SB predictions

[TruePoint]

The stupidity of the pass play from the 1 reeks of a Vegas scandal. I dont care what Carroll or Bevell say they thought was the correct call based on the the Pats stacking the box. You have a bruising back who was running over the Pats defensive line and a time out remaining. Under no circumstance should an offensive coordinator or head coach think that a pass play is the best option to win the SUPER BOWL, with Lynch in the backfield. Even worse, the poor game mgt by Seattle late in the 4th cost them another precious timeout which would have made running the ball a complete no brainer.

The impact on Vegas based on that 1 play is very suspicious, glad I didnt have a wager on this one.

Please stop. This is dumb for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that Vegas was rooting for Seattle because the public money was on New England.

There always has to be an excuse nowadays. Smh.

[SmartyBarrett]

Carroll getting a lot of blame, but fact is, you can't throw a goal line INT with the game on the line, Russell Wilson. A play call didn't make him do that.

[RhowdyRam02]

Yeah, I don't believe in the Vegas thing either. You're talking about a head coach who left an absolutely dominant Reggie Bush on the sideline at a key point against Texas. Pete Carroll just got too cute with clock management.

[adam914]

The stupidity of the pass play from the 1 reeks of a Vegas scandal. I dont care what Carroll or Bevell say they thought was the correct call based on the the Pats stacking the box. You have a bruising back who was running over the Pats defensive line and a time out remaining. Under no circumstance should an offensive coordinator or head coach think that a pass play is the best option to win the SUPER BOWL, with Lynch in the backfield. Even worse, the poor game mgt by Seattle late in the 4th cost them another precious timeout which would have made running the ball a complete no brainer.

The impact on Vegas based on that 1 play is very suspicious, glad I didnt have a wager on this one.

Please stop. This is dumb for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that Vegas was rooting for Seattle because the public money was on New England.

There always has to be an excuse nowadays. Smh.

Yeah, Pats and the over was the worst possible outcome for the vegas sportsbooks.

[adam914]

Congrats to all the Pats fans...your decision to become fans after the 2001 season has really paid off!

Dude my dad was a season ticket holder before i was born...I sat in the metal bleacher seats in the old Foxboro Stadium and watched 1-15 teams. I feel 0% bad about it.

Haha would you be shocked to hear that I don't really remember making this post last night?

[TruePoint]

Haha no. I just realized I was so intently focused on the game and so stressed out by it that I don't remember one commercial or anything about the halftime show. Although some of that might be the lifestyle choices I made before, during and after the game.

[adam914]

I actually thought the halftime show was pretty good! Missy still got it.

[adam914]

By the way, were any of you Pats fans screaming like I was when Belichick didnt call any timeouts on that last drive to save Brady some time to get the ball back? Obviously it worked out and all is well, but damn I did not get that. Wonder if that's all anybody would be talking about if SEA had scored (and that ridiculous catch of course).

[TruePoint]

Yeah I was screaming for the timeout too. Who knows what would have happened if they'd just run a read option. But oh well, not my problem.

[SmartyBarrett]

I was screaming for a timeout and also screaming for them to let SEA score.

[Taylor Swift]

Congrats to all the Pats fans...your decision to become fans after the 2001 season has really paid off!

Dude my dad was a season ticket holder before i was born...I sat in the metal bleacher seats in the old Foxboro Stadium and watched 1-15 teams. I feel 0% bad about it.

I remember going to watch the Pats training camp at Bryant back in the late 80s with my dad and brother.

[ramfan85]

Good point, adam. Yes, I was concerned about not calling a timeout, too. Belichick seemed to imply afterwards that the game would be won or lost on the goal line.
I'd love to have an 8x10 pic of Sherman's face after the interception.

[adam914]

Yeah I was screaming for the timeout too. Who knows what would have happened if they'd just run a read option. But oh well, not my problem.

Haha yeah exactly.

[rodfromcranston]

Katy Perry was great, Missy Elliott? Why not Salt n Peppa?

[Ramulous]

Watched the game in Florida.....predicted a loss because of it and who I had to watch it with....glad I was wrong!!!

[rodfromcranston]

Washington Post debunks the Brady is the greatest ever baloney,
and tells why:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fanc ... l-history/

[Ramulous]

Greenberg is a hater.....I question the validity of his analysis....

[rodfromcranston]

He pretty much put it in scientific form, with graphs, plus
he's not a fanboy yelling that someone HAS to be the greatest.
It's a pretty thorough analysis.
Probably doesn't sit well here, but everywhere else, is accepted.

[Ramulous]

You hate Brady because he is Irish....and love Montana because he is Italian....and Greenberg's mother is Italian......there I said it....

[rodfromcranston]

Well.....you like........sorry, no Lebanese QBs.
Seriously, I don't know Greenberg from a hole in the wall.
He appears to be a stat geek working for a very fine newspaper.
The Washington Post isn't exactly the Inquirer.

[TruePoint]

That is one perspective, but clearly if you are trying to make an argument to support your opinion you can cherry pick the metrics you want to use. Here is a guy who went and found a couple random stat on which he wants to hang his argument (adjusted net yards per pass is not really a great one, IMO), and then he invented his own methodology to produce a comparable ("we multiply that number by 15 and add it to 100, and that is the number you see"...um, OK?) that worked in favor of his argument.

If we get Montana and Bradshaw and Brady as the three guys, we must be putting a huge premium in the analysis on team success. Well, Brady won more conference championships and division championships than either of those guys, won more games overall and at a greater percentage over the course of his career.

I honestly don't care that much about this argument, other than it is kind of fun to structure the arguments. Joe Montana was my favorite player growing up so I don't have any interest in undermining his accomplishments. But there really is no "right" answer - everyone can have their own opinion and there really is no way to decide the argument on empirical data because everyone can define there own criteria.

[Ramulous]

Elway, Flutie, Jeff George, Manziel......

[Ramulous]

The Mount Rushmore of QB's

[rodfromcranston]

One argument I'd make for my boy Joe is this....
in his time, there were the great Parcell's Giants, and
the Joe Gibbs Redskins in addition to the 49ers.
There are no such competitors with multi Super Bowls
as those teams were. Those were the teams that blocked the
49ers at least three times, from going further.
It's the flip side to the cap argument. More great teams kept their nucleus.
The Giants had Montana's number like they have Brady's number.
Probably Rothlisberger's Steelers, would be the only two time
winners, but they haven't won lately.

[TruePoint]

They did repeatedly go up against one of the great offenses and QBs of all time (Manning's Colts/Broncos teams), they just happened to win the lion's share of those games. But Manning did go to three Super Bowls even though he only won one, so to me I'd add Manning Teams along with the Steelers and Ravens as tough competitors in that time in the conference.

[rodfromcranston]

My criteria was multi Super Bowl winners. Nobody except Pitt qualifies.
I mean nobody went to more Super Bowls than the hapless Bills.

I want to clarify something. I am a Pats fan. I like Brady very much. He has a
good story and a life anybody would envy. I just don't love him as
many around here do.
I'm just defending my all time favorite athlete (with the possible exception
of Tony C). I followed Montana since his freshman year at ND, and
to reach the heights he did was amazing, considering that idiot
Dan Divine had him at 3rd string beginning his junior season.
I actually wrote Divine a letter telling him he should be fired over that.
Some of Montana's comebacks at ND were remarkable. The hypothermia one
against Houston in the Cotton Bowl was one for the ages.

[ramfan85]

Elway, Flutie, Jeff George, Manziel......

And, of course, Tony Eason. The man John Hannah said should be wearing a skirt.

[kal-65]

his analysis lacks the fact that brady did not have the supporting cast that sf & pitt had
I recall sf had millions in deferred payments to star players on their defense;look what happened when it caught up and they had to release players.the team stunk.brady didn't have a jerry rice to throw to tho he did have moss a year.

pitt also had great defencesand franco and swann

brady has done it with less talent overall

[TruePoint]

My criteria was multi Super Bowl winners. Nobody except Pitt qualifies.
I mean nobody went to more Super Bowls than the hapless Bills.

I want to clarify something. I am a Pats fan. I like Brady very much. He has a
good story and a life anybody would envy. I just don't love him as
many around here do.
I'm just defending my all time favorite athlete (with the possible exception
of Tony C). I followed Montana since his freshman year at ND, and
to reach the heights he did was amazing, considering that idiot
Dan Divine had him at 3rd string beginning his junior season.
I actually wrote Divine a letter telling him he should be fired over that.
Some of Montana's comebacks at ND were remarkable. The hypothermia one
against Houston in the Cotton Bowl was one for the ages.

Rod, I probably like Montana more than you like Brady, so I get where you're coming from. Montana was my boyhood favorite player, and a part of the reason I am still a ND football fan (I am not old enough to have seen him play at ND). I'm not arguing against Montana's greatness at all, just making the argument for my guy Brady.

Also, the only reason Manning doesn't have more rings is because he played his whole career in the same conference as Brady and Belichick. If we pretend that Manning's teams were all just one team for that stretch, that team was no slouch and for the decade was much better than the Steelers or Ravens. It was probably the second best team in the NFL over that period, honestly. Patriots were just their bugaboo.

[rodfromcranston]

This business that Brady never had a supporting cast is hogwash.
He had the greatest slot reciever in history in Welker. He's had the greatest tight end ever in Gronk
for the last several years, minus injuries. He had Moss. He had pre-Seattle Branch.
He had Corey Dillon. He had the greatest kicker in NFL history, who won many games for
them. He had pro bowlers like Seymour, Bruschi, Harrison, Revis, Wilfork, Law,Malloy, Seau. Light,
Faulk, Troy Brown, Fauria, McGinnis, Ted Johnson, and Vrabel.
Pats fans make it seem like Brady had a pile of shit to work with, which is an
outright insult to the team.
Oh, and check Montana's first SB winner. Nothing like his other three. no Rice, no Taylor, no Craig.
Ronnie Lott was a rookie.
THAT was a team of nobodys.

[kal-65]

no way can you compare the pitt iron curtain defense to any patriot defenses,

sf had many hall of fame players on their defenses,thru the Montana young eras that won

by the way how did Montana do in kc without a great supporting cast

[Ramulous]

Tony Eason was not Lebanese to my knowledge

[Seawrightspostgame]

Welker the greatest slot in history? Edelman is better than that guy. Welker would get roughed up when it counted and he would disappear.

Edelman took that headshot, was obviously effected and proceeded to step up. Welker never showed up like that at the end.

I do think there were good guys the pats had, just not that many. Like Deion Branch, what if they kept him during his best years??? For deep threats in Brady's career it goes Moss, Branch.

[adam914]

Edelman is better then Welker? Come on man...

[rodfromcranston]

Montana lead lowly KC to the AFC championship game. Got that?
He also beat the reigning Super Bowl champs, 49ers and Steve Young with his new team.
It was at the end of his career, yet he revived a dead franchise.

[TruePoint]

Edelman is better than Welker in many ways. He is a much more gifted and explosive athlete, and has better hands. He isn't as good of a route runner as Welker was (yet). Edelman is 28, which is how old Welker was in 2009, and has really only had two seasons as a starter so he has some career ahead of him.

[rodfromcranston]

This:

[ramfan85]

With all the talk about the greatest cornerbacks in the game (Revis and Butthead), Butler will be the one that is remembered.

[ramster]

By the way, were any of you Pats fans screaming like I was when Belichick didnt call any timeouts on that last drive to save Brady some time to get the ball back? Obviously it worked out and all is well, but damn I did not get that. Wonder if that's all anybody would be talking about if SEA had scored (and that ridiculous catch of course).

I was thinking the same, but eventually I decided that Belichick knew best - have that much confidence in him built over the years.

After all is over I think this was the right decision, not because it worked out necessarily but consider:

Seattle had to call a time out earlier because the play was too late coming in from the bench. I thought to myself at the time, what a waste and this could come back and haunt Seattle. Then, believe it or not, Seattle had to call a time out AGAIN in the 4th Quarter because they were about to have the play clock expire. 2 Timeouts wasted in the 4th Q!!! Maybe they would have been bettr off taking the 5 yard penalties and save the TOs.

Now they run 4.5 yards with Lynch to get to the .5 yard line on 1st down. What a fantastic effort by the Pats Defense to keep Lynch out of the end zone.
IF Belichick had called a TO then Seattle would have been able to think things over, but more importantly they could then run on 2nd down, use their lone remaining TO if they didn't get in, then run again on 3rd down and run again on 4th down.
Having only 1 TO made Seattle have fewer options if they wanted to have 4 shots to get to the End Zone

It actually made sense what the HC was doing - they could take a shot at passing into the end zone, if incomplete clock stops, then run on 3rd, if not successful call the last TO then run on 4th with the superbowl all on the line for ONE PLAY - how exciting would that have been. BUT, it you are going to passthen it has to be a pass that only the receiver would have a shot at - down the middle is too risky, chance for deflection or worse.

Those two wasted Time Outs due to inefficiency in execution were disastrous. Great coaching on Belichick's part NOT to call the Time Out - he really is a genious.


One other thing:
I have watched over and over the catch by Kearse.
Mistake was by Duron Harmon #30 in jumping over Kearse. You should never give up, never assume. Harmon had a chance to level Kearse making it impossible to catch the ball, for that matter he might have even intercepted the carom but he chose to leap over Kearse and avoid any contact as all.
Butler actually made a fantastic play to deflect the pass and then very alertly sprang to his feet and knocked Kearse out of bounds -otherwise Kearse could have scored. Harmon had taken himself out of the play. Watch below in super slow motion.

http://deadspin.com/jermaine-kearses-in ... 1683234978

[Seawrightspostgame]

Edelman is better than Welker in many ways. He is a much more gifted and explosive athlete, and has better hands. He isn't as good of a route runner as Welker was (yet). Edelman is 28, which is how old Welker was in 2009, and has really only had two seasons as a starter so he has some career ahead of him.

Agreed.

Adam if you think Welker is better than Edelman that much then obviously nobody can argue with you. BUT Edelman is clearly a better athlete. Has shown to be tougher. He made that touchdown catch at the goal line in a critical moment that Welker never made and never will.

If you don't remember Welker getting roughed up and having concussion problems? Probably didn't pay attention enough.

Welker also had his best stuff with the help of Randy Moss on the field. If Gronk helps the scheme by drawing attention then the most gifted receiver to ever play the game likely did something like that? no?

[rjsuperfly66]

A few things...

I think football is a very easy sport to quickly grow a bandwagon following. You commit to 16 games a year, on Sundays with nothing else going on, on the afternoon which doesn't usually affect plans. Games are always on national TV, and you commit to 3 hours a week. When a team has been good for as long as the Patriots, the bandwagon only continues to grow. But lets not pretend the Patriots are any different than the Giants, Cowboys, 49ers, etc. You rarely hear anything and then they start winning and all of these people you didn't even know liked football are cheering for them.

Edelman is absolutely a more dymanic player than Welker. I just think he does more. He's one of the greatest punt returners in the NFL, he's a much better blocker, and he can make plays downfield. I do think Welker beats him in route running and with hands, but I think Edelmen has proven he's just as tough, and can be just as effective. I just prefer his more diverse skillset.

[adam914]

Edelman may eventually end up being better than Welker, but he is not there yet in my opinion. Going to have to show me more than 2 good seasons vs. Welker's 8.

[RhowdyRam02]

Say what you will about Welker, but he was every bit as tough as Edelman and probably even tougher. People forget how many shots Welker took. That said, Edelman has better hands. Welker got the drops a lot, not just in big situations.

[Seawrightspostgame]

Yes 8 years of consistency great. I will take the 1 Super Bowl over that.

[rjsuperfly66]

I always felt Welker had great hands and the years just wore on him. At the end he had a lot of big drops, but don't remember that so much early in his time in NE. Edleman has had a ton of drops, especially this season.

Welker was consistent over his 8 years, but I think it's a different argument. If you want to ask whose been the more valuable Patriot, it would be Welker given he's the all-time Pats receptions leader. That's a different question than who do you think has the better skillset/who do you think does the most things better.

[TruePoint]

Edelman may eventually end up being better than Welker, but he is not there yet in my opinion. Going to have to show me more than 2 good seasons vs. Welker's 8.

Who has had a better career as of today? Welker, no question. But, Edelman was at least as good this year as Welker was at the same point in his career. In his 28 yr old season (2009), Welker was an all-pro and had 123 catches - a terrific season. But advanced metrics put Welker at 1.07 WPA, 29th in the league. This season was Edelman's 28 yr old season, and he caught 118 passes and was not an all-pro, but advanced metrics put Edelman at 2.61 WPA, 3rd in the league. (Note that advanced metrics include playoffs.) Welker's best season according to the advanced metrics was his other all-pro season, 2011 when he was 30, when he finished first in the league with an astounding 3.90 WPA - the best WPA I can find for any receiver (I can only search back to 1999). Edelman is unlikely to ever have that kind of season, but he has many years ahead of him to catch up to Welker for career accomplishments.

Also, people think of them as being the same type of player, because they are both formerly unwanted white receivers that do most of their work underneath and between the numbers. But Edelman is a superior athlete and more dynamic player. He is also much bigger than Welker and is more capable of playing on the boundary.

[Seawrightspostgame]

measuring things through statistics and thinking about football with concrete evidence is great. Works most of the time. I don't think it accounts for Edelman delivering on that bench route to put the patriots ahead in the SB. That was huge.

Also different topic, the Grantland article that runs through all the statistics of that Seattle goal line blunder doesn't provide for Bill B not calling the timeout and forcing the Seahawks to execute, not stopping the clock and allowing them to think.

Probably took the Seahawks 10 seconds to realize BB wouldn't call a timeout, another 10 to choose the play, then guys are getting lined up confused, they then throw the pick. Who knows what Bill B was thinking there but its not measurable the impact of him not calling a timeout and the way it effected the Seahawks.

I for one think that for as much of an unstoppable force Lynch is and the idea that he would get the ball in to win a Super Bowl. Vince Wilfork probably would have been able to dig deep and stop someone for him to finally break through and win another.

Never know because The seahawks choked in their execution and ran a play that everyone knew they would and the Patriots executed it exactly the way BB drew it up.

Browner signed to be physical, he did that.
They identified the tendency of the Seahawks to run that play.
Coached them on how to react to it.
Let the Seahawks run it by not calling a timeout.
Kid makes a play.

Crazy game.

[rodfromcranston]

Nobody in the NFL stopped Lynch when it mattered.
I doubt a tired Wilfork would have been up to it.
The Pats were lucky they even stopped him at the one foot line
on the previous play.
One theory making the rounds is Carroll wanted his QB Wilson, to be the MVP and
not Lynch. Thus the DUMBEST PLAY IN THE HISTORY OF SPORTS!

[ATPTourFan]

Rod, that's a stupid theory. I know it's not yours, but it's a really stupid theory to think that the head coach with everything else he had running through his head would choose a passing play because he was concerned who would win the MVP.

[woodennickel1]

This business that Brady never had a supporting cast is hogwash.
He had the greatest slot reciever in history in Welker. He's had the greatest tight end ever in Gronk
for the last several years, minus injuries. He had Moss. He had pre-Seattle Branch.
He had Corey Dillon. He had the greatest kicker in NFL history, who won many games for
them. He had pro bowlers like Seymour, Bruschi, Harrison, Revis, Wilfork, Law,Malloy, Seau. Light,
Faulk, Troy Brown, Fauria, McGinnis, Ted Johnson, and Vrabel.
Pats fans make it seem like Brady had a pile of shit to work with, which is an
outright insult to the team.
Oh, and check Montana's first SB winner. Nothing like his other three. no Rice, no Taylor, no Craig.
Ronnie Lott was a rookie.
THAT was a team of nobodys.

He has only one time had a legitimate deep threat to stretch the field in Moss and they almost went undefeated. He also went to the AFC conf championship game with Reche Caldwell and some scrub they got off the waiver wire from Oakland. Also Gronk has been hurt a number of times so yes he has done it several times with a very limited supporting cast.