OT: Do you let the Giants score? If so, when?

I'm more interested in the Giants decision to run the ball. Why didn't they just take 3 knees and then kick? Not sure why the announcers didn't point this out either. 

No doubt in my mind NE should've let them in sooner than they did, but they still made the right call on the play where they did let them in. If they hadn't blown a TO on that challenge, they would've been in much better shape there, but hindsight is 20/20 and all that. Still, I think Coughlin made a bigger mistake in running than Belicheck did in waiting as long as he did to let them in. They definitely should've let them in on that 1st and goal. 

Tom Brady with 2+ minutes and 2 timeouts vs hoping an NFL kicker misses a 35 yarder. That's a no brainer

Double post

Did anyone else think it looked like Bradshaw scored on purpose but wanted to make it look like he tried to stop? Got to pad those stats.

In this article, the author uses Win Probability and finds that the Patriots should've let the Giants score two plays before (at the two minute warning).

http://www.slate.com/articles/sports/sports_nut/features/2011/nfl_2011/super_bowl/giants_patriots_super_bowl_the_ballsiest_call_in_super_bowl_history_.html

Anyone who watches a game with me or plays NCAA Football with me will tell you I bring this up whenever a situation like this happens. The problem with letting them score earlier, though, is that Bradshaw would have realized it sooner and taken a knee. There's also the possibility of a turnover or really bad penalty, so you don't want to just hand it to them too soon.

I think they did it when they needed to, it was just bad luck that they had to challenge that catch earlier. Had they had 2 timeouts and completed that first pass to Branch, they would have been golden. Branch had plenty of room to run and get out of bounds, leaving them with 30 or fewer yards to go with at least 40 seconds on the clock and 2 timeouts.

I think out of principle alone you play to win the game (Right Coach Edwards???)... which means not letting them score more points than you with under 1 minute to go.  Trust your defense and special teams to do their part.  Or at least pray their offense or special teams can't do theirs.  Giving away points is embarrassing.

Seeing the Patriots DT celebrate with a fist-pump after the Giants took the lead with 0:56 left in the Super Bowl?   Seeing Bradshaw "accidently" fall backwards as if he couldn't stop his momentum?   Seeing Mayo (?) running towards Bradshaw in what appeared to be an attempt to hit him into the endzone?    It was like bizzaro-world where the teams switched jerseys.

Obviously Bill chose Brady with the ball over trusting his defense, special teams, or the pressure on a long snapper, holder, and kicker as time exprires on a big staged game

I guess the Pats staff never saw Earnest and the Browns' forced fumble with the game on the line in the AFC champtionship.  Or the Bills/Giants shanked field goal with the super bowl on the line.   Or the Long Snapping chaos of Giants/49ers in the NFC playoffs.   Miami-FSU wide right.    

Offense, Defense, Special Team.   Not just Tom Brady.   No matter how dreamy and great he is.

I think it would have been ideal for Tom Brady to have another 30 seconds (1:30) left on the clock but it would have been much more interesting had Deion Branch and Gonzales not dropped those passes. Those two plays set up the 3rd and long sack, forcing the use of the timeout and also took away any midrange out routes. I think had those plays been complete, the patriots would have been in ryrhm and gone down and scored a td with the best drive in SB history.

score, the sooner the better. 

Also, take your timeout to stop the clock prior to Texas attempting their field goal attempt in the 2004-2005 Rose Bowl please.

I'd have let NY score with about 2 minutes - the offense for the Pats had already marched down the field twice on that defense, and Brady and co. are deadly in the 2-minute offense.  Wasting a couple of timeouts and about 1 minute to let the Giants score seemed dumb.

I also think that Bellicheck wasting a timeout on that challenge late was not a good call.  He was right there, and it definitely looked like a catch even in real time.  At that point, I'd rather hang onto that timeout than take a chance on an iffy reversal.  And yes, if it was a closer catch I would have probably challenged, but for whatever reason I would have expected the Giants to score anyway and then save the timeout for my team's last drive.

Points are never guaranteed, a snap can be botched, a hold can be botched.

I would always take guaranteed points.

I would have done it about thirty seconds earlier.  The problem is, though, that there was still a little bit of hope at holding them to a long field goal attempt.  If Belichick had let them score from about ten yards further out, everyone in the media, especially his "home" media, would be blasting him today.  

Ultimately, he made the right call.  His team just didn't have enough of "it" to get the job done on the last drive.  

I think they should have let them score as soon as they got to the 18 with two minutes left.  A better question however, I think, is whether the Giants should have taken the score or stopped before the end zone.  Bradshaw started to but didn't - guessing instinct took over and he caught himself too late.  I'm a Giant fan and have been torn on this one but I think you do have to take the TD when you can - if you stop intentionally and end up not scoring it would  be worse than having the Patriots come back and win.

The problem is that they waited too long to let them score.  You either do it earlier or don't do it at all.  They wouldn't of even been in that position though if the Pats receivers could catch the ball toward the end of the game.

The flaw in saying the Pats should have let them score once they got to the 18 is twofold.  1)  A 35 yard field goal is not a gimme (see the Ravens).  There were people at the SB party I was at, that were screaming for the Giants to start taking knees when they hit the 30.  Really?  You want to have Tynes try a 47 yard kick, when you can easily scoop up some more yards, possible get a few first downs to run down the clock as well.  You can't assume they'll make a 35 yard field goal.  If the NYG got within the 13 (and thus it was less than a 30 yard field goal), I think I'd let them score.  2) The biggest flaw in saying, oh the Pats should have let them score is assuming that the Giants try and score.  The Giants could run down to the one and take at the one.  They could then take 3 knees, or a couple knees and then try to score a TD on 3rd down.  Regardless, they'd be little time left on the clock even after they called their TOs.

ttp://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/boxscore?gid=20120205017&page=plays

1st-10, NE34 2:52 E. Manning passed to M. Manningham to the left for 2 yard gain

2nd-8, NE32 2:09 E. Manning passed to H. Nicks to the left for 14 yard gain

1st-10, NE18 2:00 A. Bradshaw rushed up the middle for 7 yard gain

2nd-3, NE11 1:15 E. Manning passed to H. Nicks to the left for 4 yard gain

1st-7, NE7 1:09 A. Bradshaw rushed up the middle for 1 yard gain

2nd-6, NE6 0:57 A. Bradshaw rushed

(Just had this long post not save because "field is required" even though nothing is highlighted, so this is the short version)

Probably 1st and 10 from the 18 was the best time.  Goes from a maybe stoppable FG to a pretty sure thing. Certainly by 2nd and 3 from the 11, because that's practically an XP.  Two more plays shouldn't have occurred. Having said that it's hard in real game time to do something so out of the ordinary.  You're still hoping that maybe you cause yet another Giants fumble, and finally they don't recover one of them.  So while I think that might have been the optimal time, I'm not saying he was wrong for when he did it. It's different me thinking on my couch that it's over when they get to the 18, and what a coach has to try and do in the moment.

Anything can happen. Remember Illinois 2009. That was terrible. The above poster is right that if the Giants somehow couldn't punch the ball in from the one years line that would be almost as bad as the play that led to the creation of the Victory Formation.

People kept saying that they would have let the Gaints score once they got inside the 20.  But I don't think the Giants would have let themselves score from there.  It would have been too obvious what NE was doing.

Bradshaw did not mean to score, but was taken by surprise, and once he got momentum from the six he could not stop.  Had that been from the 15 or 20, he would have caught himself.  That would have been it.  

It probably worked out as well as it could have in terms NE having a chance to win.