NFL playoffs

[Ellis Dee]

This thread is for discussion of week 17 plus the playoffs all the way through the Superbowl.

Some interesting matchups going into week 17, where teams will have to decide whether or not to rest their starters. IMO, teams that have clinched their spots should treat it exactly like the third preseason game: rest anyone who is dinged up, otherwise play your starters into the 3rd.

Titans @ Colts (Sunday Night)
Tony Dungy had a long history of resting his starters after clinching their spot, and then getting eliminated in the playoffs. Last year, IIRC, he didn't rest anybody and they won it all. Did he learn his lesson? (Or am I mis-remembering?) The Titans and Browns are surely interested in what he wants to do. For the Titans, it's simple: win and you're in, lose and stay home. Let's see if Young can pull it together in the dome.

Cowboys @ Redskins
With Romo and TO both hurt, I expect the Cowboys to keep them out, effectively conceding this game. Meanwhile the Redskins are in if they win, though with help they could still make it even if they lose. Personally I'm rooting for Washington to make it, since that would be the second consecutive year the NFC East sends three representatives to the post-season.

Packers
I'm not liking the sound of Brett Favre's post-game comments yesterday where he complained about it being cold. Uh, Brett, you're aware you play in Green Bay, right? I mean, I get that Chicago probably has more severe wind chills, but come on, man. You aren't instilling confidence in your ability to weather the elements after your first round bye.

Browns
Cleveland is in a bit of an odd position. They not only haven't clinched a playoff birth, but their fate is completely out of their hands. They are in with a Titans loss, stay home with a Titans win. (And the Titans play after the Browns.) It doesn't matter either way if the Browns actually lose to the 49ers. Well, it doesn't matter for playoff implications, but I'd think they'd want to try and re-establish a little momentum after the turd they laid yesterday. I just find it odd that a team could miss the playoffs AND legitimately rest their starters. That doesn't happen very often.

Jaguars
I can't think of a less-appealing wildcard opponent in recent memory. They give both the Steelers and Chargers solid motivation to play for the #3 seed to avoid them, with their ability to play well anywhere under any weather conditions.

Bucs
With still something left to play for, the Bucs rested their starters in the second half against the 49ers yesterday, resulting in a loss. Some would say the Bucs intentionally sandbagged in order to get the 4 seed instead of the 3, meaning they would face the Giants instead of the Vikings/Redskins. I can't really fault them for that. Jeff Garcia in particular has been a Giant-killer, and it is of interest that this will be the third time he's faced the Giants in the playoffs on three different teams: 49ers, Eagles, and now Bucs. He is 2-0 so far, with both games going down to the wire. We''ll see a week from next if this gambit pays off.

Patriots @ Giants
This is the historic matchup of the weekend, but most won't be able to see it. I have argued before that the NFL Network Thursday games don't change any game's availability, because they are usually games that wouldn't be broadcast outside their home markets anyway. I forgot about the traditional Giants late-season Saturday games, though. Those have always been nationally televised games, but now on NFL Network (both last year and this) most of the country is being denied a game they would otherwise be able to see. (I didn't notice because I get to see them, being in a local market.)

Mike Francessa made a pretty compelling argument about why the Giants should try their hardest in this game. First, the Giants aren't going to the Superbowl, but even if they did, ending the Patriots bid for a perfect season would be more memorable. While I agree that beating the Patriots would be one for the history books, I don't necessarily agree that the Giants have no chance in the playoffs.

I don't hate the Giants chances against the Bucs in the wildcard round. The Giants biggest weaknesses are wind, rain, cold, and playing at home, none of which should be part of the wildcard game in Tampa Bay. The Giants have won seven straight on the road, so going on the road in the playoffs is probably a good thing.

[ShibbOleth]

Bucs
With still something left to play for, the Bucs rested their starters in the second half against the 49ers yesterday, resulting in a loss. Some would say the Bucs intentionally sandbagged in order to get the 4 seed instead of the 3, meaning they would face the Giants instead of the Vikings/Redskins. I can't really fault them for that. Jeff Garcia in particular has been a Giant-killer, and it is of interest that this will be the third time he's faced the Giants in the playoffs on three different teams: 49ers, Eagles, and now Bucs. He is 2-0 so far, with both games going down to the wire. We''ll see a week from next if this gambit pays off.


It's not quite that Gruden just decided to rest his starters. Late in the first half Maurice Stovall got a broken arm on a routine pass play. Given some of the injuries they've seen this year, Gruden decided "screw it. If our second string can win, great, if not, so be it." It was still very close and the Bucs came an inch from tying it on their last offensive play. (Michael Clayton's back foot came down just out of bounds on the 2 point conversion try).

[Ellis Dee]

It's not quite that Gruden just decided to rest his starters. Late in the first half Maurice Stovall got a broken arm on a routine pass play. Given some of the injuries they've seen this year, Gruden decided "screw it. If our second string can win, great, if not, so be it." It was still very close and the Bucs came an inch from tying it on their last offensive play. (Michael Clayton's back foot came down just out of bounds on the 2 point conversion try).Yeah, I saw that replay. Very close, though clearly out.

As I said, I can't really blame Gruden either way. Looking at it objectively, I'd have rather faced the Giants than the winner of the Vikes/Redskins game too.

I'm looking forward to seeing Ike in action again, having not seen a single Bucs game all season. (Garcia rocked the house for me in my fantasy league pretty much all season.)

[ShibbOleth]

Also meant to point out that Seattle was leading the hapless Baltimore Ravens 21-0 at halftime (both games were West coast), with little indication that the Ratbirds had a chance to get back in the game. Given that, and the injury to Stovall, Gruden was absolutely correct to pull his key personnel. I really dislike the guy, but can't say that there was anything left to play for. Remember TB lost to the Seahawks in the first game of the season, so would lose the tiebreak, so at that point they were pretty much resigned to the four spot, regardless of whether that matchup works best for them.

[some white dude]

The AFC playoffs are looking very exciting. Jacksonville's rematch in Stinktown...er, Pittsburgh will be fun, and the winner has to play New England (assuming Cleveland/Tennessee doesn't advance against San Diego). Jacksonville-New England would be an awesome matchup, and on top of that, we could get another Colts-Pats showdown in the AFC championship, which is always fun to watch.

I'd be thrilled to get any two of the four bye teams in the Super Bowl. I'm pretty indifferent between Pats-Colts, but I'd like to see Green Bay get in. Despite ESPN's constant Brett Favre knob-slobbering, I admit that it is fun to watch him compete like he has this year. IMO, the most interesting Super Bowl matchups come from the QBs. I didn't care much about Grossman last year, so whatever. But Favre-Brady? Romo-Manning? That'd be awesome. I just hope none of the wild card teams make it through. Well, unless by some divine miracle Cleveland gets the wild card this weekend.

[Snickers]

F*cking Vikings. Dammit. They do this to me every single year. Bastards.

My only consolation is that even if they do get in, by some miracle, which they won't, they'd only lose. At least this way I probably won't have to see that.

[Madd Maxx]

Hail to the Redskins! We lost 4 straight games after the midpoint of the season and we don't need any help to make the playoffs? We lose our best defensive player, the right side of our O-line has been out all year and our starting QB goes down and then we win two straight must-win games to stay in the playoff picture? With the exception of the Patriots game, every game we lost this year we were winning at the half. This is my first year having season tickets and Sunday's game vs. the Cowgirls is going to be sweet. Beat the Cowboys, go to the playoffs. Hell yeah. Oh, yeah; I won my fantasy football league this year too.

[RTFirefly]

If the Redskins beat Dallas on Sunday, here's hoping that Gibbs stays with Todd Collins at QB in the playoffs, even if Jason Campbell is healthy. He's got the hot hand, he knows Al Saunders' system inside and out, and they're winning. You don't change QBs in the middle of a winning streak.

The 'Skins have lost narrowly to the Pack, the 'Boys, the Bucs, and split a pair with the Giants. IOW, they've played everyone, fairly evenly, who's already got an NFC playoff spot except the Seahawks, who are the team they'd almost surely have to play if they get in. The Redskins could potentially run the NFC table, at which point they'd almost surely get stomped by the Pats in the Super Bowl, but it would still be a fun ride.

[phungi]

So, the Redskins, Vikings, and Titans are the only teams playing for either a playoff berth or seeding?

[An Arky]

The Browns and Saints can make it with some help.

Eh, I don't really like this year. The only thing that would be interesting is if the Pats get beat, but that's probably not going to happen. If it does, there'll be a lot of what ifs, because even if they lose in the playoffs somehow, they're still the best team by a country mile.

The NFC playoffs are just to see who gets to be the Washington Generals for the Pats this year. It would be nice to see the Cowboys lose in a most embarassing fashion, though.

[Hal Briston]

I don't hate the Giants chances against the Bucs in the wildcard round.Hell, I absolutely love their chances against the Bucs, and (if everything else falls together properly) would give them a pretty good chance against the Packers the following week.

Hail to the Redskins! ... Beat the Cowboys, go to the playoffs. Hell yeah.I'm hoping the Redskins make just so the entire rest of the NFC East can point at the Eagles and yell "HA-ha!".

[ShibbOleth]

With the exception of the Patriots game, every game we lost this year we were winning at the half.

And except for the Bucs, whom you were trailing 19-3 at halfime, although you did make it interesting at the end.

[SCSimmons]

Cowboys @ Redskins
With Romo and TO both hurt, I expect the Cowboys to keep them out, effectively conceding this game.

I think the Phillips will play Romo for at least half the game, maybe even three quarters. He claims to be concerned about rust with a bye week coming up ... Owens is out, Girode (still officially only 'doubtful') will almost certainly be out, as will (I hope! He needs to rest!) Terence Neuman. So the 'boys will be working with a depleted o-line, and with Patrick Crayton and Sam Hurd as their primary wideouts. (Terry Glenn may be back this week, but at best will have limited minutes.) Not a recipe for success this week, that's for sure--but two weeks to rest before their first playoff game after.

The Browns and Saints can make it with some help.

The Browns just need the Titans to lose. The Saints need a miracle from on high: Washington to lose, Minnesota to lose, and then (worst of all) they still need to win! I wouldn't be buying any Saints/Seahawks playoff tickets just yet. :)

(I married a Saints fan, which gives me so many opportunities for football snark come playoff time.)

[SCSimmons]

Patriots @ Giants
This is the historic matchup of the weekend, but most won't be able to see it. I have argued before that the NFL Network Thursday games don't change any game's availability, because they are usually games that wouldn't be broadcast outside their home markets anyway. I forgot about the traditional Giants late-season Saturday games, though. Those have always been nationally televised games, but now on NFL Network (both last year and this) most of the country is being denied a game they would otherwise be able to see. (I didn't notice because I get to see them, being in a local market.)

HOLD THE PRESSES!!!

Patriots' Historic Game to Be Available to All of America, After All (http://sports.excite.com/news/12262007/v9580.html)

... the league announced Wednesday that the NFL Network feed will be simulcast on NBC and CBS.

:cool:

[some white dude]

I can't believe it. With the league's "Lalalalalala I can't hear you!" stance on the NFLN, I am shocked that they're actually going to let us see this game.

[ShibbOleth]

I can't believe it. With the league's "Lalalalalala I can't hear you!" stance on the NFLN, I am shocked that they're actually going to let us see this game.


Makes them seem magnanimous and at least triples their audience. Win-win.

What I'm wondering about that game, is which side, if either, will actually try to win. The Bucs rested their starters for half of their game last week, and will probably rest their starters for at least that long in a meaningless home contest against the Panthers this week. The Patriots can play their first string for a while, if they want to, since they have a bye week coming up. But would New York go all out, since this is meaningless for them, and they will risk injury and fatigue to their first string, just out of some sort of sense of machismo?

I hate trying to handicap these sorts of games late in the season.

[SenorBeef]

I think New England will try harder than the Giants, but that's just a vague guess, I know little about the Giants.

I say that because as much as they talk it down, NE wants to set all sorts of records. Look at how they forced the ball to Moss in the 2nd half of last game. They want Brady to get 50 TDs and Moss to get 23. I wouldn't be surprised to see those players play until that happens.

[An Arky]

HOLD THE PRESSES!!!

Patriots' Historic Game to Be Available to All of America, After All (http://sports.excite.com/news/12262007/v9580.html)



:cool:


...and the fix is in...look for the Pats to win by 3 points in the final seconds of the game... :D

[some white dude]

ESPN offers hope (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3170314) to Browns fans. For the non-clicky types, Marvin Harrison is practicing. Dungy says if he plays, he may let Manning stay in longer on Sunday to work on his timing with Harrison.

[robz]

Will defeating the Pats take "Little Brother's" rep to the next level? This is the motivation for the Gints that I see. Eli is a good QB with bad and good moments, but not Elite. Could this be a break out game for him.

I'm just hoping no Pats leave the field hobbling especialy Tom in the face of that Gints pass rush.

[SenorBeef]

ESPN offers hope (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3170314) to Browns fans. For the non-clicky types, Marvin Harrison is practicing. Dungy says if he plays, he may let Manning stay in longer on Sunday to work on his timing with Harrison.

It's a double edged sword with that one. If Manning is in there specifically to play with Harrison, he'll be forcing balls to a rusty, hurt receiver who doesn't have his timing down with his QB. And Tennessee will know this, and roll the coverage this way. Scares me a bit, I could see some balls going to Harrison get picked.

[The Tof]

I think New England will try harder than the Giants, but that's just a vague guess, I know little about the Giants.

I say that because as much as they talk it down, NE wants to set all sorts of records. Look at how they forced the ball to Moss in the 2nd half of last game. They want Brady to get 50 TDs and Moss to get 23. I wouldn't be surprised to see those players play until that happens.

NE will definitely be trying harder. Giants actually have nothing to play for and are more likely to rest their starters. NE has the undefeated seasons, Brady and Moss's records, etc. NE will, my wag, play their starters through the first half. Enough to win the game and get Brady his TD record.

I'm not sure what to think about the Colts playing Harrison. Quite frankly, as a Bolts fan.. I think I'd rather see the Browns in the first round than the Titans again. Maybe Harrison will lead an emotional charge and the Colts will tough it out for the win :)

[SCSimmons]

NE will definitely be trying harder. Giants actually have nothing to play for and are more likely to rest their starters. NE has the undefeated seasons, Brady and Moss's records, etc. NE will, my wag, play their starters through the first half. Enough to win the game and get Brady his TD record.

Plus, the Pats have that first-round bye coming up next week, so everybody will get some rest whether they play this game or not. The Giants have to make sure they're ready to play next weekend in ... Tampa, right?

[Ellis Dee]

Well as far as effort goes, the Giants were jacked up. They also played at warp speed against the Billies last week, so at least that's something for Giants fans to hang their hats on for the road trip to Tampa next week.

Giants boards unsurprisingly show several threads on the main page blaming Eli for the loss. It's a real think-tank over there.

Hopefully O'Hara comes back next week. As far as Mitchell goes, I'm a big fan of Gerris Wilkinson.

[Xema]

...look for the Pats to win by 3 points in the final seconds of the game...
Got the margin of victory right. Gotta give Eli and the Giants credit for making the game a lot closer than many predicted.

Remarkable season by the Pats. But they were a lot less dominating in the second half than in the first: 8 straight wins by 17 or more, then 5 close games (3 against weak teams) to go with 3 big wins. They will no doubt be talking about the need to improve for playoff success, and they may be right.

[Omniscient]

Giants boards unsurprisingly show several threads on the main page blaming Eli for the loss. It's a real think-tank over there.
Wow, I can't fathom how they could come to that conclusion. Eli took a couple of bad sacks and fumbled a snap at the wrong time, but on balance he had a great game. He was dead even with Brady for about 3 quarters. The Giants lost because Jacobs is a fat turd and the secondary couldn't have covered me.

[VarlosZ]

The Giants lost because Jacobs is a fat turd and the secondary couldn't have covered me.
Gotta disagree on both counts, especially the first. Jacobs is very fast for a guy his size. When healthy, he's an awesome player. Ok, he can't catch the ball, but other than that he's terrific. Even tonight, against a very good Patriots defense that was keying somewhat on the run, he managed a respectable 15/67/4.5, and his TD pass was the result of hard work and quickness on his part.

The secondary wasn't (and isn't) particularly good, but tonight they were facing arguably the best offense in NFL history. Given that fact, their performance this week was a lot closer to "average" than "bad."

[Nuveena]

Cleveland is in a bit of an odd position. They not only haven't clinched a playoff birth, but their fate is completely out of their hands. They are in with a Titans loss, stay home with a Titans win. (And the Titans play after the Browns.) It doesn't matter either way if the Browns actually lose to the 49ers.
I've never really followed the playoffs before so I don't get this. If they both win, the Titans are in; if they both lose, the Browns are in. Can someone explain why that is?

[ElvisL1ves]

Jacobs is very fast for a guy his size. When healthy, he's an awesome player. How about after he's had a poke in the eye? ;)

[SCSimmons]

I've never really followed the playoffs before so I don't get this. If they both win, the Titans are in; if they both lose, the Browns are in. Can someone explain why that is?
The second tiebreaker rule (after head-to-head, which doesn't come into play because the Titans and Browns didn't play each other) is conference record. The Browns have already finished their conference play at 3-3. The Titans are 2-3 in their division right now; if they lose to the Colts today, their final division record will be 2-4, and a losing Browns team will still own that tiebreaker. If both teams win, then they will both have 3-3 conference records, and the tiebreaker goes to the third level, record against common opponents, which the Titans already own (4-1 vs 3-2).

[Petey]

The second tiebreaker rule (after head-to-head, which doesn't come into play because the Titans and Browns didn't play each other) is conference record. The Browns have already finished their conference play at 3-3. The Titans are 2-3 in their division right now; if they lose to the Colts today, their final division record will be 2-4, and a losing Browns team will still own that tiebreaker. If both teams win, then they will both have 3-3 conference records, and the tiebreaker goes to the third level, record against common opponents, which the Titans already own (4-1 vs 3-2).

Nitpick: You listed the division records. Cleveland's conference record is 7-5. Tennessee's is 6-5.

I believe the rest of your post is correct.

[Omniscient]

Jacobs is very fast for a guy his size. When healthy, he's an awesome player. Ok, he can't catch the ball, but other than that he's terrific. Even tonight, against a very good Patriots defense that was keying somewhat on the run, he managed a respectable 15/67/4.5, and his TD pass was the result of hard work and quickness on his part.

He might be very fast for his size, but that's just not fast enough. He couldn't get through any of those holes and his feet looked like blocks of concrete. He was always getting tackled from behind in the hole and was zero threat to make the corner. His YPC numbers are a testament to how well the Giants line handled the point of attack, but Jacobs isn't quick enough to be an every down back. The fact that he quit at the end of several runs doesn't bode well either.

[SenorBeef]

Harrison is out tonight. No Harrison = not much Manning.

JIM SORGI IT'S YOUR TIME TO SHINE.

[VarlosZ]

[Jacobs] might be very fast for his size, but that's just not fast enough. He couldn't get through any of those holes and his feet looked like blocks of concrete. He was always getting tackled from behind in the hole and was zero threat to make the corner. His YPC numbers are a testament to how well the Giants line handled the point of attack, but Jacobs isn't quick enough to be an every down back. The fact that he quit at the end of several runs doesn't bode well either.
I think you're simply wrong. Maybe what you call "getting tackled from behind in the hole" is what I call "getting hit by two or three defenders at the line of scrimmage." I watch this guy every week, and I promise you that speed isn't Jacobs' problem; he routinely outruns Cornerbacks and Safeties when he gets into the open. His problems are injuries and being one of the worst pass-catchings RBs in the league, but when it comes to running the football, he has been every bit as good as Tiki Barber was, and the numbers bear that out.

[SCSimmons]

Nitpick: You listed the division records. Cleveland's conference record is 7-5. Tennessee's is 6-5.

I believe the rest of your post is correct.

Counter nit-pick: I just mis-typed. The second tie-break is the division record. I posted the right records, I just called them by the wrong name. (I do that all the time--the Cowboys were the NFC East Conference champs, right? :smack: )

Conference record comes fourth, after record against common opponents, and will not be relevant to the Titans/Browns comparison.

[RickJay]

I'm coming out with a wild and crazy prediction: the Patriots are going to roll to three straight wins and hoist the Lombardi trophy come the first week in February.

I see no surprises coming, and the only thing left to be decided is who they're going to beat.

[Omniscient]

I think you're simply wrong. Maybe what you call "getting tackled from behind in the hole" is what I call "getting hit by two or three defenders at the line of scrimmage." I watch this guy every week, and I promise you that speed isn't Jacobs' problem; he routinely outruns Cornerbacks and Safeties when he gets into the open. His problems are injuries and being one of the worst pass-catchings RBs in the league, but when it comes to running the football, he has been every bit as good as Tiki Barber was, and the numbers bear that out.
I'll give you that speed may not be the key issue, he's a long strider and can get moving, but his acceleration and quickness are lacking. His size lets him carry tacklers and fall forward to move the chains, but I maintain that against fast pursuing defenses he's a liability. Too many 10-12 yard carries turn into 5-6 yard carries with him. The counter-point to that is that 0-1 yard carries become 3-4 carries, which is valuable, but he has a little bit of Cedric Benson in him.

[Xema]

So 'Skins and Titans are in. Browns are the only NFL team with a winning record that fails to make the playoffs.

[Skammer]

Is division record a tiebreaker for teams that are not in the same division? That doesn't make sense. The Titans, for example, played in a much tougher division than the Browns did this year.

[Soapbox Monkey]

Is division record a tiebreaker for teams that are not in the same division? That doesn't make sense. The Titans, for example, played in a much tougher division than the Browns did this year.

For teams in different divisions, the tiebreakers are as followed:

1) Head-to-head
2) Conference record
3) Common games
4) Division record


So the division records only come into the equation if the two teams had identical results for the games they had in common.

[SenorBeef]

So 'Skins and Titans are in. Browns are the only NFL team with a winning record that fails to make the playoffs.

Yipee.


The Browns had their chance and blew it, but it's not as if the Titans deserved it more. They got thrashed 35-6 or something by the Cinci team that took the Browns destiny out of their hands, and then they didn't really have to earn it - they had to beat 2nd and 3rd stringers who were going through the motions.

The Colts had no real obligation to try to win that game (tell that to the thousands of people in the stadium that paid to watch a football game, though - any chance they get a refund because they saw a scrimmage?) but it wouldn't have been very risky to put Manning back in for that last drive, finish the season on a high note, win one for the fans, and build some momentum. Or use their last time out, for that matter. Oh well. Normally I like the Colts, but this year I'm hoping this comes back to bite them in the ass. Maybe resting starters too much, or ending the season on a downer, or something... ideally Tennessee would knock them out of the playoffs but that's a very unlikely scenario.

Unfortunately that was the best chance of the Browns to have success. Next year will see a regression as Romeo is still one of the worst head coaches in the league. He succeeded this year primarily be being carried by the surprising offense - one that was only successful because he was made a lame duck and taken out of the picture on offense. But it won't be a surprise next year, other teams will be better able to counter it, and it appears to be a harder schedule.

[Hentor the Barbarian]

The Browns had their chance and blew it, but it's not as if the Titans deserved it more.Nor any less.

[SenorBeef]

Nor any less.

The Titans went 9-6 in real football games, the Browns went 10-6.

And it's not even sitting the starters that bothers me that much. The Colts didn't seem to care about winning. If their backups gave it their best and failed - well I'd still be annoyed, but not quite so much. But look at the long Bironas FG for example - they didn't even try to block it. No edge rushers, no push up the middle, the FG blocking unit basically just stood there at the snap. A lot of the playcalling (and quality of play from the starters) just indicated they were going through the motions. No time out called at the end - I forget the exact situation but IIRC couldn't they have gotten the ball back with a bit of time? Maybe I'm wrong on that.

It's not Tennesee's fault that they didn't get to play their 16th football game, but that's the way it went down. And even then, they only squeaked out a 6 point win over a team that wasn't even trying, after squeaking out a 4 point win from a pathetic team that imploded, after getting thrashed by the same team that ended up killing Cleveland's playoff chances.

Edit: Their starters besides Bob Sanders only played hard in order to pad their stats. Ooooh, let's force feed the ball until we get the stat totals we want, and then quit.

[Boozahol Squid, P.I.]

Something smelled wrong about the game. Reggie Wayne picking up 12! receptions on the first drive, and Manning hitting the 4000 yard mark unscathed, and then the Colts shutting down entirely?

Meh, I'm just filled with hate for the world right now. I'll definitely be rooting for San Diego in the first round of the playoffs.

[VarlosZ]

I'll give you that speed may not be the key issue, he's a long strider and can get moving, but his acceleration and quickness are lacking. His size lets him carry tacklers and fall forward to move the chains, but I maintain that against fast pursuing defenses he's a liability. Too many 10-12 yard carries turn into 5-6 yard carries with him. The counter-point to that is that 0-1 yard carries become 3-4 carries, which is valuable, but he has a little bit of Cedric Benson in him.
Yeah, I'll certainly grant that, although he is a fast RB, it takes Jacobs a little time to get up to full speed, and that naturally impedes his ability to get to certain holes. However, I think there's a misperception among people who only know about him in passing that he's a traditional big power back. Yes he uses his size to get a couple of extra yards against most tackles or push the pile, but he's also agile to make some tacklers miss, and fast enough that only rarely will even a cornerback be able to chase him down from behind.

As a fan of his I might be biased, but I think that as a runner, Jacobs is one of the best in the league, when healthy.

[Trunk]

Browns - Titans. . .sort of a toss up for me.

Titans benefitted from the Colts situations, but if Albert Haynesworth stays healthy all season, the Titans are in easy. So, as a full team, the Titans are definitely a playoff team.

Still, Cleveland really got going offensively. I don't think they'll fall off much next year. They have a great foundation for an O-line, great tight end, great receiver. I don't know if they'll be able to count on Jamal too much next year, but their defense seemed to figure out how to play well late in the season.

I don't consider the Pats a lock at all right now. Jags, SD, and Indy all finished the season playing at least as well as the Pats.

A bad weather game in New England could really hurt them against the Jags if it comes to that.

Teams really were putting up a lot of points on the Pats late in the year (Giants, Ravens and Philadelphia all moved the ball against them).

Anyway. . .great playoff line up. Seriously. Dallas, Green Bay, New England, Pittsburgh and Indy.

On top of that, you have Holmgren and Seattle, Gibbs and Washington.

Star power in Vince Young and LT-2.

You got a New York team in there.

Except for maybe finding a way to put in Chicago, I can't imagine what else the league could have hoped for.

[Ellis Dee]

Counter nit-pick: I just mis-typed. The second tie-break is the division record.Only if they're in the same division, which the Titans and Browns are not.For teams in different divisions, the tiebreakers are as followed:

1) Head-to-head
2) Conference record
3) Common games
4) Division record


So the division records only come into the equation if the two teams had identical results for the games they had in common.Not sure where you got that info, but it's wrong. Division records play no part in tiebreaking (http://www.nfl.com/standings/tiebreakingprocedures) teams from different divisions: Head-to-head, if applicable.
Best won-lost-tied percentage in games played within the conference.
Best won-lost-tied percentage in common games, minimum of four.
Strength of victory.
Strength of schedule.
Best combined ranking among conference teams in points scored and points allowed.
Best combined ranking among all teams in points scored and points allowed.
Best net points in conference games.
Best net points in all games.
Best net touchdowns in all games.
Coin toss.For anyone who might not know:

The rankings in 6 & 7 would go like: "3rd in points scored & 9th in points allowed for a total of 12, versus 5th in points scored and 7th in points allowed for a total of 12, so tied and move on to the next tiebreaker."

And step 3 is the same as 4 except you only count the wins.

[Ellis Dee]

The Browns had their chance and blew it, but it's not as if the Titans deserved it more. [...] The Titans went 9-6 in real football games, the Browns went 10-6.I'm going to disagree, though I completely agree with everything you wrote about the Colts. (While I don't hope that their pussy tactics backfire -- because I don't care -- I predict that it will.)

If you want to get into "real" football games, the Titans' divisional games were way tougher than the Brownies'. Based on that I think they deserve it more, having had a much tougher row to hoe.

[Ellis Dee]

His problems are injuries and being one of the worst pass-catchings RBs in the league, but when it comes to running the football, he has been every bit as good as Tiki Barber was, and the numbers bear that out.While he sucks at pass catching, one nice thing is that he's a solid pass blocker. (For whatever that's worth.) I'm not sure how much I want to kill him for his dropped passes anyway. The Giants lead the league in dropped passes, and Toomer leads the team. WTF? I'm guessing that they'll address that in the offseason and assuming it gets corrected for the team, it'll get corrected for Jacobs as well. Hopefully, at least. Unlike Toomer, Jacobs has never had good hands, but here's hoping.

As for your comparison to Tiki, I would have agreed with you except that I've been transferring over my tapes of the second half of 2006 this week. Tiki ran about a bajillion times better than Jacobs. Don't get me wrong; I agree that Jacobs runs well, but holy friggin' shit Tiki was just on another level. His fluid style, deliberative starts, deceptive power and surgical cutbacks combined to make him a true phenomenon.

Jacobs isn't anywhere on that level, and that's not even taking into consideration the fact that Tiki was apparently invulnerable, leading the team in rushing for something like 80+ straight games. 80! That sounds like a QB starting streak, not a RB getting the most yards streak. Look at last week, when Bradshaw outrushed Jacobs due in large part to a big gainer. For every game the Giants played from like 2001 to 2006, Tiki Barber had the most rushing yards on the team.

The craziest thing? In the game I just finished transferring -- against the Bucs -- Tiki got hit behind the line and carried a LB on his back for 5 yards, just barely converting a 3rd down. That's something I don't see Jacobs doing. Sure, he'll bowl the occasional safety over, but Tiki would actually carry linebackers. I have yet to see Jacobs carry anybody, ever. He's like the anti-weeble-wobble.

Don't get me wrong, though. I'm a big fan of Jacobs, and would like to see him as the starter for the next four years. I'm just saying he doesn't belong in the same sentence as Tiki Barber, who was a truly transcendent back.

[RTFirefly]

My Redskins are in, thanks to their victory over the Whiny Cowgirls (Terry Glenn (http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/12/31/sports/FBN-Cowboys-T.O..php): "I think they were trying to hurt me"), though I hardly think the Cowboys who show up for the second round of the playoffs in two weeks will closely resemble the uninterested team that played at FedEx Field yesterday.

Factoid: today is the 35th anniversary of the Redskins' beating the Cowboys, 26-3, in the NFC championship game on the way to Super Bowl 7, which didn't go quite as well. (As someone said to me afterwards, with absolutely no trace of irony, "You can't win 'em all.")

[SenorBeef]

I'm going to disagree, though I completely agree with everything you wrote about the Colts. (While I don't hope that their pussy tactics backfire -- because I don't care -- I predict that it will.)

If you want to get into "real" football games, the Titans' divisional games were way tougher than the Brownies'. Based on that I think they deserve it more, having had a much tougher row to hoe.

Well, that may be true. I meant real in the sense that the other team was doing their best to win, regardless of how good that team was. In all 16 games the Browns faced the challenge of a team trying to win. If, when the Browns held their destiny in their own hands like the Titans did, Cincinatti decided to yank their starters in the mid-2nd quarter, they'd have made the playoffs over the Titans. Or if the Titans happened to reverse the order in which they play the Colts and the Jets - Colts in week 16, Jets in week 17, the Browns would probably make the playoffs. It's a fluke of scheduling and some pussy shit from "we're going to try to win the game" Dungy that the Titans went in. And again, it's not strictly the resting the starters thing, other teams have done that. I'd have been happier if their starters never even took the field, but that their backups actually played to win.

I'm not trying to blame it all that way. I'm extremely dissapointed in how my team played in week 16. Mostly Anderson. Too often one player takes too much blame for a game, but if there was a game you can pretty much pin on a single player, this is it.

Comparing the schedules overall, the Titans didn't really accomplish more than the Browns. Discounting the last Indy game, they played 5 games in the division - the two vs Jacksonville and one vs Indy were legitimately hard, they won both games with Houston but by a smaller margin than the Browns did, got thrashed 35-6 by lowly Bengals, and they got to play Atlanta, Carolina, Kansas City, and a freebie at Indy. Ultimately, if the schedule were a bit different, and they were forced to play all 16 games against teams that were trying, they most likely would've finished 9-7.

Edit: Looks like Billick was fired. :(
What's next? No Boller?

I've seen multiple rumors that Parcells wants Crennel for Miami. If there's any competant coaches who will accept their role as coaches and not GMs to replace him with, I'd be all for it.

[Hal Briston]

I'm hoping the Redskins make just so the entire rest of the NFC East can point at the Eagles and yell "HA-ha!".UPDATE:

Hey Eagles! HA-ha!

[Bearflag70]

I've seen multiple rumors that Parcells wants Crennel for Miami.

How does Parcells / Tuna / Manboobs feel about allowing his next head coach to shop for some of the groceries?

[Soapbox Monkey]

Not sure where you got that info, but it's wrong. Division records play no part in tiebreaking (http://www.nfl.com/standings/tiebreakingprocedures) teams from different divisions: Head-to-head, if applicable.
Best won-lost-tied percentage in games played within the conference.
Best won-lost-tied percentage in common games, minimum of four.
Strength of victory.
Strength of schedule.
Best combined ranking among conference teams in points scored and points allowed.
Best combined ranking among all teams in points scored and points allowed.
Best net points in conference games.
Best net points in all games.
Best net touchdowns in all games.
Coin toss.For anyone who might not know:

The rankings in 6 & 7 would go like: "3rd in points scored & 9th in points allowed for a total of 12, versus 5th in points scored and 7th in points allowed for a total of 12, so tied and move on to the next tiebreaker."

And step 3 is the same as 4 except you only count the wins.

My bad, don't know why I got that wrong considering I was looking at my tiebreaker sheet as I was typing the answer. (Yes, I keep an excel sheet ranking all the teams and keeping track of records, points for, points against, games behind in division/wild-card)

[Xema]

Head-to-head, if applicable.
Best won-lost-tied percentage in games played within the conference.
Best won-lost-tied percentage in common games, minimum of four.
Strength of victory.
Strength of schedule.
Best combined ranking among conference teams in points scored and points allowed.
Best combined ranking among all teams in points scored and points allowed.
Best net points in conference games.
Best net points in all games.
Best net touchdowns in all games.
Coin toss.
What's the deepest into this list it's ever been necessary to go?

[Wee Bairn]

See, Belichicks not an ass for running up the score, he's just ensuring if it ever comes to points scored in the tiebreaker, his team will get in. :) I think points scored should be further up the list as it is in world soccer- it keeps all teams trying to score always, even late in a blowout, which is good for the fans.

[Ellis Dee]

And again, it's not strictly the resting the starters thing, other teams have done that. I'd have been happier if their starters never even took the field, but that their backups actually played to win.Understood and agreed.I think points scored should be further up the list as it is in world soccer- it keeps all teams trying to score always, even late in a blowout, which is good for the fans.I disagree completely. The last thing I want to see in the NFL is the ridiculous, bush-league-style running up the score that is pervasive in college football, which is justified because points play a more important role in tie-breaking.

Speaking of tie-breakers, apparently there was a 3-way tie toward the top of the draft order for next year, and the NFL did not actually have a tie-breaking procedure in place, and so had to make one up on the fly. They were projected to announce the procedure yesterday (Monday.) Anybody hear anything about it?

The ony tiebreaker they had that might apply was for two teams, flip a coin. Since there were three, uh, draw straws? Rock, paper scissors? hehheh.

[Petey]

1. Head-to-head, if applicable.
2. Best won-lost-tied percentage in games played within the conference.
3. Best won-lost-tied percentage in common games, minimum of four.
4. Strength of victory.
5. Strength of schedule.
6. Best combined ranking among conference teams in points scored and points allowed.
7. Best combined ranking among all teams in points scored and points allowed.
8. Best net points in conference games.
9. Best net points in all games.
10. Best net touchdowns in all games.
11. Coin toss.

What's the deepest into this list it's ever been necessary to go?

The tiebreakers have changed over the years. In 1979, Chicago had to win their last game by over 30 points to win a points differential tiebreaker over Washington. I think that was about the 5th tiebreaker.

I think they took out the points differential tiebreaker to discourage blow-outs. But it looks like they modified it with the points ranking tiebreaker.

[Ellis Dee]

#1 AFC South 30-10 (75%)
#2 NFC East 28-12 (70%)
#3 NFC North 23-17 (58%)
#4 AFC North 20-20 (50%)
#5 AFC East 16-24 (40%)
#6 NFC South 15-25 (38%)
#7 NFC West 14-26 (35%)
#7 AFC West 14-26 (35%)

#1 NFC 32-32 (50%)
#1 AFC 32-32 (50%)

Playoff predictions based on these rankings, where coming in second makes you equal to the winner of the division below you, etc...

Wildcard Round
Redskins over Seahawks
Jags over Steelers
Giants over Bucs
Titans over Chargers

Divisional Round
Cowboys over Redskins
Colts over Titans
Giants/Packers (no decision)
Jags over Patriots

Conference Championships
Cowboys over Giants/Packers
Colts over Jags

Superbowl
Colts over Cowboys

[SenorBeef]

Wildcard Round[/u]
Redskins over Seahawks
Jags over Steelers
Giants over Bucs
Titans over Chargers

Divisional Round
Cowboys over Redskins
Colts over Titans
Giants/Packers (no decision)
Jags over Patriots


Unless I'm missing something, if the Jags and Titans won, it'd be Pats/Titans and Colts/Jags in the divisional.

I'd love to see the Titans knock the Colts out, it'd be poetic, but it'd have to wait for the AFC Championship game which is pretty unlikely.

I don't really know who to root for this year. I've mildly liked the Colts for years but I'm not such a big fan now. I'm rooting against the Steelers, of course, and I expect them to be tossed in the first round. Jacksonville is a nice run-and-play-defense team but their fan base is small and fickle - I tend to factor in fan base deservingness into who I root for. New England I'm not too enthusiastic about. I don't have a grudge against the Titans and I vaguely like them, I suppose. Neutral towards SD... I guess my AFC playoff viewing will be based around who I'm rooting against, not rooting for.

The NFC is a little clearer because I've always liked and respected Green Bay's fanbase. They're the only ones I'd put in the same tier of fan devotion as the Browns. Indifferent towards Favre, but I'd like to see that team succeed. Seattle has always been well-represented by classy, knowledgable fans on the various football boards I've browsed, although I don't especially like the team. Giants - meh, NY team. Washington - always found something mildly obnoxious about the team. Same with TB. Oh and of course screw Dallas. I've always disliked them for their institutional arrogance, but this year gave me a more concrete reason to root for their failure - all the fans that taunted us about how the Browns just traded Dallas a top 5 pick in '08 after the draft.

A few weeks ago when SD played TEN I said TEN was the better football team. Looks like the situation has reversed - TEN has been on a steady improvement and SD on a steady decline - although I'll take Fisher over what's-his-generic-journeyman-face. The Haynesworth reinjury is a major factor, but I'm not sure if Vince Young's injury is going to hurt theteam. Still, a home game, the way SD has been playing lately, they'll probably bounce TEN out convincingly. The Browns would've given them a better game - with the warm weather and an aggressive gameplan, we could've seen some of the fireworks from the Browns that we'd seen earlier in the year.

[Ellis Dee]

Unless I'm missing something, if the Jags and Titans won, it'd be Pats/Titans and Colts/Jags in the divisional.
[...]
A few weeks ago when SD played TEN I said TEN was the better football team. Looks like the situation has reversed - TEN has been on a steady improvement and SD on a steady decline - although I'll take Fisher over what's-his-generic-journeyman-face.
[...]
The Browns would've given them a better game - with the warm weather and an aggressive gameplan, we could've seen some of the fireworks from the Browns that we'd seen earlier in the year.You're right about the Jags/Titans. My bad. It doesn't really change anything other than swapping them, though it makes the "Titans over Patriots" pick look extremely unlikely.

I don't understand the middle part from the quote. Did you mix up the teams in one of the sentences?

As for the warm weather in San Diego -- which may be blacked out in the home market since the mouthy whiners don't have any actual fans -- it's supposed to rain. Greeny was goofing on the report this morning that they issued a "winter storm warning" which went on to describe the warned-about conditions as "chilly." 50 degrees and rain; yeah, nice winter storm ya got there. It was FIVE FRIGGIN DEGREES this morning in Connecticut.

[Ellis Dee]

One encouraging sign for the Giants chances against the Bucs is the weather. The San Diego, Pittsburgh and Seattle forecasts all show rain during the games, but in Tampa it's supposed to be a beautiful, dry, and sunny day in the 70s. (1:00pm kickoff)

The Giants have really had to contend with some shit weather for a while now, though the Patriots game was pretty nice. Before that, the two games against the Redskins and Bills were horrendous with the wind and just general shitty weather. How bad were those two games? Here's the combined numbers for just the winning QBs in those two games:

15 of 40 (38%) for 277 yards, 0 TDs 2 Ints, Rating: 41.35

When those are the winning numbers, you know the conditions are fucked. When they finally got some decent weather in that Patriots game, we saw the result. I'm hoping that having a sunny, warm and non-windy game on Sunday will produce a similar offensive performance as we saw last week.

[kidchameleon]

I'm rooting for the Giants and Seahawks, I like Dallas's chances of beating them without Shockey more than the likelyhood of their beating Tampa or Washington.

[RTFirefly]

I'm rooting for the Giants and Seahawks, I like Dallas's chances of beating them without Shockey more than the likelyhood of their beating Tampa or Washington.I see ESPN is saying T.O. will play (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs07/news/story?id=3179101) next weekend.

[RTFirefly]

When they finally got some decent weather in that Patriots game, we saw the result. I'm hoping that having a sunny, warm and non-windy game on Sunday will produce a similar offensive performance as we saw last week.I'd have thought the Giants would have the edge over the Bucs in crappy weather, since they'd be more used to playing in it. You may occasionally get a monsoon in Tampa, but it doesn't get very cold for very long.

[SenorBeef]

I don't understand the middle part from the quote. Did you mix up the teams in one of the sentences?


Ah yes, of course I meant that SD has been improving but Tennessee has been declining.

If it's true about the SD game being a blackout - a 50 degree rainy day (OH MY GOD!!!) keeping SD fans away from the game would indicate to me that they don't deserve a football team, let alone a very successful one.

I should probably just get over this, but from rotoworld (http://www.rotoworld.com/Content/playerpages/player_main.aspx?sport=nfl&line=110857&id=2311)


Kerry Collins, speaking on WFAN, said that the Titans kneeled down at the end of the Colts-Titans game because they knew the Colts wouldn't call a timeout.

Collins said that the Titans originally called a running play, but he was told over his headset that the Colts wouldn't call a timeout to potentially force Tennessee to punt with less than 20 seconds left. Pressed further, Collins said the Colts and Titans coaches had "a communication," which is sure to raise collusion questions. Clearly it would have been a long shot for the Colts to win, but Browns fans won't enjoy hearing this one.


The original version had "an agreement" in place of "a communication", which sounds more damning.

[Hal Briston]

Just so it doesn't get missed by anyone who may be interested, the deadline for entries to the Early Super Bowl Predictions Thread (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=449706) is tomorrow before kickoff off the first game.

[RTFirefly]

The Redskins lost, fair and square. But what was the deal with that kickoff right after they went up 14-13?

I'd always thought a kickoff was a free ball. This kickoff bounced behind the returner, and a Redskin cover man plucked it out of the air and ran it in, seemingly for a TD, but they brought it back to the place where he grabbed the ball.

[Ring]

The Redskins lost, fair and square. But what was the deal with that kickoff right after they went up 14-13?

I'd always thought a kickoff was a free ball. This kickoff bounced behind the returner, and a Redskin cover man plucked it out of the air and ran it in, seemingly for a TD, but they brought it back to the place where he grabbed the ball.

I believe it's called a muff. And you can't advance one of those. Why? I have no idea. I hope somebody knows the rational behind the rule because it's always seemed strange to me also.

[Bearflag70]

A kickoff is a free ball but cannot be ADVANCED by the kicking team. That's why they brought it back.

A punt is a dead ball if recovered by the kicking team.

A muff is essentially treated as a fumble.

[Bearflag70]

In this case, the receiving team did not touch the ball, so it's not a muff. It's just recovery of possession by the kicking team with the ball spotted at the point of possession. If it was a muff, then the kicking team could advance the ball just the same as if the receiving team caught the ball then fumbled it away.

[Bearflag70]

The first play from scrimmage, TEN had its offensive line shift all the way to one sideline, leaving their QB and Center naked in the middle of the field. In response, SD shifted pretty much its entire defense over to line up against the TEN offensive line. You had about 20/22 players way off to one side, well away form the snap.

TEN snapped the ball and appeared to be executing some kind of screen pass behind the O-line. The play failed, incomplete.

1. What's up with that?

2. Should the SD defense have shifted to match up against the TEN O-Line or should they have stayed put to swarm the now-unprotected QB, leaving the TEN O-line way out to one side of the field?

[Darth Sensitive]

Well, the big problem of not shifting is that if the QB is in shotgun, that screen can kill you.

If he gets the pass off (maybe even making sure it's a lateral so it can bounce), the reciever has a bunch of big guys blocking smaller ones down field.

I would have shifted most of mine.

[Bearflag70]

Well, the big problem of not shifting is that if the QB is in shotgun, that screen can kill you.

If he gets the pass off (maybe even making sure it's a lateral so it can bounce), the reciever has a bunch of big guys blocking smaller ones down field.

I would have shifted most of mine.

They should try it again but bootleg the other way

[The Tof]

I think if the Chargers don't shift, and the pass goes off.. it's pretty much a touchdown.

I was thinking it would have been a good idea to shift halfway out to the Titan shift. When the ball is snapped, we could move unabated in front of the Titan shift and pickoff or block the pass.

Whatever.. they only did it once and it didn't work.

I'm ready to take on Indy!

[borschevsky]

I'm happy that my Chargers won, but I think it's a bit funny how people are saying this validates Norv, now that he's won a playoff game where Marty couldn't. That's just because they had a bye last year. Norv has them in a position where they have to win in Indy and in New England to reach the Super Bowl; I hope they can do it. Marty had them in a position where they had to win home games against the same teams, and they couldn't do that.

I'll be cheering for them, but this just strikes me as odd.

[The Tof]

I'm happy that my Chargers won, but I think it's a bit funny how people are saying this validates Norv, now that he's won a playoff game where Marty couldn't. That's just because they had a bye last year. Norv has them in a position where they have to win in Indy and in New England to reach the Super Bowl; I hope they can do it. Marty had them in a position where they had to win home games against the same teams, and they couldn't do that.

I'll be cheering for them, but this just strikes me as odd.

The thing is that Marty was fired for his complete inability to win a playoff game. Since 94's Super Bowl.. we've had a handful of playoff games and never won one. Two games under Marty, but home games with us as favorites... both times our sphincters tightened up and we lost.

Norv has been brutalized all season long... but the playoff win vindicates him in that he has done what he was brought in to do. Win a playoff game. He was calm in the face of adversity, stuck with his plan and got us the win.

[aktep]

I believe it's called a muff. And you can't advance one of those. Why? I have no idea. I hope somebody knows the rational behind the rule because it's always seemed strange to me also.

A muff does not change the status of the ball- it's still a kick, and the kicking team cannot advance a kick. They may recover a kick, and recovery (touching) of any muffed kick is legal.

A.R. 6.8 A receiving team player first touches a free kick after a Try on the kicking team’s 39. The kicking team recovers on its own 38.
Ruling: Kicking team’s ball on its own 38. No foul as the ball was touched first by a
receiving team player. The ball is dead where it is recovered by the kicking team if it is muffed (no possession) by the receiving team.

[RTFirefly]

I believe it's called a muff. And you can't advance one of those. Why? I have no idea. I hope somebody knows the rational behind the rule because it's always seemed strange to me also.I'm glad I'm not the only one; the logic escapes me completely.

On an only mildly related note, I've wondered for some time if it was possible for the kicker, on a kickoff, to get enough loft under the ball so (a) it would only go 30-40 yards forward in the air, but (b) have enough hang time to give the kicking team a chance to get to the ball before it landed?

My WAG is that if it were possible, it would quickly turn into a routine play on kickoffs, so the answer is probably no.

[garygnu]

...On an only mildly related note, I've wondered for some time if it was possible for the kicker, on a kickoff, to get enough loft under the ball so (a) it would only go 30-40 yards forward in the air, but (b) have enough hang time to give the kicking team a chance to get to the ball before it landed?
...
I've seen this tactic used as a surprise on-side kick. I think a similar idea was used in a recent college bowl game to keep the ball away from a dangerous return man, but it also was nearly taken by the kicking team.

I also want to note here that the recieving team can fair catch a kickoff, which I've seen done by astute up-men when faced with this type up short high kickoff.

[aktep]

The kicking team can catch a high kickoff, but only if the receiving team is not in position to catch it.

A.R. 6.9 A kickoff after a Try is caught in the air by a kicking team player on the kicking team’s 41-yard line:
(a) before any touching by the receiving team. A receiving team player could have
caught the ball.
Ruling: Interference with the opportunity to make a catch. 15-yard penalty from spot
of foul, snap only (10-1-4).

NCAA football has a similar rule.

If the ball has hit the ground, it's fair game for anyone. This is one reason that onside kicks are kicked straight down to bounce high, rather than just kicked high and short.



The rationale I was taught that kicks are not advance-able by the kicking team is that stopping the play at the point of recovery then allows it to be sorted out whether the touching was legal or not or whether previously illegal touching occurred. Muffs don't change the status of the ball from kicks to something else because you need possession to change the status (eg, a passed ball must be caught before it stops being a pass (unless it's incomplete, but then the play is over so it doesn't matter)).

[Ellis Dee]

Here's an interesting tidbit about Eli this year courtesy of the giants.com messageboards:Week Opp Comp Att Yards TDs Int
1 Dal 28 41 312 4 1
2 GB 16 29 211 1 1
10 Dal 23 34 236 1 2
17 NE 22 32 251 4 1
WC TB 20 27 185 2 0The Giants played five games against division winners this season, including playoffs. In those five games, Eli's numbers are:

109 of 163 (67%) for 1195 yards, 12 TDs 5 Ints; Passer Rating: 100.12

Given these numbers, it would appear that Eli either a) steps up big in big games, or b) chokes it bigtime in "small" games.

[SenorBeef]

Jacksonville is +13 tomorrow, a higher spread than I expected. I'm thinking about betting it.

The home team in the divisional round is a very strong favorite, historically, both because they're good enough to have locked up a top 2 seed in the first place, and because they've had a week to rest.

But Jacksonville, strangely enough, has been playing better as a cold weather team than New England has. I think NE wins, but I doubt it's by a margin larger than 13. Anyone have any opinions on the bet?

[Enginerd]

Looking at the game in a vacuum, I agree with you - I don't see the Pats covering a 13 point spread against the Jags in January. If I were forced to pick the game, and take the Jags and the points.

That being said, the last thing I'm going to do at any point this season is put money against New England.

[meek]

Jacksonville is +13 tomorrow, a higher spread than I expected. I'm thinking about betting it.......

Anyone have any opinions on the bet?

I was expecting that spread to come in at about +11 or so...

I agree Beef, Pats win, but the Jags make it closer than 13. Fred Taylor will keep Brady off the field. Jags will play possession football.

I also like the under on this one.
.

[Ellis Dee]

I think NE wins, but I doubt it's by a margin larger than 13. Anyone have any opinions on the bet?The only concern I would have is that toward the end of the game last week the Steelers lit up the Jacksonville defense. New England's offense is on another level, so I wouldn't be surprised to see them hang a nickel on the Jags.

[gonzomax]

Green Bay looked real good. I am slightly shocked that they recovered from such an ugly start .
If the Giants beat Dallas they play in G.B.again. Weather could be uglier yet.

[Johnny L.A.]

Well, darn. I'm not a huge football fan, but I wanted to see the Seattle-Green Bay game. Forgot it was on. Checked the listings earlier today and didn't seen anything but the Jaguar-Patriots. And it looked like it was snowing in Green Bay. I like watching snow games. :(

[flickster]

Go Pack Go

now Go Giants.....

I'd love to see the NFC Championship Game in Green Bay

[SenorBeef]

I'm becoming more and more irritated by the commentators' inability to distinguish between an end around, reverse, and double reverse.

Last week, I forget which game, but a team ran an end around. The announcer said "They run an end around.... a reverse...." - at first, after he said "end around", I thought "HEY! THEY GOT IT RIGHT!" and then he said "...reverse" after, as if he were clarifying or they were the same thing. :smack:

Okay. So a few minutes ago in the Patriots/Jaguars game, there was a reverse. I thought to myself "here's your chance to correctly call a reverse, just don't call it a double reverse" and Jim Nantz calls it "an end around to Welker".

:smack:

[aktep]

And it looked like it was snowing in Green Bay. I like watching snow games. :(

It was snowing so hard at one point they couldn't use the normal, default, press box-level camera for an entire Packer's possession. The only cameras used were the over-the field camera and the camera on the truck behind the sideline. It was odd to watch an entire possession from that angle.

[SenorBeef]

I like when they use other cameras. The pressbox camera is way overused and doesn't give a very good view of the field. Ever since they developed high quality sky camera rigs those should've become the default camera view - it's so much better watching the play unfold from behind and above the quarterback. You see almost everything.

[Rysto]

Speak for yourself. On my little 17" screen you can't see anything from that angle.

[Frosted Glass]

Speak for yourself. On my little 17" screen you can't see anything from that angle.

I know the feeling. That is why I will be going to the bar for the Giants-Cowboys game later. I am just hoping that Eli can keep up his mini-streak of playing very well behind center.

[N9IWP]

Woot! go Giants! (I'm a Packer Fan). Sure the Giants are a much better team than in week 2, but so are the Packers. Much better chance to win against the Giants at Lambeau than vs Dallas in Texas.

Brian

[Darth Sensitive]

I like the flying cam for replays. It's very good for that. But I can't stand watching things happen through it on the first run through.

[Rysto]

Two outdoor games, potentially in the snow, for the conference championships? Awesome.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

I'm disappointed that the Cowboys laid an egg today. That means we'll probably have to endure the Packers in the Superbowl. Let the Favre cocksucking begin. America's only speck hope for a Favre-free Superbowl rests on the fact that Favre is a world class choke artist who has a great chance of pissing down his leg against the Giants.

Even if he makes, there is still the comfort of knowing the Packers wil get raped and sodomized by the patriots. The game will be over after the 1st quarter.

[ZebraShaSha]

I'm disappointed that the Cowboys laid an egg today. That means we'll probably have to endure the Packers in the Superbowl. Let the Favre cocksucking begin. America's only speck hope for a Favre-free Superbowl rests on the fact that Favre is a world class choke artist who has a great chance of pissing down his leg against the Giants.

Even if he makes, there is still the comfort of knowing the Packers wil get raped and sodomized by the patriots. The game will be over after the 1st quarter.

Brett Favre and Tom Brady, in the Super Bowl, would be enough for me to not turn on my TV for the next few months.

[kidchameleon]

I'm disappointed that the Cowboys laid an egg today. That means we'll probably have to endure the Packers in the Superbowl. Let the Favre cocksucking begin. America's only speck hope for a Favre-free Superbowl rests on the fact that Favre is a world class choke artist who has a great chance of pissing down his leg against the Giants.

Even if he makes, there is still the comfort of knowing the Packers wil get raped and sodomized by the patriots. The game will be over after the 1st quarter.

I dunno, Dio, this might be the year you want to root for the Pack. Surely Favre couldn't resist going out in a blaze of glory, you'd be rid of him forever.

Stupid Cowboys, why can't you guys knock it off with all these penalties?

[flickster]

Loved the expression on Jerry Jones' face at the end of the game :p

[drm]

Loved the expression on Jerry Jones' face at the end of the game :p

Me too.

It pretty much made up for the otherwise brutal weekend I've had.

[FoieGrasIsEvil]

So nobody is giving the Bolts any credit for ditching the Colts? I think San Diego can actually beat the Patriots, and I hope that happens, because then at least the Superbowl will be interesting rather than the Pats blowing out the NFC team.

[Ellis Dee]

Loved the expression on Jerry Jones' face at the end of the game Even better was TO crying at the post-game press conference. (EDIT: Some guy from the giants.com boards just posted this youtube video (http://youtube.com/watch?v=LSh8kRZEBUQ) of it.)

Such a great ending to that game. During the last four or five Cowboys plays, I was so tense I couldn't sit still. I actually had to stand up and rock back and forth. Exquisite torture.

As Rich Eisen said, Eli is the last Manning standing. A stat I find interesting is the post-season passer rating differential. Think of it like a measure of "clutch" for QBs. You take their career post-season passer rating and subtract their regular season passer rating. A negative number means they choke in the clutch, while a positive number means they step up.

Peyton Manning: -10.3
Eli Manning: +14.9

I find the differential even more interesting than the fact that Eli (88.3) has a better straight-up playoff passer rating than Peyton (84.1).

Artie Lang had a great (funny) line about Eli: "the Giants really got the Gummo Marx of that family." I laughed out loud when I heard it, but Eli is making him eat his words.

Go Giants!

[DSYoungEsq]

I'm disappointed that the Cowboys laid an egg today. That means we'll probably have to endure the Packers in the Superbowl. Let the Favre cocksucking begin. America's only speck hope for a Favre-free Superbowl rests on the fact that Favre is a world class choke artist who has a great chance of pissing down his leg against the Giants.

Even if he makes, there is still the comfort of knowing the Packers wil get raped and sodomized by the patriots. The game will be over after the 1st quarter.
Wow, such vitriol. The guy just likes playing football. And for this you get THAT resentful? :eek:

I'm having to eat words this season, and loving it. I wanted Favre to quit instead of coming back. His last few seasons have been anything but enjoyable; too many interceptions, too many bad decisions, too much trying to do it all himself. But he really has managed to get back the approach he had during his glory years of the mid-90s. Interceptions down, bad choices limited, good throws when really needed. Very few quarterbacks, even in the NFL, would have managed that underhand flip in the first half; most would have been sacked, or fallen, or tried to continue running.

If the Giants play like they did tonight against the Packers, they will be going home. The defense wasn't bad, but it wasn't great, either, and Favre isn't Romo.

Fun to watch the Cowboys suffer from having someone not quite good enough. Makes up for all those years of Staubach and Aikman and all the others... :D

[Xema]

Is it significant that all of the teams who coasted at the end of the regular season are now eliminated?

It's hard to argue with the logic of resting your starters in a meaningless final game, but it doesn't really feel right. I like the idea that today's result was the Giant's reward for playing a tough game against the Pats, when they didn't have to.

[Rysto]

Is it significant that all of the teams who coasted at the end of the regular season are now eliminated?
This could just be selection bias on my part but this seems to happen a lot. The only thing I can figure is that timing is so important in football, and losing even a little bit of your edge can prove fatal in the playoffs.

[Khadaji]

I was happy to see the Pack win and happy to see the Cowboys lose. That only means that someone needs to be The Pats to make me really happy!

[Xema]

... someone needs to be The Pats
Presumably a New England fan who's into Zen meditation.

[Khadaji]

Presumably a New England fan who's into Zen meditation.
lol. Well, of course, I meant beat the Pats...

[Hal Briston]

I'm so damn torn...while I have no great love for the Pats, I do respect their accomplishments. However, I loate the Chargers, all they stand for, and every one of their indifferent, crybaby fans.

Now, the Giants making the Super Bowl is now a foregone conclusion in my book, so it's time to figure out who my beloved Big Blue gets to take on in Glendale.

That said, I'll be cheering San D like a mofo next weekend. The prospect of having a stadium filled to the rafters with Giants fans is too perfect. After all, Glendale is a good 350 miles from San Diego -- who could blame Chargers "fans" for not wanting to make such a long, arduous trek just for a football game?

Since the Pats have developed a fan base in the past few years, a New England win would mean less seats for Giants fans -- Go Chargers!!

[Hamlet]

Even better was TO crying at the post-game press conference. (EDIT: Some guy from the giants.com boards just posted this youtube video (http://youtube.com/watch?v=LSh8kRZEBUQ) of it.)I hate TO a ton, and enjoy watching him lose at every opportunity. But the guys who taped that make Giant's fans sound like douchebags.

Go Giants!Go Pack!

I was actually hoping for another shot against Dallas, rather than having to beat the Giants... AGAIN, but I'll take the easier win at home. I think the Packers take it by 10.

As for the AFC, it's now down to two teams I absolutely abhor. Hate the Patriots. I used to like the Chargers, but with Merriman's drug use and mouth, and LT's whining, I'm destined to have a team I hate playing the Pack in the Super Bowl. Which makes it all the nicer.

[Gangster Octopus]

Now, the Giants making the Super Bowl is now a foregone conclusion in my book,

So you enjoy fiction.

Go Pack!

[RogueRacer]

Wow, such vitriol. The guy just likes playing football. And for this you get THAT resentful? :eek: You just have to remember where DtC is coming from. It seems he pisses purple and gold. The never ending ways that his team finds to disappoint makes him bitter.

[MovieMogul]

However, I loate the Chargers, all they stand for, and every one of their indifferent, crybaby fans. :confused:

[Lord Ashtar]

Wow, such vitriol. The guy just likes playing football. And for this you get THAT resentful? :eek:
[Tony Kornheiser]

Brett Favre doesn't just like playing football, he loves it. Did you see how much fun he was having out there? It's like he was playing in his backyard, throwing the ol' pigskin around with his friends just for the love of the game. He was just like a little kid, having a blast. Seriously, who else has that much fun out there?

[/TK]

[D_Odds]

Now, the GIANTS making the Super Bowl is now a foregone conclusion in my book...Sir, I like the way you think. Have you booked your non-refundable flight yet?

[Cheesesteak]

I was actually hoping for another shot against Dallas, rather than having to beat the Giants... AGAIN, but I'll take the easier win at home. I think the Packers take it by 10.You do realize that Dallas beat the Giants at home, AND away this year, and still lost.

[Xema]

the Giants making the Super Bowl is now a foregone conclusion in my book
I'd like to hear how you work that out. I give them a decent chance, but it's hard to see how the Packers in Green Bay will be an easy win. While the Giants performed well against the Cowboys, they didn't actually stomp them.

[borschevsky]

I loate the Chargers, all they stand for, and every one of their indifferent, crybaby fans.Even me? The hell you say! :)

[robby]

I thought that the Chargers-Colts game was just great, watching the two teams absolutely destroy each other. The Chargers should be in great shape to get killed by the Patriots next week. :D Kind of the reverse from last year, when the Pats had nothing left for the Colts after narrowly beating the Chargers in the Divisional round. I wonder if Rivers and LT are going to be in shape to play next week?

Then on to the Super Bowl. I hope the Giants beat the Packers and make it to Arizona in February, because the only thing better than another Manning going down in flames is a New York team going down. :D

GO PATS!

[DSYoungEsq]

You just have to remember where DtC is coming from. It seems he pisses purple and gold. The never ending ways that his team finds to disappoint makes him bitter.
Yes, well, I have to admit that, in the '70s, I couldn't STAND Fran Tarkenton, for much the same (if mirrored) reason. :D

[hekk]

Very few quarterbacks, even in the NFL, would have managed that underhand flip in the first half; most would have been sacked, or fallen, or tried to continue running.

Youtube (http://youtube.com/watch?v=5mnVbKxLnGc) link of this pass. Makes me smile.

[FoieGrasIsEvil]

I'm rooting for Favre. I'm not a Packers fan, but to me it's hard to root against a guy like Brett, especially with the almost Cinderalla-ish quality the Pack has had this season.
The guy is a player and is tough, and a good leader to boot. I admire his accomplishments and fail to understand how any fan of the game of pro football could really HATE him, regardless of which team you root for. I have the same respect for other players as well, Brady, Manning, etc.
Although I have to admit as much as the Pats have been a model of winning (keep the cheating shots to yourself, ALL teams do that shit), I hope the lose this year. I am tired of their success.

[FoieGrasIsEvil]

I'm rooting for Favre. I'm not a Packers fan, but to me it's hard to root against a guy like Brett, especially with the almost Cinderalla-ish quality the Pack has had this season.
The guy is a player and is tough, and a good leader to boot. I admire his accomplishments and fail to understand how any fan of the game of pro football could really HATE him, regardless of which team you root for. I have the same respect for other players as well, Brady, Manning, etc.
Although I have to admit as much as the Pats have been a model of winning (keep the cheating shots to yourself, ALL teams do that shit), I hope the lose this year. I am tired of their success.

[SenorBeef]

Hahaha! I hope it was worthwhile, Colts, that you were getting Manning and Wayne their records instead of practicing realistic game scenarios and keeping sharp.

It's not proof yet, but every year Indy has rested starters going in, they've been booted early. When they won the superbowl last year they played their last game for real.

No way SD should've beat the Colts at home, after a bye, with Tomlinson and Rivers missing half the game, and the refs trying to give the Colts the game. (Some of the calls were ridiculous - total phantom hold on the game-changing interception return before halftime, a big pass interference call when no one even touched or came near touching the receiver, other smaller ones I can't remember).

I wonder wtf happened there.

Not that I feel too good about SD winning. Their fans are among the least deserving of the NFL of success and they're spoiled by having one of the most talented teams. Of course the same is true for the Colts, so it was a no win situation on that issue.

It's interesting to see how it's shaking out with teams that half-assed their last week. I wonder if this will change how teams approach week 17.

I have to give credit to the Giants - they gave their all in a game they could've half-assed in week 17, and they've come further than I ever expected.

I wonder if the psychological aspects of momentum and general "sharpness" levels really affect teams that significantly. I'd be interested in seeing a historical analysis rather than the results of one year.

[Xema]

I'd be interested in seeing a historical analysis rather than the results of one year.
CHFF has a discussion of this (http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Articles/11_2068_The_mail-it-in_effect%3A_fact_or_fiction%3F.html). They conclude that "mailing it in" looks to be a bad bet, but the difference it makes isn't statistically significant.

[Quercus]

Since I live in New England, I naturally want to have the team I've been watching all year go to the TremendousBowl, but there is a part of me that wanted to have Farve vs. (Peyton) Manning, just to watch the poor referees trying to decide who was supposed to get the PI calls all game. Based on the season so far, I assume it would still have been the Colts, but the league would also certainly love to see the about-to-retire consensus nicest-guy-in-the-game win his last one.

[Frosted Glass]

Go Pack!

I was actually hoping for another shot against Dallas, rather than having to beat the Giants... AGAIN, but I'll take the easier win at home. I think the Packers take it by 10.


The Giants are on the express train to Arizona. I have nothing against Favre but I will not shed a tear when the Pack loses. The way I see it, their chances are a hell of a lot better away than at home.

[Hal Briston]

Full agreement, FG. Weatherman might predict a cold day at Lambeau, but the Giants are so fricking hot right now that those cheeseheads are gonna get sunburn.

The pass rush is going to be so brutal on Favre that he's going to announce his retirement at halftime.

Ryan Grant might be putting up good numbers, but let's not forget that the only reason he's even in Green Bay is because the Giants' practice squad was tired of stopping him behind the line -- they needed more of a challenge!

The only two players I have a concern about -- Al Harris, who is always a threat to pick off even a perfectly placed pass; and Aaron Rodgers, since he'll be an unknown factor in the second half.

[Sal Ammoniac]

The Giants are on the express train to Arizona. I have nothing against Favre but I will not shed a tear when the Pack loses. The way I see it, their chances are a hell of a lot better away than at home.
Me, too. I'm giving this one to the Giants. The Packers look a lot weaker to me than their record indicates. They did beat the Giants early in the season, but the Giants have come on strong lately, and Manning has impressed me a lot, contrary to my expectations.

[ShadowFacts]

No way SD should've beat the Colts at home, after a bye, with Tomlinson and Rivers missing half the game, and the refs trying to give the Colts the game. (Some of the calls were ridiculous - total phantom hold on the game-changing interception return before halftime, a big pass interference call when no one even touched or came near touching the receiver, other smaller ones I can't remember).
.

Agreed on both counts. SD showed a lot of heart and grit [cliche alert!] in the second half. It blows my mind they pulled it out with Billy Volek. Turner and Sproles doing well is much less of a surprise, since we've seen it before, but Volek?!?

And that holding call on the interception! It's tough when the other guy throws you to the ground and YOU get called for the hold. Now that's quality officiating! :smack:

[RogueRacer]

To all of you giving the NFC game to the Giants, think about a few things. You think the G-Men are hot? GB scored TDs on 6 consecutive drives last week. That's pretty damned hot. Wasn't Seattle supposed to have a good pass rush?

It was very early in the season when GB beat the Giants, but do you remember late November? Does 17-41 remind you of anything? That's when another NFC North team came into your house and put a beating on you. (Yes, it pains me to use them for an example.)

There's a reason why they actually lace them up on Sunday. There's 4 quarters of football left to play.

[Wakinyan]

Full agreement, FG. Weatherman might predict a cold day at Lambeau, but the Giants are so fricking hot right now that those cheeseheads are gonna get sunburn. The pass rush is going to be so brutal on Favre that he's going to announce his retirement at halftime.
You putting some money on Green Bay, eh?

Seriously though, dopers, tell this European what's wrong with the Chargers fans.

[gazpacho]

You putting some money on Green Bay, eh?

Seriously though, dopers, tell this European what's wrong with the Chargers fans.I suspect that San Diego fans are viewed as fair weather fans. Which is only natural living in San Diego.

[Ellis Dee]

Ryan Grant might be putting up good numbers, but let's not forget that the only reason he's even in Green Bay is because the Giants' practice squad was tired of stopping him behind the line -- they needed more of a challenge!Nice spin, but that's simply not the case.

The problem with Grant, and the reason he was traded away after being on the practice squad last year is that he's a true franchise back. As in, all he can do is play running back. The Giants needed more versatility out of their RB depth, namely on special teams. Derrick Ward returns kicks. Reuben Droughns returns kicks. Ahmad Bradshaw returns and covers kicks.

Ryan Grant isn't a special teamer; he's just a running back. So even if they thought Grant was marginally better than Ward or Bradshaw, he had to go because roster spots are too precious to keep a backup RB who doesn't do anything else.

One thing I can't complain about when it comes to the Giants scouts is their eye for RB and DE talent. I swear, it seems like quality RBs and DEs grow on trees out in East Rutherford. (Unless your jerseys are green, of course.)

[blondebear]

I suspect that San Diego fans are viewed as fair weather fans. Which is only natural living in San Diego.San Diego native here. Two words: Ryan Leaf.

Now, don't get me wrong. I learned about football watching Hadl and Bambi.I stuck with them through all the Muncie fumbles. Leaf was the last straw for me, though. I decided to shop around for a new team. I chose the Pats. How serendipitous!

[SenorBeef]

This doesn't relate to the playoffs, but I felt the need to bitch. It looks like they're going to sign Romeo Crennel to a contract extension.

If you just look at the surface, it almost seems reasonable. A 4-12 team becomes a 10-6 team, quite a turnaround.

Except... if you know more about it, you realize that the main reason it was a 4-12 last team last year was Romeo, and the main reason it's a 10-6 team this year is because Romeo controlled less.

Romeo F'd up the Carthon/offense situation so badly in his first 2 years that the GM had to come in and make him a lame duck, hire his own OC, and give him the offense. Then, the next year, the offense carries the team - the offense that Crennel is largely uninvolved with and that was MUCH worse when Crennel's guy was in charge. On the other hand, Crennel's defense got worse most of the year.

So the area of the team Crennel had less control over was suddenly surprisingly successful. Result? Everyone is praising Crennel, when it should be the opposite - they should be realizing how much his incompetance was setting it back before.

He's got 2 years on his contract, anyway. How often do you extend with 2 years left? Not often. Has Crennel done something special to deserve an early extension? Absolutely not. Give him another year, see if the team continues to improve, and then extend him if you have to.

This is obnoxious.

[SenorBeef]

San Diego native here. Two words: Ryan Leaf.

Now, don't get me wrong. I learned about football watching Hadl and Bambi.I stuck with them through all the Muncie fumbles. Leaf was the last straw for me, though. I decided to shop around for a new team. I chose the Pats. How serendipitous!

Actually, this poster did a good job of answering your question, unintentionally.

Their team had some unsuccessful years capped off with drafting a bust with a high pick, so they gave up their fandom entirely, found a successful team to latch onto.

I wouldn't be surprised if he/she now wears a Tomlinson jersey and claims to have been there all along.


San Diego is full of fans who support the team when it's fashionable - and then, barely. Wasn't there some question as to whether or not the playoff game would be sold out? It's a relatively affluent, warm weather area, and if their team starts to perform badly you still won't be able to find people to attend the games.

Compare it to a city like Green Bay or Cleveland. Both of those teams will not only fill their stadiums every game, but they'll have a years-long waiting list for season tickets, and they'll be there when their team is pathetic and it's 15 degrees out. Cleveland does it despite being a poor area with increasingly outrageous ticket costs, Green Bay does it despite being a very small market. The fans will rabidly support the team, will tend to be more knowledgable about their team and the game of football in general.

[Wakinyan]

I suspect that San Diego fans are viewed as fair weather fans.
That's it! Let's get'em boys!

[Hamlet]

The Giants are on the express train to Arizona. I have nothing against Favre but I will not shed a tear when the Pack loses. The way I see it, their chances are a hell of a lot better away than at home.I'm usually not a spelling Nazi, but you mistyped "back home" as "to Arizona".

[Hamlet]

Full agreement, FG. Weatherman might predict a cold day at Lambeau, but the Giants are so fricking hot right now that those cheeseheads are gonna get sunburn.A four point win is HOT? Losing two out of the last 3 regular season games is hot? Winning by less than a touchdown in 4 of the last 5 regular season wins is hot?

The pass rush is going to be so brutal on Favre that he's going to announce his retirement at halftime.And Kerney's going to. And the Vikes are going to stuff the run. Blah, blah, blah.

Ryan Grant might be putting up good numbers,Might be? Aside from Tomlinson, he's had the most yards in the NFL since he began starting and is coming off 201 yards against Seattle.

but let's not forget that the only reason he's even in Green Bay is because the Giants' practice squad was tired of stopping him behind the line -- they needed more of a challenge!Keep telling yourself that. Early returns on the Grant for a 6th round pick put it on par with Brock for Broglio.

The only two players I have a concern about -- Al Harris, who is always a threat to pick off even a perfectly placed pass; and Aaron Rodgers, since he'll be an unknown factor in the second half.You're scared of our second string QB, and not Favre? But you're right, Rodgers, if he plays, is still better than Eli.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

The Giants-Packers game is academic anyway since all they're fighting for is the right to get slaughtered by the Patriots in the Superbowl.

[DSYoungEsq]

The Giants are on the express train to Arizona. I have nothing against Favre but I will not shed a tear when the Pack loses. The way I see it, their chances are a hell of a lot better away than at home.
Yeah, the Pack really did a poor job of handling those balmy weather conditions last Saturday. :rolleyes:

Hal, um, there is another way to look at the Grant thing, you know. As in, the Giants are so inept that they let one of the best backs in the league this year lounge at fourth or fifth place on the depth chart, and then only got a sixth round draft choice for him when he left. After all, after Brandon Jacobs, it's not like the Giants had a ton of good backs. :p

Senor Beef, you really should read what people post better. :eek: blondebear claimed Charger fandom back to the 60's for goodness sake. When you've been a fan for 40 years, you are, I think, entitled to give up a team after one more example of collective stupidity without being called "fair weather."

[blondebear]

I wouldn't be surprised if he/she now wears a Tomlinson jersey and claims to have been there all along.Ouch!

Now, now, I have $25 riding on the Pats this weekend. And besides, why would I sport LaDainian-wear when I already have a Doug Flutie jersey? :p

[flickster]

I'm usually not a spelling Nazi, but you mistyped "back home" as "to Arizona".

:D

[DSYoungEsq]

Ok, so is anyone making any predictions, now that we are almost at the moment of truth?

I'm predicting: Packers and Patriots

[Xema]

I have a reasonably strong sense that the Giants aren't quite up to the challenge of Green Bay. I know they're a great road team, and I don't think they'll suffer Seattle's fate. But in that stadium against that team in the kind of weather that's predicted, I think they'll come up short. Their big hope is that Favre has one of his "heave it up regardless" games - with an edge in turnovers they could stay in it.

[gonzomax]

With infinite wisdom the NFL has decided that the Green Bay game will be the late game. 6:30. Going to be real cold.

[Walloon]

Temperature at kickoff at Sunday's game in Green Bay will be 3°F, with wind chill at –9°F.

It's 1967's "Ice Bowl (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NFL_Championship_Game,_1967)" back again!

[VarlosZ]

Football Outsiders' NFC Championship Game Preview (http://www.footballoutsiders.com/2008/01/18/ramblings/game-previews/6042/). Like most of FO's stuff, the piece is worth a read, but a couple of things form it really stand out to me.

First, while the Giants defense led the League in Adjusted Sack Rate (percentage of pass attempts that result in a sack, adjusted for opponent, down and distance) at 8.8%, the Green Bay offense was also 1st in Adjusted Sack Rate, as 3.1% (NFL average was 6.4%). I find this very troubling as a Giants fan, since their secondary (especially the banged up version they'll be trotting out on Sunday) is just not good enough to contain the better passing offenses if the front four isn't getting pressure. Now, a lot of Green Bay's success at avoiding sacks is due to Brett Favre's skill at getting the ball out in time, so the Giants may well get pressure even if the Packers avoid sacks. The problem is that, this year, somewhat unlike the past couple of seasons, Favre's throw-aways are generally becoming completions or incompletions, rather than interceptions. Basically, rut-roh.

Second, as FO puts it:
If the Giants want to upset the Packers, they need to take whatever they’ve been doing better over the past three weeks and keep doing it. And what they’ve been doing better over the past three weeks is really, really obvious:

DVOA (http://www.footballoutsiders.com/methods.php)

. . . . . . . . . . . Wk1-16 . . . . Wk 17-19
Pass offense ____ -14.7% ____ 73.1%
Run offense ______ 5.6% _____ 5.8%
Pass defense ____ -1.1% _____ 7.9%
Run defense _____ -6.9% ____ -8.4%

Could it possibly be as simple as "Eli Manning has matured?" Yes, actually, it might be that simple. The Giants have been no better on the ground, or against the run. The pass defense has been slightly worse, which makes sense given the injury situation in the secondary. The difference is the passing game, by leaps and bounds.

When we compare Weeks 17-19 to Weeks 1-16, the Giants’ passing DVOA is better on first down, second down, and third down. It is better in the red zone and in all four of the other 20-yard zones of the field. It is better in all four quarters. It is better under center, and better in shotgun. It is better when throwing to wide receivers, tight ends, or running backs. It is better on passes short or deep, and on passes to the left, middle, or right. In almost every single one of these splits, the Giants are now gaining more yards per pass, and they aren’t turning the ball over.
The point, which I think is correct, is that the ability of the Giants to be competitive in this game is dependent on the passing game's continuing to function at an elite level. Now perhaps Eli really has turned a corner, but I think that's the less likely of two possibities. The weight of evidence from the past few years, including the first 15 games of this season, suggests that he's a lot closer to being the 16th best QB in football than, say, the 5th best. Eli has probably just been going through a hot streak which, given his famous inconsistency, is as likely to come to an end as not.

I really, truly hope I'm dead wrong. Not only am I a Giants fan, but I also like Eli on a personal level. He seems like a smart, quiet, introverted guy, and it bugs me that people generally mistake these traits for timidity or immaturity. Bill Simmons, for example, has a lot of fun mocking Eli's "Manning Face," which is understandable, but most Giants fans who watch him every weekend, I think, know that Eli always looks like that, whether he's having the best game of his life or the worst one. Psychologically, he's pretty unflappable (as opposed to athetically, such as when faced with a big blitz -- in that sense, he's entirely flappable).


Wait, what was I saying? Umm . . . Go Giants!

[SenorBeef]

It annoys me that they cram both conference championship games into one day. I like to go out to watch those games, and without TiVo, having a 7 hour marathon watching session of football games can be tiring. I do it in the regular season all the time, but at a bar with all the games - I don't have to sit and watch the 8000 commercials the NFL manages to cram into every game, cause I can just shift my attention around.

Not a big deal, but it'd be more enjoyable to have one game on saturday like they've been running the rest of the playoffs.

[VarlosZ]

Really? Man, this is by far my favorite football weekend of the year. I get what you mean about the commercials, but there are a few things you could do about that. If you're in a bar, or with friends, then you should have something to do (talk, drink, talk & drink, etc.) during the breaks. If you're at home by yourself or with one or two other people, you could take advantage of your TiVo or DVR by starting up the first game a couple of hours after kickoff, which should give you just enough lead time to skip through all the commercials and both halftimes (this is my preferred strategy, all else being equal). Or, you could do what my father and I do most Sundays: stay in the living room for ten hours (or seven, tomorrow) with the NFL and the Sunday NY Times. Also opium.

Wait, scratch that last one.

[Boozahol Squid, P.I.]

It annoys me that they cram both conference championship games into one day. I like to go out to watch those games, and without TiVo, having a 7 hour marathon watching session of football games can be tiring. I do it in the regular season all the time, but at a bar with all the games - I don't have to sit and watch the 8000 commercials the NFL manages to cram into every game, cause I can just shift my attention around.

Not a big deal, but it'd be more enjoyable to have one game on saturday like they've been running the rest of the playoffs.

Dude... get some friends to watch the games with, and toss a ball around during the commercials.
This is the best day of football all year long, and you want to split it up amongst two days? Heresy.

[Ellis Dee]

Bill Simmons, for example, has a lot of fun mocking Eli's "Manning Face," which is understandable, but most Giants fans who watch him every weekend, I think, know that Eli always looks like that, whether he's having the best game of his life or the worst one.To paraphrase one of my favorite quotes about Eli this season: "That's what he looks like on Christmas morning."

Regarding your rhetorical question about whether Eli has turned a corner or if he's just on a hot streak, I think you're putting entirely too much emphasis on Eli. I think he's playing exactly the same as he always has. It's the game plan that changed; Gilbride radically changed the way he calls plays, and this new way is much more suited to Eli. (Just my opinion, of course.)

ETA: Plus the fact that the receivers aren't dropping every other pass helps.

[DSYoungEsq]

It annoys me that they cram both conference championship games into one day. I like to go out to watch those games, and without TiVo, having a 7 hour marathon watching session of football games can be tiring. I do it in the regular season all the time, but at a bar with all the games - I don't have to sit and watch the 8000 commercials the NFL manages to cram into every game, cause I can just shift my attention around.

Not a big deal, but it'd be more enjoyable to have one game on saturday like they've been running the rest of the playoffs.
Um, the rest of the playoffs have had TWO games on Saturday, AND TWO games on Sunday. :eek:

Two playoff games on Sunday has been the norm for a very long time. Most of us old timers are pretty used to it, and it leaves our Saturday this weekend for doing other, more important things. ;)

Personally, I dislike the shift of the games to later times; I like my Sunday evening to be "family" time, not football time.

[SenorBeef]

Um, the rest of the playoffs have had TWO games on Saturday, AND TWO games on Sunday. :eek:


Yeah, I know. For wild card and divisional weekend I'd usually pick the more interesting of the two games and go out for that - the other I'd watch at home with tivo assistance. But for conference championship games - they're both pretty interesting.

The movie theater down the street puts the HD feed on their 60 foot screen, I was thinking about going down there for the games, but 7 hours in a movie seat is too much.

Just thought it'd be cool for it to make two seperate days into (smaller) events. Guess it's just me.

[DSYoungEsq]

The movie theater down the street puts the HD feed on their 60 foot screen, I was thinking about going down there for the games, but 7 hours in a movie seat is too much.
They won't be doing that if the NFL finds out about it. That's the sort of thing that violates their copyright (large screens, big no no).

[blondebear]

Oh good, now I don't have to wear a Chargers jersey on the 3rd. San Diego sure had Tom's number today, though.

I'm hoping for a Brady/Favre showdown in Arizona. Go Packers!

[Hampshire]

Of all the thing the Pats are credited for this year I think their biggest achievement is sucking all the excitement out of any game they're in.
Good god that was boring game.
If I didn't see the fans there with my own eyes I would have sworn there weren't any cause I sure didn't hear them.
Brady looked bored.
I was too.
zzzzzz.....

[Diogenes the Cynic]

Well, the Giants were hanging in there pretty good for a while, but the officials have taken over the game now , like they always do when the Packers get behind. It's really too bad. I'd like to see the Packers play a game that isn't fixed.

Is there a bigger POS in the NFL than Al Harris?

[ShadowFacts]

Of all the thing the Pats are credited for this year I think their biggest achievement is sucking all the excitement out of any game they're in.
Good god that was boring game.
If I didn't see the fans there with my own eyes I would have sworn there weren't any cause I sure didn't hear them.
Brady looked bored.
I was too.
zzzzzz.....

Absolutely. The Pats defense had 4 red zone stops leading to field goals! What were they thinking? We all know there need to be touchdowns to keep it exciting!

And the offense - driving down the field at the end of the game, cranking out first downs and running the clock out. How the heck are we supposed to have 4th quarter comebacks if the Pats don't let the other team have the ball? BORING!

But really I blame Belichick. I mean, what's with running the ball so much in the 2nd half and dominating the line? Running is boring! You're supposed to keep passing, not change the game plan at the half and make adjustments like that.

And who the hell is Kevin Faulk, anyway?

If only it had been a close, hard-fought game. Oh well, there's always the Super Bowl.

[storyteller0910]

Oh, that call was some BULLSHIT.

[hekk]

Of all the thing the Pats are credited for this year I think their biggest achievement is sucking all the excitement out of any game they're in.
Good god that was boring game.
If I didn't see the fans there with my own eyes I would have sworn there weren't any cause I sure didn't hear them.
Brady looked bored.
I was too.
zzzzzz.....

I agree, what a boring, predictable game.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

That's exactly what I mean about the officials bailing out the Packers with totally fraudulent calls. It's a shame that the NFL won't allow Packers games to be played on the level.

[gonzomax]

It annoys me that they cram both conference championship games into one day. I like to go out to watch those games, and without TiVo, having a 7 hour marathon watching session of football games can be tiring. I do it in the regular season all the time, but at a bar with all the games - I don't have to sit and watch the 8000 commercials the NFL manages to cram into every game, cause I can just shift my attention around.

Not a big deal, but it'd be more enjoyable to have one game on saturday like they've been running the rest of the playoffs.
Wind chill of about -10. Ill sit in and watch Football all day.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

So now they're changing the rules to allow the Packers to challenge a play after the next play has already been run. It was a good catch but I have no doubt the refs will take it away anyway.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

I have to say, I haven't been much of a believer in Eli Manning in the past, but he's really showing me something today. I never would have expected to see him come into Lambeau and outperform Favre like this.

[gonzomax]

Considering the weather ,the Green Bay game is pretty good.

[blondebear]

Farve scrambles, almost gets sacked, he throws up a prayer...it's intercepted and fumbled back to Green Bay. Wow, what a play!

[Marley23]

Wowee wow wow. As soon as McQuarters started running that ball back, I sensed a fumble was coming, and it just seemed to squirt around on the ground for a long time. Can Manning lead the Giants to a win? This Bradshaw TD isn't going to count...

[eenerms]

All I can say right now is that I dragged myself out of bed at 4:30 am (local time) to watch the Pack. They better pull it together. I'd love to see a win! :)

[hekk]

Thank you Mr. Tynes!

[storyteller0910]

Well, at least there's the consolation of knowing that Lawrence Tynes will be unemployed by tomorrow morning at 10:00AM.

[Two and a Half Inches of Fun]

Well, at least there's the consolation of knowing that Lawrence Tynes will be unemployed by tomorrow morning at 10:00AM.

The last miss was a bad snap and hold. No kicker would have made that.

[Two and a Half Inches of Fun]

Thank you Mr. Favre.

[Two and a Half Inches of Fun]

I hope that is Favre's last play ever!!!

[Rysto]

Man, I feel bad for Tynes. When he kicked for the CFL's Ottawa Renegades he was basically automatic from inside of 45.

ETA: He was pretty good from 47 during his time here, too.

[Two and a Half Inches of Fun]

It"s Goooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooood!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

[blondebear]

Brett, Brett......that's not the way to get to the Superbowl, man.

[hekk]

Screw you, Mr. Tynes! :smack:

[saoirse]

Well, at least there's the consolation of knowing that Lawrence Tynes will be unemployed by tomorrow morning at 10:00AM.

Now, I'm thinking he won't. Props to the Giants. I think they deserve it.

[Rysto]

The football gods have rewarded the Giants for giving their all in that last game of the regular season against New England.

Maybe the rest of the league will finally notice that resting starters going into the playoffs is a recipe for an early exit.

[N9IWP]

I say this as a (mediocre) Packer fan - even if they had won, they didn't deserve to.

14-4 is still a perty good season, esp considering most predictions were between 7-9 and 9-7

Brian

[hekk]

Okay, I gotta get this off my chest.

The Packers didn't deserve to win tonight. They hardly tried.

[blondebear]

Both of the winning teams can look forward to nicer weather in their next game, that's for sure.

[storyteller0910]

<can't contribute; died of massive arterial thrombosis at 10:10PM EST. Will contribute in morning>

[pulykamell]

Okay, I gotta get this off my chest.

The Packers didn't deserve to win tonight. They hardly tried.

I was rooting for them (as a Bears fan, no less). But they completely played like shit. That last quarter and OT was brutal. I'm not a fan of sudden death overtime as it is, and the Packers had every advantage given to them, with the missed FG at the end, and winning the toss for the first possession in OT.

[storyteller0910]

Actually, no, I do want to say the following, for posterity:

Ellis Dee, if you're around somewhere, regarding a past disagreement:

I was wrong. You were right.

[pepperlandgirl]

I'm not a Giants fan by any means, but I hope this stops that "The Lesser" Manning bullshit in its tracks.

[Kid_A]

Congrats to the Giants. They played better and deserved it.

And Eli...wow...impressed the hell out of me in all 3 of these playoff games. I always love watching young players turn the corner (no matter who they play for.)

[Hal Briston]

Some very important facts to note in the next two weeks:

1) The Giants will be unable to compete on the same level as the Patriots in Week 17.
2) The Giants won't be able to beat the Bucs in Tampa.
3) Well, ok, but there's no way the Giants can go into Texas Stadium and beat the Cowboys.
4) Ok, ok, fine...but c'mon...they have no chance of winning in Lambau in those conditions.

So please, everyone who has been talking crap about Big Blue for the past month, please, please, please keep it up!

[Diogenes the Cynic]

How fitting that the last play of Favre's career might be a game-losing interception which prevents his team from going to the Superbowl.

[ShadowFacts]

Some very important facts to note in the next two weeks:

1) The Giants will be unable to compete on the same level as the Patriots in Week 17.
2) The Giants won't be able to beat the Bucs in Tampa.
3) Well, ok, but there's no way the Giants can go into Texas Stadium and beat the Cowboys.
4) Ok, ok, fine...but c'mon...they have no chance of winning in Lambau in those conditions.

So please, everyone who has been talking crap about Big Blue for the past month, please, please, please keep it up!

Yeah, I cannot BELIEVE the crap people talk about their opponents! It's unconscionable!

Full agreement, FG. Weatherman might predict a cold day at Lambeau, but the Giants are so fricking hot right now that those cheeseheads are gonna get sunburn.

The pass rush is going to be so brutal on Favre that he's going to announce his retirement at halftime.

Ryan Grant might be putting up good numbers, but let's not forget that the only reason he's even in Green Bay is because the Giants' practice squad was tired of stopping him behind the line -- they needed more of a challenge!

The only two players I have a concern about -- Al Harris, who is always a threat to pick off even a perfectly placed pass; and Aaron Rodgers, since he'll be an unknown factor in the second half.

;)

[Slacker]

I'm not a Giants fan by any means, but I hope this stops that "The Lesser" Manning bullshit in its tracks.
I'm not sure I've heard the "Lesser" Manning bullshit, so maybe I'm misunderstanding. Is there a coach in the league who would take Eli over Peyton?

[Xema]

I thought the Packers would prevail, but my hat's off to Eli and the Giants - the better team won.

Some may scoff at their chances in the SB, but I don't think the Pats will.

[drm]

How fitting that the last play of Favre's career might be a game-losing interception which prevents his team from going to the Superbowl.

He's coming back.

There's no way he won't. They have a good young team and you know he'll want to be a part of it.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

I'm not sure I've heard the "Lesser" Manning bullshit, so maybe I'm misunderstanding. Is there a coach in the league who would take Eli over Peyton?
No, but in fairness there were people who were calling Eli a bust, saying he shouldn't be a starter, saying he was another Ryan Leaf, etc. I was one of them. I was wrong. I don't think I've ever seen Peyton play as gutty a game as Eli played tonight.

[Argent Towers]

FUCK YEAH!

Not only did my team win, I bet a round of beers on the game with my Wisconsinite friend - and I'll be getting drunk for free this Spring Break.

Watching a Giants game with my dad is always fun. He always starts to call the Giants "Yankees," as in, "Man! The Yank-er, Giants - just fumbled!"

[Marley23]

Congratulations to everybody who picked the Giants to represent the NFC in the Su.... oh, wait, nobody thought this was coming. I sure didn't. But I was pulling for the Giants in this game, for some reason, and since they Aren't The Patriots, I'll be rooting for them in the Super Bowl. Go Giants!

[bbs2k]

How fitting that the last play of Favre's career might be a game-losing interception which prevents his team from going to the Superbowl.Well, not very. Considering he was already a first round Hall of Famer. In fact it's downright depressing. Mostly because it means that he'll want to play for another year now.


Also, was it just me or did Tom Coughlin look like a zombie?

Could you imagine Mike Shanahan in that weather?

[Xema]

How fitting that the last play of Favre's career might be a game-losing interception which prevents his team from going to the Superbowl.
I'm not sure it's fitting, but it does seem as if the bad Brett is never all that far beneath the surface.

[Hal Briston]

Congratulations to everybody who picked the Giants to represent the NFC in the Su.... oh, wait, nobody thought this was coming.AHEM! Might you note post #1 over in the 5th Annual SDMB Early Super Bowl Pick Contest (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=449706):

I'll be looking for some Week 17 payback by picking the Giants over the Patriots, 38-35.WOOT! :D

[D_Odds]

[Danny Aiello in Hudson Hawk]

Can you fucking believe it!

[/DA in HH]

If the GIANTS insist on always playing this close, I am going to need a defibrillator. My heart can't take another week of this.

[pepperlandgirl]

I'm not sure I've heard the "Lesser" Manning bullshit, so maybe I'm misunderstanding. Is there a coach in the league who would take Eli over Peyton?

I don't know (or care) about coaches. Hell, I don't even care about people talking shit online or around the water cooler. I just think it's obnoxious as hell when I hear it coming from the "talking heads" on television. And yes, I have heard commentators call Eli "The Lesser" Manning. No, I don't remember when/who it was (I almost want to say it was Joe Buck, but I tune out so much of what comes out of his mouth, I can't be sure). Only that it bugs the shit out of me, and I hope I never hear it again.

[Boozahol Squid, P.I.]

Ugh. Eli and Strahan versus Bill Belichek....

I'm getting my deposit back on the kegs. Super Bowl's cancelled at my house.

[Ellis Dee]

I honestly don't think Eli turned any corner this post-season. In fact, I think his last three playoff games have pretty much been classic Eli; the Eli who already turned the corner during the 2005 comeback against the Broncos.

If that's the case, then why isn't he turning the ball over? Well, first off he lucked out of an easy interception in the red zone against the Packers. But what's really doing it is the lack of penalties and the strong defense, which is allowing him to just take what the defense gives him. He's always been quite good at that. When he feels like he has to force something, he kinda sucks. (Just like Favre; more on that later.)

I had that bad feeling in the first half of this game. Bad drops by Toomer and others, stupid penalties, let up a big play on defense; this was classic "bad Giants" football. Even the 2:00 drill fell short.

The third quarter was a bit of a mess with all the penalties and lead changes, so I couldn't really get a feel for what was going to happen. Until the final play that is, when Brett "the chucker" Favre showed up. God damn that was a heart-warming moment to see him try to force a rainbow into triple coverage while under pressure. I knew right then that Favre would not win this game for the Packers, but that didn't necessarily mean that the Giants would win.

Then in the fourth quarter, the good Giants showed up. Love that defense, love that running game. And Favre the chucker looked like he was cold, like he just wanted to get to the locker room. But then Tynes had to go and pull a Feeley, just to keep it exciting.

When it went to overtime, I didn't really care who won the coin toss. Frankly, I kinda wanted to start on defense because the game was starting to look like a battle for field position. I had faith in Eli and Bradshaw (who looked way better than Grant, btw) getting at least to midfield before having to punt, but with the extreme cold a fumble is always a possibility. I felt better about the defense's chances to force a 3 & out and the special team's ability to return the punt inside the Packers 40, which is a much better place to start than your own 25.

Even if the Packers marched down the field and scored the game winner, I would have felt good about the fact that the Giants defense was on the field and so Big Blue had every possible chance to win in overtime. This was going to be a perfect example of why the sudden death format is good and proper no matter how it turned out. Teams who can't get a stop from their defense don't deserve fair ups anyway.

Mad props to Corey Webster, Justin Tuck, Kawika Mitchell and Steve Smith for stepping up big in the playoffs this year. Four down, one to go...

[flickster]

Well, the Giants were hanging in there pretty good for a while, but the officials have taken over the game now , like they always do when the Packers get behind. It's really too bad. I'd like to see the Packers play a game that isn't fixed.

Is there a bigger POS in the NFL than Al Harris?

Congrats to the Giants and best of luck againt the Patriots

Dio, You let your hatred of the Packers allow you to be painted as clueless maroon....

[Ellis Dee]

Oh yeah, I forgot about how amazing the addition by subtraction has been. First no Tiki Barber, (who has to be kicking himself for retiring,) and then no Shockey. Now don't get me wrong; I friggin' love Shockey more than Madden loves Favre. But even I can see plain as day that Shockey being out has contributed greatly to Eli's no-interceptions during these playoffs.

It feeds into allowing him to simply take what the defense gives him, instead of having to force the ball into Shockey. During those many forced Shockey passes, there was always a non-trivial chance that Shockey would make the wrong read and run the wrong option, sending Eli's woulda-been-accurate pass straight into the arms of a defender while no blue jersey was even in the frame. Those always looked terrible, and people would get down on Eli, but I swear to god those were pretty clearly option routes that Shockey didn't read correctly.

I want Shockey back next year and for the next five years, but I desperately want him to get better at reading coverages.

[Marley23]

AHEM! Might you note post #1 over in the 5th Annual SDMB Early Super Bowl Pick Contest (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=449706):

WOOT! :D
I was thinking of people who made their picks at the beginning of the seaon, but congrats all the same. If the Giants played a competitive game in week 17, I hope they can do a little better this time.

[SenorBeef]

A Boston team vs a New York team makes it easy for ESPN, they're used to covering that since that's all they do the rest of the reason anyway.

I was rooting for the Packers, but I've been impressed with the Giants in the post-season. I have some for the Giants as an old school franchise, I mostly just tend to dislike New Yorkers and want to see their teams fail. But they really earned their way in.

I doubt they'd have made it this far if they rested their starters in week 17. Instead they gave us one of the most entertaining games all year. And now we get a rematch. Should be good.

[DSYoungEsq]

Well, I have to say that the Packers appear to have beaten themselves before the game even started. I got completely confused by the first sequence of plays. The Packers from the beginning eschewed a power running game for various sleight-of-hand passing plays that in the long run got the nothing. Indeed, subtract one 90-yard bomb TD, and the Packers probably wouldn't have sniffed overtime. Meanwhile, the Giants were establishing a very powerful running game, doing it the way you should on the frozen tundry, by getting their backs outside the tackles with a head of steam so that they could run over defenders who couldn't get good traction for stopping the runner.

To me, it looked like the Packer coaches had decided that they had no chance running the ball against the Giants, and decided instead to resort to some sort of flim-flammery to overcome this supposed inability. And, when they DID run the ball, they tended to try to run "up the gut," which is hard to do on a frozen field for precisely the same reason that it's hard to tackle you out in the open field with a head of steam: you can't get enough traction to make the quick cuts needed inside consistently.

The wind was blowing hard enough to make long passes inherently errant. The Giants recognized this, and stuck to relatively short passes, such as sideline hitches and slants. The Packers, not so much. Favre wasn't significantly worse than Manning, other than the fact that he was intercepted twice, once for doing a typical Favre "force the ball into coverage you have no business trying to beat" throw (thank goodness it was promptly fumbled to the Pack for a net gain), and once by failing to throw the pass in a way that accounted for the wind drift to the left. But unlike the Giants, the Packer coaches put the game on Favre's shoulders (they only called 13 running plays, IIRC!). Not surprisingly, in that weather, that was the last place it needed to be.

Lombardi was rolling over in his grave, I'm sure. <sigh> (Hell, he was probably clawing the dirt away to get out of it and come take over the job!!!!) :D

[Xema]

I'm another who was astonished by the Packer's ineffectivness after their field goal early in the 4th quarter. At home, with the NFC championship on the line, they come up with pitiful yardage, no first downs, and then finish with a fatal interception. Absolutely brutal.

[Trunk]

Favre is just friggin' retarded sometimes.

I can't believe he heaved that ball into triple coverage on the int-fumble recovery play.

Then, someone has to say to him, "all right, you got fired up there, but now it's time to get back to playing right."

The interception in overtime was a perfect example. The guy he was throwing to was covered. Ryan Grant was coming out of the back field on a delayed check-down. . .it is specifically designed to go to him if the receivers are covered, and Favre still tries to put it in there.

For as great as he's been his whole career, I'm going to remember him for plays like that as much as games like he had at Oakland on Monday night a few years back, or the Monday nighter at Denver this year.

It's like he just goes into full retard mode.

Well, Giants are playing very well; the Pats are playing a notch below where they were at mid-season. This matchup might be tougher than what the Bears could have given the Colts last year, if the Giants can hold form.

[Hamlet]

Well, I have to say that the Packers appear to have beaten themselves before the game even started. I got completely confused by the first sequence of plays. The Packers from the beginning eschewed a power running game for various sleight-of-hand passing plays that in the long run got the nothing. Indeed, subtract one 90-yard bomb TD, and the Packers probably wouldn't have sniffed overtime.I didn't see it as much different from the rest of the season. The first series was meant to get the offense in a rhythm, with realtively easy passes and a shot downfield, and a lot of movement.

Meanwhile, the Giants were establishing a very powerful running game, doing it the way you should on the frozen tundry, by getting their backs outside the tackles with a head of steam so that they could run over defenders who couldn't get good traction for stopping the runner.What really stuck me about the Giants gameplan was that they were committed to the run. Even though both backs averaged under 4 yards a carry, they still ran the ball 37 times, more than 3 times the amount the Packers did. Now that's commitment to the run, and it paid off in the end.

To me, it looked like the Packer coaches had decided that they had no chance running the ball against the Giants, and decided instead to resort to some sort of flim-flammery to overcome this supposed inability. And, when they DID run the ball, they tended to try to run "up the gut," which is hard to do on a frozen field for precisely the same reason that it's hard to tackle you out in the open field with a head of steam: you can't get enough traction to make the quick cuts needed inside consistently.And, again, I didn't find it a surprise. The Packers coaches did that often early in the season. To be honest, I thought it was poor coaching, but it wasn't unprecedented. I think part of the blame also lies on the offensive line. Because of the Giant's pass rush hype, they were on their heels all game and not getting a push at all. Kudos to the Giants D Line for that.

The wind was blowing hard enough to make long passes inherently errant. The Giants recognized this, and stuck to relatively short passes, such as sideline hitches and slants.Generally, the Packers are a short passing, get the YAC, team. Favre wasn't significantly worse than Manning, other than the fact that he was intercepted twice,Other than that, how'd you like the play Mrs. Lincoln?
... once for doing a typical Favre "force the ball into coverage you have no business trying to beat" throw (thank goodness it was promptly fumbled to the Pack for a net gain), and once by failing to throw the pass in a way that accounted for the wind drift to the left.Favre was horrible. Most of the season, he's been accurate, putting the ball right where it needed to be to allow his receivers to make the catch, get the YACs, and keep it away from the DB's. Manning did an outstanding job of doing just that in this game. Favre didn't. His accuracy totally sucked. And he reverted back to old Favre, which was the most frustrating part.

But unlike the Giants, the Packer coaches put the game on Favre's shoulders (they only called 13 running plays, IIRC!). Not surprisingly, in that weather, that was the last place it needed to be.As many problems as I had with the coaching staff, putting the game on Favre's shoulders wasn't one of them. I'm hoping, and I think he will, that McCarthy learns a lot from this game as a coach. He's a new coach and he trusted his studs and put the game on the shoulders of his ProBowlers Favre, Harris and Kampman, which is not a bad plan. The problem was, it wasn't working and he didn't make the necessary adjustments. They needed to focus on the running game to help Favre. But, even more important, they needed to get Al Harris some help and adjust their blitz packages to get a pass rush. The lack of adjustments was what really hurt. But being a fan, I think he learned something from the game which will help him in what hopefully will be a long, succesful career coaching the Packers.

The Giants certainly deserved to win, and they played a great, disciplined game. And Manning impressed me with his accuracy. The Giants were the better team yesterday.

What chaps my hide is that I think the Packers are the better team, they just played like crap. And it wasn't just one of them, the whole team made almost constant mistakes. The OLines poor run blocking, Favre's inaccuracy and stupidity, the DLine's lack of a good rush, Al Harris' thuggery, stupid penalities, poor play calling, and inability to get a fumble recovery all killed them.

But, in the end, I'm excited for next year, because I think they'll have another shot at the Super Bowl. I don't see them as one of those "lightning in a bottle" teams that gets lucky one year, but rather as a young team with a young coach. But I tend to be more of a fan than a dipshit hater like Dio, so I look on the bright side.

[fatgail]

Nothing warms the cockles of my heart like knowing...KNOWING that the Packers aren't going to the superbowl BECAUSE of Brett Favre...ah. It's like a restful sleep after months of exhaustion, cuddled up with my pillow, dreaming of someone else's misery.

[Hamlet]

I honestly don't think Eli turned any corner this post-season. In fact, I think his last three playoff games have pretty much been classic Eli; the Eli who already turned the corner during the 2005 comeback against the Broncos.

If that's the case, then why isn't he turning the ball over? Well, first off he lucked out of an easy interception in the red zone against the Packers. But what's really doing it is the lack of penalties and the strong defense, which is allowing him to just take what the defense gives him. He's always been quite good at that. When he feels like he has to force something, he kinda sucks. (Just like Favre; more on that later.)I don't watch many (as in none except the times they play the Packers) Giants games, but he really impressed me. Only having newspaper accounts of games (I hate pregame talk), I had a bad impression of Manning, but last night he was accurate, smart, and only a tiny bit whiny. He looked good last night.

I had that bad feeling in the first half of this game. Bad drops by Toomer and others, stupid penalties, let up a big play on defense; this was classic "bad Giants" football. Even the 2:00 drill fell short.The Giants didn't WOW me. They played a very good, very disciplined, old school football game. They didn't give up much on defense, and they commited to the run. But I didn't see anything that made me think they were an elite team. But they were very good.

The third quarter was a bit of a mess with all the penalties and lead changes, so I couldn't really get a feel for what was going to happen. Until the final play that is, when Brett "the chucker" Favre showed up. God damn that was a heart-warming moment to see him try to force a rainbow into triple coverage while under pressure. I knew right then that Favre would not win this game for the Packers, but that didn't necessarily mean that the Giants would win.His first interception (which they lucked out one getting the fumble) just killed me. IIRC, he had some pressure, eluded it going left, cocked his arm and looked like he was ready to throw, across his body, deep and late over the middle. It would have been classic Favre-stupid throw. But then he stopped, didn't make the throw. For a second, I was thrilled because it showed he wasn't going to make the mistakes that plague his career. But then he made a move, and, instead of throwing it away, he threw an interception. So for one brief, shining second, I had a vision of a quarterback with Favre's arm, ability to read defenses, and usual accuracy, but also with discipline. It was a truly beautiful second.

And then reality hit and Favre was Favre again. *sigh*

Then in the fourth quarter, the good Giants showed up. Love that defense, love that running game. And Favre the chucker looked like he was cold, like he just wanted to get to the locker room. But then Tynes had to go and pull a Feeley, just to keep it exciting.They looked great in the second half. I had mentally prepared for the loss when Tynes was lining up for the kick, only to have him miss and give me back the one thing I had missed. Hope. Unfortunately, Favre ruined it for me.

Mad props to Corey Webster, Justin Tuck, Kawika Mitchell and Steve Smith for stepping up big in the playoffs this year. Four down, one to go...I would have said mad props to Burress and Manning, who impressed me. Burress, although he's a punk, gave Al Harris a whipping and Manning played with a discipline I would love to see Favre have. Pierce (is that the guy?) impressed me also.

All said, the Giants played better, and certainly deserved to win. Kudos to them and their fans.

[Gangster Octopus]

Sadly for me the Giants were the better team, the smarter team, Eli was the better QB, Favre played badly, they abandoned the run too early and they had some really stupid penalties.

Still, a great season, way more than I expected at the beginning.

[RogueRacer]

Congratulations to the Giants! Congratulations to the Patriots as well, since they seem to be ignored in the last page or so.

As a Packer fan, I was worried once I started hearing the forecasts. They played like crap against the Bears in miserable weather, so unlike a lot of the experts, I didn't think the extreme cold would be to their advantage. I was more worried when the teams came out of the locker room and most of the Packers were in short sleeves. I figured it would give them about a 2 minute psychological advantage at the beginning of the game. From there they would just be more cold and miserable than they needed to be. Worse, they would be burning more energy just keeping warm. It might be minor in the grand scheme of things, but it was also just a bad idea.

Overall I thought it was a very brutal game on several levels. The weather, the hits, the penalties, all brutal. There was plenty of thuggery from both Burress and Harris, although one poster is so jaded that he blinds himself to seeing both sides. There were bad calls both ways too. I remembered them calling a hands to the face on Harris when Burress about knocked him over with a push off and got a reception. That's not to say that Harris didn't get his hands in Burress's face that play, but if the play continues, the push off should be illegal too.

I really thought the Packers would get on track after the 90 yard pass play to Driver. (How cool was it seeing the "slow, possession receiver" outrun the Giants secondary, btw?) Unfortunately it never really happened. The Giants slowly took control and ground the game out.

To the Giants fans here, you will have some extra people on your side in two weeks. After the game, all the Packer fans I talked to said they would be cheering for the Giants against the Patriots. Good luck to you all!

[Ellis Dee]

The third quarter was a bit of a mess with all the penalties and lead changes, so I couldn't really get a feel for what was going to happen. Until the final play that is, when Brett "the chucker" Favre showed up. God damn that was a heart-warming moment to see him try to force a rainbow into triple coverage while under pressure. I knew right then that Favre would not win this game for the Packers, but that didn't necessarily mean that the Giants would win.His first interception (which they lucked out one getting the fumble) just killed me. IIRC, he had some pressure, eluded it going left, cocked his arm and looked like he was ready to throw, across his body, deep and late over the middle. It would have been classic Favre-stupid throw. But then he stopped, didn't make the throw. For a second, I was thrilled because it showed he wasn't going to make the mistakes that plague his career. But then he made a move, and, instead of throwing it away, he threw an interception. So for one brief, shining second, I had a vision of a quarterback with Favre's arm, ability to read defenses, and usual accuracy, but also with discipline. It was a truly beautiful second.The last play in the third that I described wasn't an interception. I'm almost positive you know this, and were using my quote as a springboard for your own separate reflection. I just wanted to clarify in case you thought I was talking about the interception-fumble-first down. (Which wasn't triple coverage, as somebody upthread thought.)

[JohnnieEnigma]

Sadly for me the Giants were the better team, the smarter team, Eli was the better QB, Favre played badly, they abandoned the run too early and they had some really stupid penalties.

Still, a great season, way more than I expected at the beginning.

I don't know. Neither team played that great. It's not like they played anything like the Patriots. Whenever I watch other teams, I'm always disapointed... they just don't come close to the Pat's powerful pursuit of perfection.

[fatgail]

I don't know. Neither team played that great. It's not like they played anything like the Patriots. Whenever I watch other teams, I'm always disapointed... they just don't come close to the Pat's powerful pursuit of perfection.

People are already saying that this will be one of the highest rated superbowls ever, mainly because of the fan base of both teams...but frankly, I foresee a bloody carnage that will be tearfully boring by the third quarter.

[Xema]

It's not like they played anything like the Patriots.
To be fair, the Pats didn't exactly sparkle - or perhaps I should say Brady. To his credit, he stepped up and played a very solid 4th quarter (7 of 7 passing). Contrast this with Favre's stinkbomb, and it's no surprise who is and isn't moving on to the SB.

[JohnnieEnigma]

People are already saying that this will be one of the highest rated superbowls ever, mainly because of the fan base of both teams...but frankly, I foresee a bloody carnage that will be tearfully boring by the third quarter.


sure it will be highly rated. do you recall the high ratings for their game a few saturday nites ago? I believe there were like 35 million viewers, and it was broadcasted on 3 channels. I just think the Giants are given too much credit for what I see as a mediocre team. It's that damn manning factor. It's like the media has a real hard-on for the mannings. And they don't give Brady/Belichick the glory they deserve.

[JohnnieEnigma]

To be fair, the Pats didn't exactly sparkle - or perhaps I should say Brady. To his credit, he stepped up and played a very solid 4th quarter (7 of 7 passing). Contrast this with Favre's stinkbomb, and it's no surprise who is and isn't moving on to the SB.

Well, come on. That's his M.O.

[Xema]

I heard a guy today (disgruntled Packers' fan, I think) saying that the Giants didn't really excel in either the Dallas or Green Bay games. They were content to play solid, unspectacular, mostly error-free football (ignoring a couple of missed field goals) and take advantage of faltering opponents at the end of each game.

Is this valid, or just the grousing of a fan whose favored team lost?

[Gangster Octopus]

I heard a guy today (disgruntled Packers' fan, I think) saying that the Giants didn't really excel in either the Dallas or Green Bay games. They were content to play solid, unspectacular, mostly error-free football (ignoring a couple of missed field goals) and take advantage of faltering opponents at the end of each game.

Is this valid, or just the grousing of a fan whose favored team lost?

Yes, it's called Championship Football (I am a disgruntled Packers fan).

[Hal Briston]

People are already saying that this will be one of the highest rated superbowls ever, mainly because of the fan base of both teams...but frankly, I foresee a bloody carnage that will be tearfully boring by the third quarter.Awww, don't worry...the Giants aren't going to stomp them that badly...

[MovieMogul]

Nary a comment on my beloved Chargers, who did a lot better than anyone expected :) :eek: :) , which makes their complete inability to deliver the goods when it counted that much more frustrating :( :smack: :( :smack: :( . The Pats are unquestionably the better team, but they didn't beat San Diego yesterday. The Bolts beat themselves.

[blondebear]

Ok, a comment on my ex-beloved Chargers: Philip Rivers played yesterday on a “totally gone” ACL. That's guts.

[DSYoungEsq]

Ok, a comment on my ex-beloved Chargers: Philip Rivers played yesterday on a “totally gone” ACL. That's guts.
Actually, it's STUPID. He threw at least one interception, IIRC, that can be directly attributed to his inability to step onto that leg properly.

Frankly, they should have gone to the "other guy" in the second half. Having suffered through the stupidity that was letting Favre play several games with a broken thumb a few years back, and getting the deserved result, I am a firm believer that you don't rely upon "stars" whose injuries demonstrably limit their ability to perform.

[Trunk]

Nary a comment on my beloved Chargers, who did a lot better than anyone expected :) :eek: :) , which makes their complete inability to deliver the goods when it counted that much more frustrating :( :smack: :( :smack: :( . The Pats are unquestionably the better team, but they didn't beat San Diego yesterday. The Bolts beat themselves.
That can be said of some games, but not of that one.

They didn't have the huge turnovers. The difference was that the Patriots shut them down in the red zone, and not vice-versa, and then the Partiots were able to grind away the clock to remove all doubt at the end of the game.

I heard a guy today (disgruntled Packers' fan, I think) saying that the Giants didn't really excel in either the Dallas or Green Bay games. They were content to play solid, unspectacular, mostly error-free football (ignoring a couple of missed field goals) and take advantage of faltering opponents at the end of each game.

Is this valid, or just the grousing of a fan whose favored team lost?It's not so much grousing as an honest assessment.

He's not saying the Giants stunk, or that the better team lost.

GB and Dallas have each looked better this year than either game against the Giants. The Giants have looked unspectacular, but solid. That's more than can be said of a lot of teams.

[DSYoungEsq]

I don't watch many (as in none except the times they play the Packers) Giants games, but he really impressed me. Only having newspaper accounts of games (I hate pregame talk), I had a bad impression of Manning, but last night he was accurate, smart, and only a tiny bit whiny. He looked good last night.
Eli Manning was 21 of 40, for a whopping 254 yards. That is hardly "accurate." What he didn't do is throw interceptions, which is the sole reason he was better than Favre (who was 19/35, a better percentage, for 236 yards, a better average).

And this points out that the real difference between the teams was the running games. The G-men managed 134 yards of rushing on 39 attempts; the Packers managed a measly 28 yards on their 14 attempts. This, ladies and gentlemen, represents the difference in the game. It kept the Giants offense on the field more, it sustained their drives better (the Packers, recall, managed no drives of over 40 yards (the 90-yard completion is not a "drive" just a wonderfully beautiful, but lucky and non-repeatable score :) ) and only one drive of more than 6 plays (which finished in a field goal)).

In short, the Packers on offense were inept and woeful, and if it hadn't been for three fortuitous turns of events (the interception cum fumble and the long scoring pass), wouldn't have even been in the game. And most of that blame cannot be laid on Brett Favre, who was not demonstrably worse than Eli Manning (except for that last interception). The blame goes directly to the Packer coaching staff.

Hamlet, this is in direct contrast to their game plan against Seattle. In that game, they started with a swing pass to their running back (a sweep by pass, I call it), then two straight running plays the next possession. Then the next possession, they ran on the second play of the possession. In short, against Seattle, you didn't see deception, trickery, misdirection, etc. You saw a good, honest effort to set up a running game, utilizing a back who had demonstrated his competence for them the whole final half of the season. Where did that go against the Giants?

And Hamlet, you talk about early in the season? Here are the plays in the first possession of the game in week two against the Giants: run, run, pass, run, pass, run, pass, run, run, run. They ran 29 times that game. Yes, they only gained 83 yards, but the point is that a good passing game in the NFL usually requires that you establish the willingness to run, just to keep the defense honest about having to defend against it. It worked in week 2; again, it was ABSENT in week last-and-losing.

Packer coaching staff got beat in their heads before they ever let the team walk onto the field, deciding that they had no chance of establishing a running game. So they never tried. As a result, they were relying upon their quarterback to deliver in a playoff game played in -24 wind chill with a healthy breeze blowing. It was a stupid, fatal decision. The fact that the opponents demonstrated just how stupid and fatal it was by executing the exact game plan the Packers should have attempted only adds salt to the wounds. :mad:

[Hamlet]

Eli Manning was 21 of 40, for a whopping 254 yards. That is hardly "accurate." What he didn't do is throw interceptions, which is the sole reason he was better than Favre (who was 19/35, a better percentage, for 236 yards, a better average).What Eli's statistics don't reflect, in my estimation, is the number of drops the Giants had and the number of balls Eli threw away. Also, Eli did a great job putting the ball high for Burress, and putting it on the back shoulder of many receivers, as well as keeping it away from the DB. Favre, on the other hand, did none of those things. If you take away one play, his TD to Driver, Favre threw for 146 yards the whole frickin game. The statistics in this game don't reflect much of how they played, even if you cut out the int's.

And this points out that the real difference between the teams was the running games. The G-men managed 134 yards of rushing on 39 attempts; the Packers managed a measly 28 yards on their 14 attempts. This, ladies and gentlemen, represents the difference in the game. It kept the Giants offense on the field more, it sustained their drives better (the Packers, recall, managed no drives of over 40 yards (the 90-yard completion is not a "drive" just a wonderfully beautiful, but lucky and non-repeatable score :) ) and only one drive of more than 6 plays (which finished in a field goal)).Yes the running game, and the commitment to the running game, were huge also.

In short, the Packers on offense were inept and woeful, and if it hadn't been for three fortuitous turns of events (the interception cum fumble and the long scoring pass), wouldn't have even been in the game. And most of that blame cannot be laid on Brett Favre, who was not demonstrably worse than Eli Manning (except for that last interception). The blame goes directly to the Packer coaching staff.The offense's woes go beyond just one man, of course. But I think you're kidding yourself if you think Favre wasn't outplayed by Manning.

Hamlet, this is in direct contrast to their game plan against Seattle. In that game, they started with a swing pass to their running back (a sweep by pass, I call it), then two straight running plays the next possession. Then the next possession, they ran on the second play of the possession. In short, against Seattle, you didn't see deception, trickery, misdirection, etc. You saw a good, honest effort to set up a running game, utilizing a back who had demonstrated his competence for them the whole final half of the season. Where did that go against the Giants?

And Hamlet, you talk about early in the season? Here are the plays in the first possession of the game in week two against the Giants: run, run, pass, run, pass, run, pass, run, run, run. They ran 29 times that game. Yes, they only gained 83 yards, but the point is that a good passing game in the NFL usually requires that you establish the willingness to run, just to keep the defense honest about having to defend against it. It worked in week 2; again, it was ABSENT in week last-and-losing.

Packer coaching staff got beat in their heads before they ever let the team walk onto the field, deciding that they had no chance of establishing a running game. So they never tried. As a result, they were relying upon their quarterback to deliver in a playoff game played in -24 wind chill with a healthy breeze blowing. It was a stupid, fatal decision. The fact that the opponents demonstrated just how stupid and fatal it was by executing the exact game plan the Packers should have attempted only adds salt to the wounds. :mad: I'm not sure what your problem with my post is. I pointed out that the coaching staff made mistakes by not running the ball more, and that they didn't make any adjustments after their initial gameplan wasn't working. They should have run the ball more. No argument. But that is nowhere near the only reason they lost. But relying heavily on your ProBowl quarterback is not a horrible starting gameplan. But refusing to adjust the gameplan after it fails repeatedly IS the problem.

[EddyTeddyFreddy]

Crap.

Tom Brady been spotted today limping on his right foot, which is in a walking cast. (http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/articles/2008/01/22/brady_wearing_cast_on_foot/)

[robby]

Crap.

Tom Brady been spotted today limping on his right foot, which is in a walking cast. (http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/articles/2008/01/22/brady_wearing_cast_on_foot/)
NOOOOO!!!! :eek: :(