the td and lost it would have been bad.The fact that he didn't want the td and admitted he didn't specifically instruct his players not to score and didn't even discuss the Pats allowing a td left him incredibly exposed if the pats won.And he knew it.Wish you guys would admit as much.

yoeddy
02-08-2012, 05:37 PM
I still think that giving up an 80 yard TD drive with 57 second left would have been a bigger gaffe than Bradshaw's not taking a knee...

pica01
02-08-2012, 05:46 PM
Hey,if Coughlin decided he wanted the TD I could understand this debate more.Then,if it backfired he could and would say,"I wanted the TD and i'll live with the results.And I could live with that.But He didn't want the Td and admitted he didn't make himself clear enough about that to his players.That would have been a double disaster for him had the worst happened.Am I getting thru to you guy's?anyone?Bueller?Bueller?

jhamburg
02-08-2012, 05:49 PM
IT WAS AN EXTRA POINT!I don't trust Tynes either,but comeon.I do wonder,however,how different this discussion would be if it was Matt Bahr kicking this 20 yarder.20 yards.indoors.Deossi is a professional long snapper.It's all he does.Weatherford is a great holder.Tynes is 99 % on extra pts with 140 made strait.As far as trusting this defense,well,they played great during this run but you must have been watching a different defense,especially a different secondary then I did this year.</P>


OK...............OK.....you're right. You should be coach of the year and annoited the next football guru. Bradshaw and the Giants are stupid imgrates(lol) and lucky they won!!!....[;)]</P>


shut up now......[;)]</P>


OK so why do you think Bradshaw tried to stop then?</P>


*I never said what pica was saying was wrong. I was just refuting all the "what ifs" and "could have's".</P>


He tried to stop because Eli was yelling at him to not score. I never dissagreed that not scoring there was the wrong thing to do. It was 2nd down. They could have ran it again after that and scored anyway. My arguement was that since Bradshaw scored going up by 4 points was not such a bad scenario either. You can disect it and argue till you are blue in the face what was right or what was wrong. It worked. They won. </P>


*</P>


We were likely to win either way. On advanced football stats they had us at 89% chance of winning with 3 kneels and a kick, and 85% chance with scoring the TD. And the 89% was when we were on the 6 yard line instead of the 1/2 yard line, so its actually a little higher than 89%.</P>


*I am not a real big X'x and O's guy. I mean I understand the whoe concept and know a decent amount about the ins and outs of the game. So when I discuss things like this its from a layman's perspective. I also hate "what ifs", hindsight, and shoulda coulda woulda scenarios. </P>


Why participate in the thread then? I mean I think most of us are discussing this because we have an opinion and an interest about football strategy. If you took threads like this away, the forum would just be all "Let's go Giants" and "Fire coughlin!" threads, there would be no real discussion.</P>


dont be so* smug man. You sound like a bit of *****. I have discussed and I am having some fun with the thread as well.</P>


I can participate in any thread I choose too. I am not disrespecting anyone. I down play my X and O knowledge of the game because I dont want to sound like a know it all. </P>


Whats ur problem????</P>


Run the clock down as much as you can is one strategy in that scenario. However its the SB. No game next week!! You get a TD to*go ahead by 4 with 57 seconds left and 80 yards*(hopefully) to go for the opposing D. Not a bad a deal either. BTW....it worked....</P>

Wasn't trying to be like that, sorry...I just keep seeing people post in this thread like "Who cares what happened, we won!", obviously everyone is happy with how things turned out, that doesn't mean we can't discuss what the best possible decision was at the time.

Tuckit91
02-08-2012, 05:52 PM
Not really, what if he downs it and then we botch the FG?
</P>


</P>


</P>


<FONT size=6>THIS!! </FONT><FONT size=3>what if on the next play we fumble or miss the field goal?? i say if you can score then SCORE!!</FONT></P>

jhamburg
02-08-2012, 05:56 PM
Not really, what if he downs it and then we botch the FG?
</P>


*</P>


*</P>


<FONT size=6>THIS!!* </FONT><FONT size=3>what if on the next play we fumble or miss the field goal?? i say if you can score then* SCORE!!</FONT></P>

There's risk either way obviously. It's a matter or what risk is greater. You can's say "what if we miss the FG?!?!?" and ignore the risk of Brady scoring with all that extra time and more importantly an extra timeout.

Coughlin, Belichick, and Eli all knew that scoring a TD was bad for the Giants, I don't know why you guys think you know better.

Ruttiger711
02-08-2012, 06:00 PM
Not really, what if he downs it and then we botch the FG?
</P>


</P>


</P>


<FONT size=6>THIS!! </FONT><FONT size=3>what if on the next play we fumble or miss the field goal?? i say if you can score then SCORE!!</FONT></P>


There's risk either way obviously. It's a matter or what risk is greater. You can's say "what if we miss the FG?!?!?" and ignore the risk of Brady scoring with all that extra time and more importantly an extra timeout. Coughlin, Belichick, and Eli all knew that scoring a TD was bad for the Giants, I don't know why you guys think you know better.</P>


Belichek in no way saw the Giants scoring a td as bad for the Giants. </P>


What he saw was the only way they have a CHANCE is if they get the ball back. HUUUUUGE difference. </P>

jhamburg
02-08-2012, 06:01 PM
Not really, what if he downs it and then we botch the FG?
</P>


*</P>


*</P>


<FONT size=6>THIS!!* </FONT><FONT size=3>what if on the next play we fumble or miss the field goal?? i say if you can score then* SCORE!!</FONT></P>


There's risk either way obviously. It's a matter or what risk is greater. You can's say "what if we miss the FG?!?!?" and ignore the risk of Brady scoring with all that extra time and more importantly an extra timeout. Coughlin, Belichick, and Eli all knew that scoring a TD was bad for the Giants, I don't know why you guys think you know better.</P>


Belichek in no way saw the Giants scoring a td as bad for the Giants.* </P>


What he saw was the only way they have a CHANCE is if they get the ball back.* HUUUUUGE difference.* </P>

Explain to me how what's good for the Pats isn't bad for us....

Anything that happens in the game is either good for us or good for them.

Ruttiger711
02-08-2012, 06:16 PM
Not really, what if he downs it and then we botch the FG?
</P>


</P>


</P>


<FONT size=6>THIS!! </FONT><FONT size=3>what if on the next play we fumble or miss the field goal?? i say if you can score then SCORE!!</FONT></P>


There's risk either way obviously. It's a matter or what risk is greater. You can's say "what if we miss the FG?!?!?" and ignore the risk of Brady scoring with all that extra time and more importantly an extra timeout. Coughlin, Belichick, and Eli all knew that scoring a TD was bad for the Giants, I don't know why you guys think you know better.</P>


Belichek in no way saw the Giants scoring a td as bad for the Giants. </P>


What he saw was the only way they have a CHANCE is if they get the ball back. HUUUUUGE difference. </P>


Explain to me how what's good for the Pats isn't bad for us.... Anything that happens in the game is either good for us or good for them.</P>


Can you really not see this? </P>


Because being down 4 is not good for the Pats... and typically not good for any team in any sport when needing more points than the other guy is required to win. </P>


It only gives them a chance... they are still losing... and wound up losing by what? 4 points. Scoring a td was not bad for the Giants... bad for the Pats. A chance is only a chance. </P>

jhamburg
02-08-2012, 06:26 PM
Not really, what if he downs it and then we botch the FG?
</P>


*</P>


*</P>


<FONT size=6>THIS!!* </FONT><FONT size=3>what if on the next play we fumble or miss the field goal?? i say if you can score then* SCORE!!</FONT></P>


There's risk either way obviously. It's a matter or what risk is greater. You can's say "what if we miss the FG?!?!?" and ignore the risk of Brady scoring with all that extra time and more importantly an extra timeout. Coughlin, Belichick, and Eli all knew that scoring a TD was bad for the Giants, I don't know why you guys think you know better.</P>


Belichek in no way saw the Giants scoring a td as bad for the Giants.* </P>


What he saw was the only way they have a CHANCE is if they get the ball back.* HUUUUUGE difference.* </P>


Explain to me how what's good for the Pats isn't bad for us.... Anything that happens in the game is either good for us or good for them.</P>


Can you really not see this?* </P>


Because being down 4 is not good for the Pats... and typically not good for any team in any sport when needing more points than the other guy is required to win.* </P>


It only gives them a chance... they are still losing...* and wound up losing by what? 4 points.* Scoring a td was not bad for the Giants... bad for the Pats.* A chance is only a chance.* </P>

So you would rather be down by 1 point with 20 seconds and no timeouts than down by 4 points with 57 seconds and 1 timeout?

Ruttiger711
02-08-2012, 06:36 PM
Not really, what if he downs it and then we botch the FG?
</P>


</P>


</P>


<FONT size=6>THIS!! </FONT><FONT size=3>what if on the next play we fumble or miss the field goal?? i say if you can score then SCORE!!</FONT></P>


There's risk either way obviously. It's a matter or what risk is greater. You can's say "what if we miss the FG?!?!?" and ignore the risk of Brady scoring with all that extra time and more importantly an extra timeout. Coughlin, Belichick, and Eli all knew that scoring a TD was bad for the Giants, I don't know why you guys think you know better.</P>


Belichek in no way saw the Giants scoring a td as bad for the Giants. </P>


What he saw was the only way they have a CHANCE is if they get the ball back. HUUUUUGE difference. </P>


Explain to me how what's good for the Pats isn't bad for us.... Anything that happens in the game is either good for us or good for them.</P>


Can you really not see this? </P>


Because being down 4 is not good for the Pats... and typically not good for any team in any sport when needing more points than the other guy is required to win. </P>


It only gives them a chance... they are still losing... and wound up losing by what? 4 points. Scoring a td was not bad for the Giants... bad for the Pats. A chance is only a chance. </P>


So you would rather be down by 1 point with 20 seconds and no timeouts than down by 4 points with 57 seconds and 1 timeout?</P>


First off... lets clarify that you refuse to answer that being down 4 is NOT good for the Pats. Right? </P>


But now you're asking a question from the Pats point of view... if you are down of course you want more time and the timeout. That still doesnt make being down 4 points a good thing... it MAY be a better chance to do something... but only a chance. </P>

jhamburg
02-08-2012, 06:40 PM
Not really, what if he downs it and then we botch the FG?
</P>


*</P>


*</P>


<FONT size=6>THIS!!* </FONT><FONT size=3>what if on the next play we fumble or miss the field goal?? i say if you can score then* SCORE!!</FONT></P>


There's risk either way obviously. It's a matter or what risk is greater. You can's say "what if we miss the FG?!?!?" and ignore the risk of Brady scoring with all that extra time and more importantly an extra timeout. Coughlin, Belichick, and Eli all knew that scoring a TD was bad for the Giants, I don't know why you guys think you know better.</P>


Belichek in no way saw the Giants scoring a td as bad for the Giants.* </P>


What he saw was the only way they have a CHANCE is if they get the ball back.* HUUUUUGE difference.* </P>


Explain to me how what's good for the Pats isn't bad for us.... Anything that happens in the game is either good for us or good for them.</P>


Can you really not see this?* </P>


Because being down 4 is not good for the Pats... and typically not good for any team in any sport when needing more points than the other guy is required to win.* </P>


It only gives them a chance... they are still losing...* and wound up losing by what? 4 points.* Scoring a td was not bad for the Giants... bad for the Pats.* A chance is only a chance.* </P>


So you would rather be down by 1 point with 20 seconds and no timeouts than down by 4 points with 57 seconds and 1 timeout?</P>


First off... lets clarify that you refuse to answer that being down 4 is NOT good for the Pats.* Right? </P>


But now you're asking a question from the Pats point of view... if you are down of course you want more time and the timeout.* That still doesnt make being down 4 points a good thing... it MAY be a better chance to do something... but only a chance.* </P>

No, obviously you would rather be up by 50 than down by 4, I really don't see how that is relevant to the discussion....we have the ball inside the 10, so it's close to 100% that they will end up being down by some amount. What I'm saying is that the amount of time left on the clock is a lot more important than the amount they are down by, as long as that amount is less than 7.

And as far as your point of only having a chance...I don't see what you're getting at, at all. If you go from a 10% chance of winning to a 15% chance of winning, that's a huge victory. So it is good for the pats that the giants score, compared to the alternative of us running out the clock and kicking a FG.

pica01
02-08-2012, 06:45 PM
yeah,but the fg at 8 seconds gives them no chance

NYGRealityCheck
02-08-2012, 06:52 PM
The Patriots were in bad shape Either Way and the Giants won. Dragging this out is senseless.

Be Happy! I know I am!

Ruttiger711
02-08-2012, 06:54 PM
Not really, what if he downs it and then we botch the FG?
</P>


</P>


</P>


<FONT size=6>THIS!! </FONT><FONT size=3>what if on the next play we fumble or miss the field goal?? i say if you can score then SCORE!!</FONT></P>


There's risk either way obviously. It's a matter or what risk is greater. You can's say "what if we miss the FG?!?!?" and ignore the risk of Brady scoring with all that extra time and more importantly an extra timeout. Coughlin, Belichick, and Eli all knew that scoring a TD was bad for the Giants, I don't know why you guys think you know better.</P>


Belichek in no way saw the Giants scoring a td as bad for the Giants. </P>


What he saw was the only way they have a CHANCE is if they get the ball back. HUUUUUGE difference. </P>


Explain to me how what's good for the Pats isn't bad for us.... Anything that happens in the game is either good for us or good for them.</P>


Can you really not see this? </P>


Because being down 4 is not good for the Pats... and typically not good for any team in any sport when needing more points than the other guy is required to win. </P>


It only gives them a chance... they are still losing... and wound up losing by what? 4 points. Scoring a td was not bad for the Giants... bad for the Pats. A chance is only a chance. </P>


So you would rather be down by 1 point with 20 seconds and no timeouts than down by 4 points with 57 seconds and 1 timeout?</P>


First off... lets clarify that you refuse to answer that being down 4 is NOT good for the Pats. Right? </P>


But now you're asking a question from the Pats point of view... if you are down of course you want more time and the timeout. That still doesnt make being down 4 points a good thing... it MAY be a better chance to do something... but only a chance. </P>


No, obviously you would rather be up by 50 than down by 4, I really don't see how that is relevant to the discussion....we have the ball inside the 10, so it's close to 100% that they will end up being down by some amount. What I'm saying is that the amount of time left on the clock is a lot more important than the amount they are down by, as long as that amount is less than 7. And as far as your point of only having a chance...<FONT color=#0000ff size=5>I don't see what you're getting at, at all. If you go from a 10% chance of winning to a 15% chance of winning, that's a huge victory.</FONT> So it is good for the pats that the giants score, compared to the alternative of us running out the clock and kicking a FG.</P>


Close to 100% ISNT 100%..... bradshaw going in the endzone is 100%</P>


A huge victory? really... the only HUGE victory i saw was at :00 on the clock. </P>


It s semantics now... the pats still had a shot at either scenario... </P>


"Lesser of 2 evils".... "Pick your poison" - I'm sure you've heard and used these before... but you do realize that this means neither are good options?It seems you think one actually might be better than the other. </P>


What i really jumped in on was you saying Giants going up by4 pointsis BAD forthe Giants and GOOD for the Pats....even knowing the outcome of the game... even celebrating the Giants victory... its baffling. </P>


</P>

OrangeGiant
02-08-2012, 06:57 PM
I just think that when you have the chance to score a TD, you score the TD. Nothing is a given in the NFL. You never know what is going to happen on the next play. If Bradshaw kneels there and they take a shot to run it in on the next play, anything could have happened. A bad snap, a bad exchange, a fumble. If they ended up having to kick a FG, again a bad snap, a botched hold (ask Tony Romo about that, on the same type of chip shot)a blocked kick.</P>


There was under a minutes left, they had only one time out, and they had dinked and dunked their way all game long. Score it when you have the chance, because that may be the only chance you get. Can you imagine if Bradshaw would have taken a knee and not scored and one of the things I mentioned above happened?</P>


My god, none of us would have ever recovered.</P>


</P>

jhamburg
02-08-2012, 06:57 PM
Not really, what if he downs it and then we botch the FG?
</P>


*</P>


*</P>


<FONT size=6>THIS!!* </FONT><FONT size=3>what if on the next play we fumble or miss the field goal?? i say if you can score then* SCORE!!</FONT></P>


There's risk either way obviously. It's a matter or what risk is greater. You can's say "what if we miss the FG?!?!?" and ignore the risk of Brady scoring with all that extra time and more importantly an extra timeout. Coughlin, Belichick, and Eli all knew that scoring a TD was bad for the Giants, I don't know why you guys think you know better.</P>


Belichek in no way saw the Giants scoring a td as bad for the Giants.* </P>


What he saw was the only way they have a CHANCE is if they get the ball back.* HUUUUUGE difference.* </P>


Explain to me how what's good for the Pats isn't bad for us.... Anything that happens in the game is either good for us or good for them.</P>


Can you really not see this?* </P>


Because being down 4 is not good for the Pats... and typically not good for any team in any sport when needing more points than the other guy is required to win.* </P>


It only gives them a chance... they are still losing...* and wound up losing by what? 4 points.* Scoring a td was not bad for the Giants... bad for the Pats.* A chance is only a chance.* </P>


So you would rather be down by 1 point with 20 seconds and no timeouts than down by 4 points with 57 seconds and 1 timeout?</P>


First off... lets clarify that you refuse to answer that being down 4 is NOT good for the Pats.* Right? </P>


But now you're asking a question from the Pats point of view... if you are down of course you want more time and the timeout.* That still doesnt make being down 4 points a good thing... it MAY be a better chance to do something... but only a chance.* </P>


No, obviously you would rather be up by 50 than down by 4, I really don't see how that is relevant to the discussion....we have the ball inside the 10, so it's close to 100% that they will end up being down by some amount. What I'm saying is that the amount of time left on the clock is a lot more important than the amount they are down by, as long as that amount is less than 7. And as far as your point of only having a chance...<FONT color=#0000ff size=5>I don't see what you're getting at, at all. If you go from a 10% chance of winning to a 15% chance of winning, that's a huge victory.</FONT> So it is good for the pats that the giants score, compared to the alternative of us running out the clock and kicking a FG.</P>


Close to 100% ISNT 100%..... bradshaw going in the endzone is 100%</P>


A huge victory? really... the only HUGE victory i saw was at :00 on the clock.* </P>


It s semantics now... the pats still had a shot at either scenario... </P>


"Lesser of 2 evils".... "Pick your poison"* - I'm sure you've heard and used these before... but you do realize that this means neither are good options?***It seems you think one actually might be better than the other.* </P>


What i really jumped in on was you saying Giants going up by*4 points*is BAD for*the Giants and GOOD for the Pats....even knowing the outcome of the game... even celebrating the Giants victory... its baffling.* </P>


*</P>

Well it's like this. If someone said "OK, I'm either going to punch you in the face as hard as I can, or smash you in the balls with a sledgehammer" than getting punched in the face is "good" for you.

If we look back with hindsight already knowing what happened then of course we would have done everything the same. I'm saying that without knowing the future, letting us score gives the Pats the best chance to win, so it's good for them that we scored. What actually happened does not affect whether it was a good decision at the time or not.

flimflam
02-08-2012, 07:00 PM
<font size="3">You score no matte rwhat. Anything can go wrong the next play. And you trust your defense. Period. That is what brought us here, and that is what we will win by.

Not that # of posts matter really, but it is comical when these less than 100 post posters come into the forum with guns blazing making bold as **** proclamations and such. Like totally absurd, ridiculous, and zany ideas. What do you save this **** up for months and passive-aggressively unload?

Did you invent the question mark too?</font>

jhamburg
02-08-2012, 07:03 PM
<font size="3">You score no matte rwhat. Anything can go wrong the next play. And you trust your defense. Period. That is what brought us here, and that is what we will win by.

Not that # of posts matter really, but it is comical when these less than 100 post posters come into the forum with guns blazing making bold as **** proclamations and such. Like totally absurd, ridiculous, and zany ideas. What do you save this **** up for months and passive-aggressively unload?

Did you invent the question mark too?</font>

So why did Belichick let us score? And why did Coughlin, Gilbride, and Eli all agree that we should have run the clock out instead of scoring fast? Why did Bradshaw try to stop? I guess they're all as stupid as I am.

Ruttiger711
02-08-2012, 07:07 PM
Not really, what if he downs it and then we botch the FG?
</P>


</P>


</P>


<FONT size=6>THIS!! </FONT><FONT size=3>what if on the next play we fumble or miss the field goal?? i say if you can score then SCORE!!</FONT></P>


There's risk either way obviously. It's a matter or what risk is greater. You can's say "what if we miss the FG?!?!?" and ignore the risk of Brady scoring with all that extra time and more importantly an extra timeout. Coughlin, Belichick, and Eli all knew that scoring a TD was bad for the Giants, I don't know why you guys think you know better.</P>


Belichek in no way saw the Giants scoring a td as bad for the Giants. </P>


What he saw was the only way they have a CHANCE is if they get the ball back. HUUUUUGE difference. </P>


Explain to me how what's good for the Pats isn't bad for us.... Anything that happens in the game is either good for us or good for them.</P>


Can you really not see this? </P>


Because being down 4 is not good for the Pats... and typically not good for any team in any sport when needing more points than the other guy is required to win. </P>


It only gives them a chance... they are still losing... and wound up losing by what? 4 points. Scoring a td was not bad for the Giants... bad for the Pats. A chance is only a chance. </P>


So you would rather be down by 1 point with 20 seconds and no timeouts than down by 4 points with 57 seconds and 1 timeout?</P>


First off... lets clarify that you refuse to answer that being down 4 is NOT good for the Pats. Right? </P>


But now you're asking a question from the Pats point of view... if you are down of course you want more time and the timeout. That still doesnt make being down 4 points a good thing... it MAY be a better chance to do something... but only a chance. </P>


No, obviously you would rather be up by 50 than down by 4, I really don't see how that is relevant to the discussion....we have the ball inside the 10, so it's close to 100% that they will end up being down by some amount. What I'm saying is that the amount of time left on the clock is a lot more important than the amount they are down by, as long as that amount is less than 7. And as far as your point of only having a chance...<FONT color=#0000ff size=5>I don't see what you're getting at, at all. If you go from a 10% chance of winning to a 15% chance of winning, that's a huge victory.</FONT> So it is good for the pats that the giants score, compared to the alternative of us running out the clock and kicking a FG.</P>


Close to 100% ISNT 100%..... bradshaw going in the endzone is 100%</P>


A huge victory? really... the only HUGE victory i saw was at :00 on the clock. </P>


It s semantics now... the pats still had a shot at either scenario... </P>


"Lesser of 2 evils".... "Pick your poison" - I'm sure you've heard and used these before... but you do realize that this means neither are good options?It seems you think one actually might be better than the other. </P>


What i really jumped in on was you saying Giants going up by4 pointsis BAD forthe Giants and GOOD for the Pats....even knowing the outcome of the game... even celebrating the Giants victory... its baffling. </P>


</P>


Well it's like this. If someone said "OK, I'm either going to punch you in the face as hard as I can, or smash you in the balls with a sledgehammer" than getting punched in the face is "good" for you. If we look back with hindsight already knowing what happened then of course we would have done everything the same. I'm saying that without knowing the future, letting us score gives the Pats the best chance to win, so it's good for them that we scored. What actually happened does not affect whether it was a good decision at the time or not.</P>


See thats the flaw in your logic. Its the means that are different - not the ends... so really its HOW would you like to have your balls smashed... you lose regardless...</P>

pica01
02-08-2012, 07:10 PM
.had Bradshaw pulled a cruz and set the ball down at the one before he fell into the endzone I would think the same rule would apply and the play would be dead.cruz hadn't been touched down.Bradshaw gave himself up voluntarily same as Cruz.Boy,talk about controversy.Imagine if that happened.Cruz was no more down when he voluntarily gave up the ball than Bradshaw would have been if he voluntarily placed the ball at the one before he fell into the endzone.He was voluntarily ending the play same as Cruz.If this response isn't connected to the original post someone said he thought Bradshaw,for an instant,thought about putting the ball down at the one,and he might be right.remember Cruz flipping the ball away before being downed?Not a fumble.This would have been the same thing I would think.Not a fumble.What a firestorm that would have been,huh?

jhamburg
02-08-2012, 07:13 PM
Not really, what if he downs it and then we botch the FG?
</P>


*</P>


*</P>


<FONT size=6>THIS!!* </FONT><FONT size=3>what if on the next play we fumble or miss the field goal?? i say if you can score then* SCORE!!</FONT></P>


There's risk either way obviously. It's a matter or what risk is greater. You can's say "what if we miss the FG?!?!?" and ignore the risk of Brady scoring with all that extra time and more importantly an extra timeout. Coughlin, Belichick, and Eli all knew that scoring a TD was bad for the Giants, I don't know why you guys think you know better.</P>


Belichek in no way saw the Giants scoring a td as bad for the Giants.* </P>


What he saw was the only way they have a CHANCE is if they get the ball back.* HUUUUUGE difference.* </P>


Explain to me how what's good for the Pats isn't bad for us.... Anything that happens in the game is either good for us or good for them.</P>


Can you really not see this?* </P>


Because being down 4 is not good for the Pats... and typically not good for any team in any sport when needing more points than the other guy is required to win.* </P>


It only gives them a chance... they are still losing...* and wound up losing by what? 4 points.* Scoring a td was not bad for the Giants... bad for the Pats.* A chance is only a chance.* </P>


So you would rather be down by 1 point with 20 seconds and no timeouts than down by 4 points with 57 seconds and 1 timeout?</P>


First off... lets clarify that you refuse to answer that being down 4 is NOT good for the Pats.* Right? </P>


But now you're asking a question from the Pats point of view... if you are down of course you want more time and the timeout.* That still doesnt make being down 4 points a good thing... it MAY be a better chance to do something... but only a chance.* </P>


No, obviously you would rather be up by 50 than down by 4, I really don't see how that is relevant to the discussion....we have the ball inside the 10, so it's close to 100% that they will end up being down by some amount. What I'm saying is that the amount of time left on the clock is a lot more important than the amount they are down by, as long as that amount is less than 7. And as far as your point of only having a chance...<FONT color=#0000ff size=5>I don't see what you're getting at, at all. If you go from a 10% chance of winning to a 15% chance of winning, that's a huge victory.</FONT> So it is good for the pats that the giants score, compared to the alternative of us running out the clock and kicking a FG.</P>


Close to 100% ISNT 100%..... bradshaw going in the endzone is 100%</P>


A huge victory? really... the only HUGE victory i saw was at :00 on the clock.* </P>


It s semantics now... the pats still had a shot at either scenario... </P>


"Lesser of 2 evils".... "Pick your poison"* - I'm sure you've heard and used these before... but you do realize that this means neither are good options?***It seems you think one actually might be better than the other.* </P>


What i really jumped in on was you saying Giants going up by*4 points*is BAD for*the Giants and GOOD for the Pats....even knowing the outcome of the game... even celebrating the Giants victory... its baffling.* </P>


*</P>


Well it's like this. If someone said "OK, I'm either going to punch you in the face as hard as I can, or smash you in the balls with a sledgehammer" than getting punched in the face is "good" for you. If we look back with hindsight already knowing what happened then of course we would have done everything the same. I'm saying that without knowing the future, letting us score gives the Pats the best chance to win, so it's good for them that we scored. What actually happened does not affect whether it was a good decision at the time or not.</P>


See thats the flaw in your logic.* Its the means that are different - not the ends... so really its HOW would you like to have your balls smashed... you lose regardless...</P>

You can't judge a decision by results alone. We could have done something completely ******ed like a surprise onsides kick with 57 seconds left, and it might have worked...that doesn't mean it was the right decision. You have to look at the information you have at the time you made the decision.

pica01
02-08-2012, 07:31 PM
Ham-were you talking about me when you said less than 100 posts?I hope not.I don't think anything I said is zany or crazy.I feel my football IQ is pretty high.If you read my posts before the game I talked about the Giants possibly running some zone blitzes and dropping a lineman into coverage.something we didn't do all season.If you watched playbook on nfl network where the disect the game you'll see that we did,mostly with JPP.It didn't work but we did do it.You score no matter what?Talk about proclamations!Our coach didn't want to score.Take it up with him.

pica01
02-08-2012, 07:33 PM
I'm sorry Ham,It was flimflam dissing me.you backed me up.Sorry

jhamburg
02-08-2012, 07:39 PM
I'm sorry Ham,It was flimflam dissing me.you backed me up.Sorry

Yeah I'm in agreement with what you're saying. I'm just glad there's someone here who believes in actually thinking to make a decision, intead of going by some corny old football cliches.

pica01
02-08-2012, 08:58 PM
Hey,I realize there are 2 school of thoughts on this.And whatever a coach decides to do,regardless the outcome,he can defend his decision as what he thought was best.Here's the problem.Coughlin wanted one thing,and the other thing happened.Can we all at least agree on that?Had we lost Coughlin would have been in a very bad spot.It's bad if you go for the TD and lose.It's much worse if you wanted to do the opposite and didn't make yourself clear to your players.It's like Dodge punting to Jackson last year.Coughlin told Dodge to kick it out of bounds.Dodge didn't.I,for one,didn't blame Coughlin.I blamed Dodge.Coaches coach.Players play.In this case,had we lost Coughlin couldn't defend scoring the td.All he could do was to say that he screwed by not telling his players exactly what he wanted ala dodge.He's never even pretended that scoring the td was what he wanted to do.He messed up and he knew it.Coach,why did you decide to score the td if possible?well,actually I didn't.And it's completely my fault that we did because I didn't give clear instructions to my players.And I have no doubt that had the pats won,this is exactly what coach Coughlin would have said.It's not just about TD or field goal.either way we're gonna have the lead.Both choices carry risk.And if Coughlins decision was implemented and backfired,so be it.He can defend it.Here,he really screwed the pooch and he knows it.He halfwayed it all around.If he didn't want the Td he should have had Eli kneel twice and center the ball.Let me ask you guys something.What if the Pats contested that run?What if Bradshaw fumbled?Mack,Byner anyone?Remember the Browns?Can we all agree that Coughlin decided to go the FG way?After all,He's never even attempted to spin what happened as what he wanted.either way you go present risks and both most likely end up positive,either a 1 pt or 4 pt lead.It's what happens after you decide and the result that fans and the media can Question if it goes wrong.Here,he decided and the opposite happened because,as he admitted,he didn't make himself clear.He didn't say to Eli,if they let us score,take it.He said,"I didn't tell Bradshaw not to score,Eli did".That makes his wishes perfectly clear.Don't score.We did.And if it backfired he couldn't and I'm sure wouldn't defend it,because it wasn't what he wanted.And not getting what he wanted was completely his fault.Hey,it worked out in the end but Coach knew he screwed up not anticipating the Pats allowing the TD and having Eli give Bradshaw specific instructions.It's like even Eli was surprized the Pats layed down and started screaming don't score,don't score.Hey,after the game Coughlin could have said he decided to set up the field goal but told Eli if they give it to use,i'll take the Td.But thats not what happened.Again,am I getting thru to anyone.This would have been worse than just being wrong.this would have been something Coughlin couldn't defend.And he knows it.

gmen46
02-08-2012, 10:09 PM
Hey,I realize there are 2 school of thoughts on this.And whatever a coach decides to do,regardless the outcome,he can defend his decision as what he thought was best.Here's the problem.Coughlin wanted one thing,and the other thing happened.Can we all at least agree on that?Had we lost Coughlin would have been in a very bad spot.It's bad if you go for the TD and lose.It's much worse if you wanted to do the opposite and didn't make yourself clear to your players.It's like Dodge punting to Jackson last year.Coughlin told Dodge to kick it out of bounds.Dodge didn't.I,for one,didn't blame Coughlin.I blamed Dodge.Coaches coach.Players play.In this case,had we lost Coughlin couldn't defend scoring the td.All he could do was to say that he screwed by not telling his players exactly what he wanted ala dodge.He's never even pretended that scoring the td was what he wanted to do.He messed up and he knew it.Coach,why did you decide to score the td if possible?well,actually I didn't.And it's completely my fault that we did because I didn't give clear instructions to my players.And I have no doubt that had the pats won,this is exactly what coach Coughlin would have said.It's not just about TD or field goal.either way we're gonna have the lead.Both choices carry risk.And if Coughlins decision was implemented and backfired,so be it.He can defend it.Here,he really screwed the pooch and he knows it.He halfwayed it all around.If he didn't want the Td he should have had Eli kneel twice and center the ball.Let me ask you guys something.What if the Pats contested that run?What if Bradshaw fumbled?Mack,Byner anyone?Remember the Browns?Can we all agree that Coughlin decided to go the FG way?After all,He's never even attempted to spin what happened as what he wanted.either way you go present risks and both most likely end up positive,either a 1 pt or 4 pt lead.It's what happens after you decide and the result that fans and the media can Question if it goes wrong.Here,he decided and the opposite happened because,as he admitted,he didn't make himself clear.He didn't say to Eli,if they let us score,take it.He said,"I didn't tell Bradshaw not to score,Eli did".That makes his wishes perfectly clear.Don't score.We did.And if it backfired he couldn't and I'm sure wouldn't defend it,because it wasn't what he wanted.And not getting what he wanted was completely his fault.Hey,it worked out in the end but Coach knew he screwed up not anticipating the Pats allowing the TD and having Eli give Bradshaw specific instructions.It's like even Eli was surprized the Pats layed down and started screaming don't score,don't score.Hey,after the game Coughlin could have said he decided to set up the field goal but told Eli if they give it to use,i'll take the Td.But thats not what happened.Again,am I getting thru to anyone.This would have been worse than just being wrong.this would have been something Coughlin couldn't defend.And he knows it.

I can't speak for anyone else here, but the issue is not whether you are getting through to anyone.

You make a decent point.

But you are making too much it, in my opinion.

Football is historically rife with thousands of instances where an actual play is not activated precisely the way it was drawn up or schemed. It happens all the time. For better, and for worse.

Coach Brian Bilick on NFL Network said it simply and said it best, the other day in reviewing this play--if it works, you were right; if it doesn't work, you were wrong; the Giants won. They were right.

It really is that simple.

Technically it was a mistake on Bradshaw's part, yes. But then again, is it ever TRULY wrong to score a certain TD vs a probable FG?

And at some point--and this situation was exactly that point--in the game you have to rely upon your defense to do their job, with the championship on the line, and stop Brady

The Giants defense stepped up (again) and did just that--just as they had the previous 25 minutes of the 2nd half.

As a personal plea--for future posts could you PLEASE, PLEASE start spacing some paragraphs? Running your entire post in one ginormous block is too draining, and will ultimately result in fewer people reading your posts.

That would be a shame, as the ones I've seen you write so far are worth reading.

pica01
02-08-2012, 10:36 PM
point taken on the run on paragraphs.I tend to write what I'm thinking without regard for proper form.

nhpgiantsfan
02-08-2012, 11:10 PM
Pica.. You keep saying what TC wanted. He has never once sis that he didn't want to score. If he didn't want to score why didn't he relay that message. And him saying "I didn't tell him not to score, Eli did". By no means makes his wishes known. He was just stating that after the snap when Eli saw what was happening He yelled don't score. You can't come on here and say that TC didn't want to score when he has never said that. And he never gave that order to his team. You have spouted about 100 times now in this thread about what coach wanted. But he has never stated that he didn't want a touchdown there. You are just assuming and preaching it on here as if it is fact.

JDE123
02-08-2012, 11:43 PM
I don't think it's fair to classify the field goal as an "extra point." I don't care what yard the ball is on when it's snapped, there are a lot of things that can go wrong when there's that much pressure on a kick. Similar to golf - you can sink every 3 foot putt you take on the practice green, but when you're on the final hole of a Major Championship all of the sudden 3 feet can look like 10.

The Patriots decision to let them score is the easy one. If the Giants run the clock down and convert the FG, the game is over - there's virtually no chance New England drives the whole way down the field, clocks the ball, and gets off a game winning field goal.

The scenario we had - almost a minute to drive down for a touchdown - I'd say Brady and company pull it off maybe 20-30% of the time.

So that does make for an interesting question: if it's a no-brainer for the Patriots to let them score, does that mean it SHOULD have been a no-brainer for the Giants to run the clock and kick the FG? I'm not so sure...

pica01
02-09-2012, 04:19 AM
nhp- If you read my posts the fact that Coughlin didn't make his wishes known clearly IS THE PROBLEM!If Coughlin didn't have a problem with scoring a TD then after the game he would have said so.Instead,he admitted that he didn't clearly communicate what he wanted.That's why he admitted postgame that his first thought when we scored the Td was,"I hope this doesn't come down on my head".He hadn't anticipated or given specific instructions to Eli to pass on to Bradshaw if the Pats laid down.No,he hasn't specifically admitted he didn't want the TD.But everything he's said points to that.Say what you will about Coughlin,but he's a strait shooter.After the game if he said he decided to go the field goal route but would take the uncontested td if offered and told Eli just that and to tell Bradshaw,no one would have doubted him.But he didn't clearly instruct his players and he admitted it.He's never said he was fine with the TD.When asked about the TD he said his first thought was,quote,"I hope this doesn't come down on my head".He realized he hadn't given specific instructions to Eli for Bradshaw if the Pats laid down.If Coughlin didn't have a problem with the TD,then after the game he would said the TD was fine with him.He didn't.Instead,he said he didn't clearly instruct his players.He knew he dodged a bullet.And he's pretty much admitted it.

pica01
02-09-2012, 04:46 AM
JDE- you answered your own question.If you think the Pats score 20-30% of the time vs a 99% sucess rate for a 20 yard FG than yes,Obviously the FG is a no brainer.I think 80 yards etc. is more in the 10 % range.Again,TD or FG any coach will be second guessed if it backfires.And he can say,it's what I decided to do and it didn't work out.Here,if scoring the TD backfired Coughlin would've told the truth.He wanted to play for the FG and we scored a TD instead.He screwed the pooch and has pretty much admitted it.It all worked out in the end, just not the way Coughlin really wanted or planned it.

nhpgiantsfan
02-09-2012, 09:50 AM
nhp- If you read my posts the fact that Coughlin didn't make his wishes known clearly IS THE PROBLEM!If Coughlin didn't have a problem with scoring a TD then after the game he would have said so.Instead,he admitted that he didn't clearly communicate what he wanted.That's why he admitted postgame that his first thought when we scored the Td was,"I hope this doesn't come down on my head".He hadn't anticipated or given specific instructions to Eli to pass on to Bradshaw if the Pats laid down.No,he hasn't specifically admitted he didn't want the TD.But everything he's said points to that.Say what you will about Coughlin,but he's a strait shooter.After the game if he said he decided to go the field goal route but would take the uncontested td if offered and told Eli just that and to tell Bradshaw,no one would have doubted him.But he didn't clearly instruct his players and he admitted it.He's never said he was fine with the TD.When asked about the TD he said his first thought was,quote,"I hope this doesn't come down on my head".He realized he hadn't given specific instructions to Eli for Bradshaw if the Pats laid down.If Coughlin didn't have a problem with the TD,then after the game he would said the TD was fine with him.He didn't.Instead,he said he didn't clearly instruct his players.He knew he dodged a bullet.And he's pretty much admitted it.

Ok so we agree he never said he didnt want to score. Basically, he is saying that he never discussed with the players what to do in the event the Pats let them score. It wasnt something he planned for. He never states that the smart play there is to kneel on the one. He never once said that he should have told them not to take the free points the Pats were giving them.

I understand that they were calling a real conservative play that mainly protects the ball. And that they never thought they were going to score, but when the lead is handed to you in the SB with one minute left you HAVE to take it. Especially a lead that requires the Pats to drive the entire length of the field. I will say it again. You cannot turn down free points to put you in the lead based on what you think or assume you can accomplish on the next play. I have been watching all of the shows on NFL network this week and I haven't heard one analyst dispute that.

Husky
02-09-2012, 10:14 AM
He let them score for the same reason he went on 4th and 2 instead of punting, from the 30, late in the game, in Indy a few years ago. Why do you believe because BB wanted it, made it the right call? IIRC, the only TD drive the Pats had which was under 1 min was Welkers 99 yard reception.

nhpgiantsfan
02-09-2012, 04:28 PM
To score or not to score. There will always be different opinions. I watched Inside the NFL last night. I haven't watched it all year but since I knew it would be all about our SB i decided to watch.. James Brown polled the guys. Simms and Sapp said always take the free points. Collinsworth said he would kneel at the one. When the interviewed Coughlin he said it is nice to have a 4 point lead there so Brady needed a TD to win and not a FG. He stated once again that he did not tell his guys not to score.</P>


So anyway which ever way you think it should've been done, there will be people on here and in the NFL that will agree with you and plenty that don't. Each decisioin has pros and cons. </P>


</P>


But most importantly, Who cares! We won!!!</P>

pica01
02-10-2012, 03:36 PM
Again,I agree there are 2 schools of thought on this.My point,AGAIN,is that Coughlin halfwayed it all around.Yeah,he never told his team not to score.He also never specifically told his team he wanted to play for the FG,although everything he's said points to that.He's admitted he didn't make himself clear.Here's clear."Eli,let's set up for the Fg".Or,"Eli,let's go for the TD".Or even,"ELi,let's set up the FG but if they give us the TD,take it".He did a bad job here and he knows it.And I don't have no doubt that,standup guy he is,Coughlin will say exactly that when he's asked about that last minute and what he was thinking.Had the worst happened,he knew he had a problem.Hence the answer when asked his 1st thought when we scored."I hope this doesn't come down on my head". Look at it this way.If he wanted the Td if the Pats laid down,shouldn't he have given specific instructions for Bradshaw to stop at the one and make the Pat's burn thier last TO?On 3rd down from the one the Pat's would have less reason to contest the TD than from the 6.Now,a kneel down fg is an extra point FG from 20 yards,not even 26.He didn't prepare his players for the lay down. Had he,we would've scored from the one on 3rd down and the Pat's would've had 53 seconds and no TO's.No one can argue this logic,although I know someone will.

Ruttiger711
02-10-2012, 03:47 PM
still no space bar... </P>


is this is the only thread you are in?</P>

pica01
02-10-2012, 04:21 PM
I know about the spacing problem.Like Coughlin,I'm a standup guy.I'm not a big internet guy and I tried to space and it didn't work.I don't know how to do it correctly.Just space ahead?

JDE123
02-10-2012, 04:28 PM
He let them score for the same reason he went on 4th and 2 instead of punting, from the 30, late in the game, in Indy a few years ago. Why do you believe because BB wanted it, made it the right call? IIRC, the only TD drive the Pats had which was under 1 min was Welkers 99 yard reception.


Good point that the other coach wanting something does not make it correct. But just because he was wrong about the 4th and 2 doesn't mean he was wrong about letting Bradshaw score.

Ruttiger711
02-10-2012, 04:53 PM
He let them score for the same reason he went on 4th and 2 instead of punting, from the 30, late in the game, in Indy a few years ago. Why do you believe because BB wanted it, made it the right call? IIRC, the only TD drive the Pats had which was under 1 min was Welkers 99 yard reception.


Good point that the other coach wanting something does not make it correct. But just because he was wrong about the 4th and 2 doesn't mean he was wrong about letting Bradshaw score.
</P>


Case in point - BB WANTED to make Eli throw to Manningham on the last drive.</P>

G-Man67
02-10-2012, 05:31 PM
i'd love to see Bradshaw use the squat, turn, sit down backwards in end zone as his new TD celebration

Husky
02-10-2012, 06:53 PM
Sorry, didn't complete the thought. The reason is because BB weighed it and thought it gave him the best chance. Whether it actually does afford that benefit is another story. Maybe Gostkowski hurt himself, who knows.

BillTheGreek
02-14-2012, 10:14 AM
Not really, what if he downs it and then we botch the FG?
</P>


*</P>


*</P>


<FONT size=6>THIS!!* </FONT><FONT size=3>what if on the next play we fumble or miss the field goal?? i say if you can score then* SCORE!!</FONT></P>


There's risk either way obviously. It's a matter or what risk is greater. You can's say "what if we miss the FG?!?!?" and ignore the risk of Brady scoring with all that extra time and more importantly an extra timeout. Coughlin, Belichick, and Eli all knew that scoring a TD was bad for the Giants, I don't know why you guys think you know better.</P>


Belichek in no way saw the Giants scoring a td as bad for the Giants.* </P>


What he saw was the only way they have a CHANCE is if they get the ball back.* HUUUUUGE difference.* </P>


Explain to me how what's good for the Pats isn't bad for us.... Anything that happens in the game is either good for us or good for them.</P>


Can you really not see this?* </P>


Because being down 4 is not good for the Pats... and typically not good for any team in any sport when needing more points than the other guy is required to win.* </P>


It only gives them a chance... they are still losing...* and wound up losing by what? 4 points.* Scoring a td was not bad for the Giants... bad for the Pats.* A chance is only a chance.* </P>


So you would rather be down by 1 point with 20 seconds and no timeouts than down by 4 points with 57 seconds and 1 timeout?</P>


First off... lets clarify that you refuse to answer that being down 4 is NOT good for the Pats.* Right? </P>


But now you're asking a question from the Pats point of view... if you are down of course you want more time and the timeout.* That still doesnt make being down 4 points a good thing... it MAY be a better chance to do something... but only a chance.* </P>


No, obviously you would rather be up by 50 than down by 4, I really don't see how that is relevant to the discussion....we have the ball inside the 10, so it's close to 100% that they will end up being down by some amount. What I'm saying is that the amount of time left on the clock is a lot more important than the amount they are down by, as long as that amount is less than 7. And as far as your point of only having a chance...<FONT color=#0000ff size=5>I don't see what you're getting at, at all. If you go from a 10% chance of winning to a 15% chance of winning, that's a huge victory.</FONT> So it is good for the pats that the giants score, compared to the alternative of us running out the clock and kicking a FG.</P>


Close to 100% ISNT 100%..... bradshaw going in the endzone is 100%</P>


A huge victory? really... the only HUGE victory i saw was at :00 on the clock.* </P>


It s semantics now... the pats still had a shot at either scenario... </P>


"Lesser of 2 evils".... "Pick your poison"* - I'm sure you've heard and used these before... but you do realize that this means neither are good options?***It seems you think one actually might be better than the other.* </P>


What i really jumped in on was you saying Giants going up by*4 points*is BAD for*the Giants and GOOD for the Pats....even knowing the outcome of the game... even celebrating the Giants victory... its baffling.* </P>


*</P>


Well it's like this. If someone said "OK, I'm either going to punch you in the face as hard as I can, or smash you in the balls with a sledgehammer" than getting punched in the face is "good" for you. If we look back with hindsight already knowing what happened then of course we would have done everything the same. I'm saying that without knowing the future, letting us score gives the Pats the best chance to win, so it's good for them that we scored. What actually happened does not affect whether it was a good decision at the time or not.</P>


See thats the flaw in your logic.* Its the means that are different - not the ends... so really its HOW would you like to have your balls smashed... you lose regardless...</P>

Did anyone ever hear of :"Murphy's Law"
is an adage or epigram that is typically stated as: "Anything that can go wrong will go wrong"

TAKE THE POINTS
It was the right Decision .....THE GIANTS WON !

pica01
02-14-2012, 11:51 AM
if you haven't seen it yet,catch NFL networks sound fx on the game.It's great.Especially on the holding call.You can tell head ref Parry didn't really agree with the call.Later,he asks Wilfork about the hold and Wilfork tells them it was a bad call.Classic,

miked1958
02-14-2012, 11:49 PM
The ref that called it wasn't even sure. He said he thought he saw him hook him. Lol

BillTheGreek
02-18-2012, 12:47 AM
Oh and to say that Coughlin wouldn't be blamed if they did miss the gimmie FG.* This statement leaves me speechless.* I know you are new to these boards but, I assume you are familiar with the NY media somewhat.* </P>


He would get absolutely destroyed!!</P>


*</P>

coughlin would have been crucified if we just took knees and tynes had a cundiff moment and missed 25-30 yard FG



and the people citing Tynes XP stats, are fooling themselves ... i'm about a 65% free throw shooter , but if somebody said 1 free throw for $1MM ... my breathing wouldnt be right ... i might choke and leave it short ... my mechanics might suffer ... i might aim it instead of freely letting it leave my hand ... i realize DeOssie, Weatherford and Tynes are pros, but you can't tell me that their hearts wouldn't be skipping several beats during the Super Bowl winning FG try



now, i'm not going to lie, i would have preferred Bradshaw kneel at the 1, but on the very next play i would have wanted us to try to get the TD and a 4 point lead and to not leave it up to our 3 non-football players to execute



When is the last time you've seen someone miss a game winning/game tying XP?


There is always a first time !...Remember Murphy's Law >>>>>Murphy's law is an adage or epigram that is typically stated as: "Anything that can go wrong will go wrong".

jhamburg
02-18-2012, 02:06 AM
Oh and to say that Coughlin wouldn't be blamed if they did miss the gimmie FG.* This statement leaves me speechless.* I know you are new to these boards but, I assume you are familiar with the NY media somewhat.* </P>


He would get absolutely destroyed!!</P>


*</P>

coughlin would have been crucified if we just took knees and tynes had a cundiff moment and missed 25-30 yard FG



and the people citing Tynes XP stats, are fooling themselves ... i'm about a 65% free throw shooter , but if somebody said 1 free throw for $1MM ... my breathing wouldnt be right ... i might choke and leave it short ... my mechanics might suffer ... i might aim it instead of freely letting it leave my hand ... i realize DeOssie, Weatherford and Tynes are pros, but you can't tell me that their hearts wouldn't be skipping several beats during the Super Bowl winning FG try



now, i'm not going to lie, i would have preferred Bradshaw kneel at the 1, but on the very next play i would have wanted us to try to get the TD and a 4 point lead and to not leave it up to our 3 non-football players to execute



When is the last time you've seen someone miss a game winning/game tying XP?


There is always a first time !...Remember Murphy's Law >>>>>Murphy's law is an adage or epigram that is typically stated as: "Anything that can go wrong will go wrong".

First off, Murphy's law is just a saying, it isn't a real law. It's not like the law of gravity or something.

And second, I don't see how it applies here, because no matter what choice you make something can go wrong. Sure your kicking team can botch the FG...but if you take the TD, any number of things can go wrong for your defense and you can end up giving up the game tying TD.

You guys are acting like the TD is the "safe" choice here, but you're just trading one risk for another, and I would argue that you're trading an extremely small risk (missing a chip shot FG) for a bigger risk (giving Brady the ball back)

GCGiant
02-18-2012, 08:11 AM
Pica...gotta start making paragraphs...I haven't read anything you've posted, yet.(I know...pot/kettle/black)

You cannot risk having the FG missed, blotched, bad snap, blotched hold.

I remember one day while practicing pony league baseball and my coach explaining why it was so important to run-out grounders...somewhere around 15 things that could go wrong.

Finally...I think some teams will now practice this scenario, and in the huddle will tell the RB to turn toward the sideline when you get to the 1/2 yard line and try to run some clock out.

Joe Morrison
02-18-2012, 08:13 AM
And coming in a close 2nd for stupidist thread is!

ghwriter1976
02-19-2012, 05:42 PM
I was giving this some more thought today, and I realized how dangerous it would have been for the Giants to take the field goal for the 1-point lead.

Yes, it would have given Brady a lot less time to work with, but this is a QB who made his name by moving his team down the field and into field goal range. And one of those two Super Bowls won in the last seconds happened in part because the Carolina kicker's penalty started the Patriots on the 40-yard line.

Plus, by only being up one point, you give Belichick the advantage to choose how he would want to score. By being up at least 4, Brady had no other option than to go for the end zone.

Again, this is all a moot point because the Giants won the game anyway, but it made me feel that the correct score was made...

nhpgiantsfan
02-19-2012, 06:39 PM
Taking the free TD is a no brainer.

buffyblue
02-19-2012, 07:29 PM
The right thing to do is to score the TD and not try to count on the field goal when Lawrence Tynes is hardly money in the bank.

Bill Bellichek never should have challenged the Mario Manningham catch and losing the timeout. We can all thank Eli Manning for rushing everyone to the line of scrimahe and forcing Bill Bellichek to make that call quickly without having the folks from above having the time to advise him on it.

pica01
02-21-2012, 05:35 PM
Guys,I'm sorry about my posts not being spaced.As I've said before,I'm not a big internet forum poster.Actually,Giants.com the 1st time I've ever posted like this.I simply don't know how to properly format my posts.I space them when I write them.When I post they're just one long paragraph.Little help?

pica01
02-21-2012, 05:51 PM
Gh,the field goal wouldn't have given Brady less time,it would have virually given him no time.If Bradshaw kneels at the 1 and Eli kneels at the 2 centering the ball on 3rd down it comes down to this.If we execute a 20 yard extra point field goal that decades of attempts show are sucessful approaching 99% of the time it's over.We miss it,we lose.Timewise,at worst,we have to kickoff with 10 seconds left.It wouldn't come down to Brady,down 1,needing just a Fg.The FG makes Brady irrelevant.Make it,win.Miss it,lose.Yeah,I'm repeating myself again.It just seems that no matter how many times I say it,people still argue the point.

pica01
02-21-2012, 06:15 PM
I'm gonna try 1 last time.Before the game.Assuming it'll be a close game decided in the last 2 minutes.I say to you,"we'll have the opportunity to kick a 20 yard extra point type FG with less than 10 seconds left to win".To me,going into the game,if it went down to the last 2 minutes,I can't believe that any of you wouldn't consider that to be THE ABSOLUTE BEST CASE SENARIO and wouldn't think twice.And again,if BEFORE the game I offered you that 20yarder for the win vs Brady with 57 seconds and a TO needing a TD to win,what would you choose?Be truthful,not arguementative about what happened after the fact.It's pregame,what's your answer?

nhpgiantsfan
02-21-2012, 07:38 PM
You need to give up already!

pica01
02-21-2012, 08:03 PM
I know nhp.It's just my way.I'm like a pitbull with a bone.You gotta admit,however,that given the pregame choice I've proposed,you would've picked the 20 yarder,right?

nhpgiantsfan
02-21-2012, 09:02 PM
I know nhp.It's just my way.I'm like a pitbull with a bone.You gotta admit,however,that given the pregame choice I've proposed,you would've picked the 20 yarder,right?

If the question before the game (superbowl) was: If you had to choose between ATTEMPTING a 20 yard field goal with 20 seconds left to go up by one point or walk in on a free touchdown with 57 seconds to go up by 4 points.

I would answer take the TD every time. The question is silly. The way you ask the question is acting like its a guarantee, that you make the FG.

How would you answer this pregame question

You are in the SB. Would you rather ATTEMPT a 20 yard field goal with 20 seconds left to put you ahead by one. Or would you rather score a TD at 57 seconds left to go up by 4.

How can you possibly say that you would rather take the chance with the FG team and leave the TD on the field.

jhamburg
02-21-2012, 09:10 PM
I know nhp.It's just my way.I'm like a pitbull with a bone.You gotta admit,however,that given the pregame choice I've proposed,you would've picked the 20 yarder,right?

If the question before the game (superbowl) was:* If you had to choose between ATTEMPTING a 20 yard field goal with 20 seconds left to go up by one point or walk in on a free touchdown with 57 seconds to go up by 4 points.

I would answer take the TD every time.* The question is silly.* The way you ask the question is acting like its a guarantee, that you make the FG.

How would you answer this pregame question

You are in the SB.* Would you rather ATTEMPT a 20 yard field goal with 20 seconds left to put you ahead by one.* Or would you rather score a TD at 57 seconds left to go up by 4.

How can you possibly say that you would rather take the chance with the FG team and leave the TD on the field.


Everyone keeps talking about how something could go wrong for the Giants on the FG try. Well consider that a lot of things DID go wrong for the patriots on their drive- They had a dropped pass, an incompletion, and a devastating sack of Brady, and they STILL were a tipped hail mary away from winning the game!

buffyblue
02-21-2012, 09:46 PM
You have to take the TD. The field goal is not guaranteed.

jhamburg
02-21-2012, 10:13 PM
You have to take the TD. The field goal is not guaranteed.

It depends on what your goal is. If you're trying to maximize your chance of scoring points on that drive, take the TD. If you're trying to maximize your chance of winning the super bowl, run the clock down.

nhpgiantsfan
02-21-2012, 10:23 PM
You have to take the TD. The field goal is not guaranteed. It depends on what your goal is. If you're trying to maximize your chance of scoring points on that drive, take the TD. If you're trying to maximize your chance of winning the super bowl, run the clock down.</P>


</P>


You know what your goal is on that drive.</P>


To take the lead in the Superbowl, the easiest and most automatic was possible.</P>

appodictic
02-21-2012, 10:51 PM
When the Giants got a 1st down I got up and said to everyone in the room-"ok,we don't want to score".that was obvious.but I said,"there is no reason to even hand it off.Eli should kneel twice and center the second and we can kick a 25 yarder at the gun.Admit it,when Bradshaw scored and gave Brady 57 seconds you were livid.Fortunately,this defense is better than the one that rodgers went the length of the field in 4 plays earlier this yr in a minute.I remember turning to my buddy when we got inside the 20 at the end and saying "Geez,wouldn't it be great if we could kick a chip shot at the gun to win it and not give them any chance?'To think we got that and somehow screwed it up was incredible.Kneel down.Kneel down again in the middle.Kick a 25 yd field goal.game over.But nooooo....instead we got 57 seconds of torture.Pisarchiks reverse spin handoff to Csonka lead to the victory formation.Had Brady pulled off a miracle... well,you know.Why hand off?You know the answer.you don't.Coughlin,Eli and Bradshaw knew it too.And did it anyway.had The pats pulled off a miracle it would've went down as the biggest bonehead play ever,in any sport.Just thought I'd say what alot of us were thinking during those 57 seconds of torture.

I was happy because Tynes is scary, the snap that beat the 49s was low, and didn't we have a block in the past three games. I like a sure thing.