Super Bowl Open Thread
Here's your MGoBlog Official Rooting Guide:
.
.
New York Giants |
New England Patriots |
|
|---|---|---|
| MVP Candidates | David Baas and Mario Manningham, plus RBs coach Jerald Ingram and Asst. (to the) Linebackers coach Jim Herrmann | Tom Brady and Zoltan Mesko, plus Mallett if you count him. |
| Known Buckeye Associates | Jake Ballard (TE) and Jim Cordle (backup to Baas) | DL Coach Pepper Johnson (played under Earl Bruce). |
| Spartans Charitably Employed | Greg Jones (backup MLB) and Devin Thomas (3rd string WR) | Brian Hoyer, but I don't count this against them because I find a Spartan as manservant to both Brady and Zoltan (srsly: he's listed as the Space Emperor's backup as PK holder!) totally acceptable. |
| Suspected Domer Sympathizers | Justin Tuck (starting SDE) | Sergio Brown, a 3rd string safety |
| Other known affiliations | The original Mara (current owner's grandpa) bought and disbanded the Detroit Wolverines (NFL) in 1929 just so he could have Benny Friedman | Kirk Ferentz, Nick Saban, and Charlie Weiss all served as asst. coaches under Belicheck at one time. OC Bill O'Brien will become Penn State's new Head Zook after game. |
Sorry to have taken over M-Wolverine's thread. I planned to have this go up at 5:30 and he beat me to it. Here's his original post:
Less than an hour away. Should be a good game. The commercials. The halftime show featuring someone steering her kid to Michigan. Brady, Zoltan and Mallett vs. Manningham, Baas and Herrmann. I'll be rooting for Brady to win his fourth, and get to the arguably greatest player/QB of all time level, so we can say THAT GUY came from Michigan. (And my general stance of rooting against Mannings). But if you're a diehard Giants fan, no problem. Just remember your team has twice as many Spartans as the Pats. ;-) Enjoy the game, the food, the family, friends, and fun!
February 5th, 2012 at 9:50 PM ^
Still in play. Ohlesdoit
February 5th, 2012 at 9:52 PM ^
Too many men but only nine seconds. Getting crazy. Going to be tough for Brady to pull this out. Two plays or one?
February 5th, 2012 at 10:04 PM ^
Let's say there are 12 seconds left, team A is up 5 and team B is at their own 20.
Time for 2 plays.
Team B puts out 18 defenders and team A spends 7 seconds getting an incomplete pass (or sack). Penalty, too many men, 5 yards, time is off the clock.
1st and 5 from the 25, only 5 seconds left. Do it again, no gain.
1st and 10 from the 30, no time left on the clock...free play.
Tough to gain 70 yards on that free play.
Unsportsmanlike? Certainly. Win? Likely.
Thoughts?
February 5th, 2012 at 10:07 PM ^
I think Buddy Ryan had a gameplan like that, saw on like SmartFootball how in Goalline situations he would put an extra 3 LB's on the field, stop them and kill the clock, then go to a regular Goalline D to stop them
February 5th, 2012 at 10:52 PM ^
Sounds good initially, but there is a "palpably unfair acts" penalty that the officials can call which gives them ultimate discresion over the penalty, up to and including forfeiture or awarding a score. I think in this case, having 18 defenders (especially doing it twice) would definitely qualify. The officials would be free to then put time back on the clock, move the ball up, or whatever.
February 5th, 2012 at 11:07 PM ^
It's good intent, but what ref is going to want to make that call? As long as it's not 18 guys, there isn'tr really much a ref can do without getting attacked. I mean time on the clock is easy, just reset it, but how do you decide where to spot the ball?
February 5th, 2012 at 9:53 PM ^
Damn you, Welker!!!
February 5th, 2012 at 9:53 PM ^
I hate NFL clock rules. Stopping the clock to move the chains is a lot better.
February 5th, 2012 at 9:53 PM ^
Gronk was there to make the catch but he couldn't come up with it. Wow.
February 5th, 2012 at 9:53 PM ^
I hate NFL clock rules. Stopping the clock to move the chains is a lot better.
February 5th, 2012 at 9:53 PM ^
3 drops screwed Brady. Welker on that earlier drive, and the 2 to start off the GW drive
February 5th, 2012 at 9:55 PM ^
Giants won that game, but man does it feel like the Patriots let them have it. A couple of drops by the Patriot WRs on the last couple of drives killed them.
February 5th, 2012 at 9:55 PM ^
So who's watching Luck??
February 5th, 2012 at 9:56 PM ^
Bottom line for me was mistakes. Both teams played really crappy IMO. But the Giants didn't have to pay for their mistakes (3 fumbles, no turnovers, FG off the upright) and the Patriots did (crucial drops).
February 5th, 2012 at 9:56 PM ^
and the game is over. Oh, wellz.
February 5th, 2012 at 9:56 PM ^
Welker = goat.
February 5th, 2012 at 9:57 PM ^
The Patriots have to be kicking themselves. So many dropped passes, and they forced the Giants to put the ball on the ground 4 times and came away with none of them.
February 5th, 2012 at 9:58 PM ^
Eat a dick Wes Welker.
February 6th, 2012 at 1:33 AM ^
with that big drop, but is it just me or was Brady channeling Denard for a bit in the 2nd half? I saw at least 3 incompletions where he put it behind his receiver. Being that it is Brady, I suppose I can give him the benefit of the doubt and assume that it was the only open window to get the pass to the receiver.
February 6th, 2012 at 8:24 AM ^
I thought of Denard on the escape leading to the interception, although Denard seems to complete those plays, and on the two batt-downs at the line of scrimmage. Tom is not tall enough to play in the NFL.
/s
February 5th, 2012 at 9:58 PM ^
If I was Brady I would have Belichek draft Hemingway. He always comes down with those Jump Balls
February 5th, 2012 at 10:02 PM ^
February 5th, 2012 at 10:21 PM ^
February 5th, 2012 at 9:59 PM ^
Was the Michigan Health System commercial on national tv or is it just a local thing?
February 5th, 2012 at 10:03 PM ^
Probably just a local thing, they had some Channel 4 commercials on earlier about that missing woman Homicide
February 5th, 2012 at 10:21 PM ^
Michigan Health System commercial was not nationwide.
February 5th, 2012 at 9:59 PM ^
February 5th, 2012 at 10:00 PM ^
Man if Gronk wouldn't have slowed down going into that pile he would have caught that ball
February 5th, 2012 at 10:05 PM ^
If it's only five yards and repeat the down (but they don't put the time back on the clock), why wouldn't every team intentionally play 12 (or 13 or 14) in that situation (other side is out of timeouts, needs to go 50+ yards, and there are only 15 to 30 seconds left)? It's like how Bielema used to go incredibly offsides on kickoffs near the end of the first half, knowing it could run down the clock and prevent the other team from getting the ball (before they changed the rule).
February 5th, 2012 at 10:11 PM ^
That's exactly what I was bitching about. It doesn't make any sense - that play took a good 10 seconds off of the clock and obviously there wasn't anyone open when there was an extra man in defensive coverage. Why not put 20 guys on the field and take the 5 yards all day?
February 5th, 2012 at 10:26 PM ^
February 5th, 2012 at 10:33 PM ^
That's not the point though. The refs wouldn't be able to call a penalty until the ball was snapped and the play started, since otherwise there would still technically be time for them to get off the field. When the clock is already ticking down this is a huge problem as there's apparently not a clock reset associated with such a penalty. It doesn't literally have to be 20 guys; having any extra in coverage is a huge advantage and there's little to lose when you're only giving up 5 yards with 50+ to go and the clock is a factor.
February 5th, 2012 at 10:42 PM ^
So he clocks the ball when there are 12 men on the D which results in a 5 yard penalty and maybe 1 second runs off the clock.
February 5th, 2012 at 10:47 PM ^
1) It should not come down to the QB essentially refereeing the game, especially in a hurry-up situation where he's not going to take 5+ seconds to count players (refs job).
2) 1 second is still valuable time and the issue would remain regardless. Again, that should not be necessary when the penalty calls for a replay of the down anyways.
February 5th, 2012 at 10:35 PM ^
It doesn't have to be 20, but if 12 or 13 guys are running around, the majority of them in the backfield it could be hard for a ref to count. Then the play goes it's only a 5 yard loss while the D get's double coverage on a receiver or an extra safety
February 5th, 2012 at 10:43 PM ^
Watch for a rule change on this one - had never seen it before but had the same thought when it happened. It would be a great penalty to just take again and kill the clock
February 5th, 2012 at 10:10 PM ^
The rule makes zero sense. The Giants traded 10 seconds for 5 yards, which was huge.
February 5th, 2012 at 10:30 PM ^
February 5th, 2012 at 10:37 PM ^
Thank goodness it's a 15-yarder in college. That's how we got into FG range for Phil Brabbs's kick against Washington.
February 5th, 2012 at 10:12 PM ^
Is one awesome vehicle
February 5th, 2012 at 11:09 PM ^
Quarterbacks that beat the Giants this year: Vince Young, Sex Cannon (twice), Tavaris Jackson/Charlie Whitehurst... yeah ...
February 5th, 2012 at 11:14 PM ^
Sex Cannon = Sexy Rexy, if you didn't know.
February 5th, 2012 at 11:22 PM ^
Quarterback that beat the Patriots twice this year: Eli Manning
February 5th, 2012 at 11:19 PM ^
One thing this game will do is add fuel to to the Spygate fire. I was surprised in the last few weeks to hear from both Steelers and Eagles fans how vehemently those teams feel they lost to Belichick because of that...and there are others. Personally I'm skeptical as to how much difference it made but the Patriots have yet to get one since and that will continue to weigh.
February 5th, 2012 at 11:35 PM ^
Preeeetty sure your argument is flawed. So you're saying that although Belichick can make it to the Super Bowl no problem, he can't win it unless he's videotaped the other team's defense? C'mon, it's FAR harder to make it to the Super Bowl than to win one game. And they lost mostly due to the Giants' good luck.
February 6th, 2012 at 12:16 AM ^
Preeeetty sure you're not reading too carefully. Spygate first emerged in regular season games with the Jets, and Pittsburgh was a playoff game within the AFC. No one is saying they aren't really good, and good enough to get to the Super Bowl, but some of the sheen is definitely off the Super Bowl wins...dude.
Also, they were penalized by the NFL for cheating...just an FYI.
The Patriots are a very, very good team, with a great coach and QB, but to date they have not won a Super Bowl that was not tainted by a cheating scandal. They have to live with that until they win another.
February 6th, 2012 at 3:44 AM ^
"Spygate" came out the first game of the 2007 season. After that, they couldn't tape any more team's defenses.
Since then, they have won the AFC East four times and made it to the Super Bowl twice. Clearly they can make do without taping other team's defenses. My point is that if the tapes had really given them that much of an advantage their successes should have been reduced significantly. If it had really been a scandal, the Patriots would have gone from owning the AFC East and making runs in the playoffs to becoming just another average team.
In reality, their successes have not stopped at all. You're basically arguing that the ONLY thing that the taping helped them with was in coming up with miracle, last second wins in the Super Bowl (re. 2001 & 2003). That is just nonsensical.
Their Super Bowl wins are not tainted in the least bit, since they have clearly proven they can win without "spying." The only difference between their first two Super Bowl wins and their last two Super Bowl losses is luck. There is nothing else at work there whatsoever.
February 6th, 2012 at 12:33 AM ^
C'mon, it's FAR harder to make it to the Super Bowl than to win one game.
Buffalo Bills fan are sleeping so much better after reading this...thank you...dude
February 6th, 2012 at 3:51 AM ^
The fact that it is no comfort to Buffalo Bills fans to know that making it to the Super Bowl is many times harder than winning it does not disprove my argument.
If Belichick can make it to the Super Bowl multiple times with and without taping the other team's defense, he can certainly win it with and without taping the other team's defense; especially since if you look at the actual Super Bowls themselves, they were all basically crapshoots.
If you can't see what I'm saying then there's no point in arguing anymore.
February 6th, 2012 at 9:30 AM ^
I see what you're saying but that wasn't my point. All I said was he hadn't won one since Spygate and that would weigh on him until he did. I also said he was a great coach and personally I didn't think the scandal meant much...but the perception is unavoidable. The analogy to the Bills was simply that yes, actually winning the Super Bowl does mean a lot.
Also, if you made your initial point with less sarcasm it would be easier to listen to. That's an internet thing...you would never have made it that way in person but here everyone can be super clever.