NFL question. Giants vs. Patriots 2007 to present.

Since 2007 it seems that the Giants have done exceptionally well against the Patriots. In 2007 they lost the last regular season game to the Patriots 38-35. They then beat the Patriots in the Super Bowl that year. That year the Giants lost 6 games, and the Patriots lost only one, the aforementioned Super Bowl. The 2011 season was a similar story. The Giants won a regular season game against the Patriots, and beat them in the Super Bowl that year as well. Overall, however, the Giants lost 7 games that year and the Patriots lost only 4, two of those to the Giants. This year the Patriots are undefeated so far and the Giants are a .500 team. The closest victory the Patriots have had this year was against the Giants, 27-26. As for the Giants, all of their victories this year have been against teams with a loosing record except for the 5-4 Bills.

My question is can random chance lead to this kind of result, or are the Giants really a better team than their record indicates in the years I mentioned? My gut tells me that what’s happening is that the Giants are a better team. I think that for some reason the Giants decide to try harder when they play the Patriots. Of course this also means that they weren’t playing up to their potential during all their other losses to teams that were worse than the Patriots. Does this explanation make any sense, or is it just random chance due to the small sample size?

Bonus question. If the Super Bowl this year comes down to the Patriots and the Giants, will history repeat itself again with an inevitable Giants victory?

The Giants were definitely not playing up to their potential either year during the regular season. In the 2011 playoffs, the Giants won a playoff game at Green Bay. The Packers were 15-1 that year, but the Giants outplayed them and won pretty handily.

I think Tom Coughlin is an outstanding playoff coach, and he is one of the few coaches not outsmarted by Belichick. Remember, he took the Jaguars to the AFC Championship game in their second season. That took some impressive coaching skills.

Why he can’t get the same results in the regular season is the mystery.

Its a great question.

Clearly, the Giants are not a better team or franchise than the Patriots over the past 11 years, but with both Coughlin and Eli Manning v Bill Belicheck and Tomy Brady, the Giants are the Patriots huckleberry.

When the Giants first beat the Pats in the Super Bowl, I argued that if the NFL championship was decided in a Best of 7 Series, the Patriots would have won 4-1, just happening to lose game one in a fluke.

Yet the Giants win over the Patriots in the 2011-12 Super Bowl made it 3-1, for the Giants; AND it wasn’t until this season the Patriots got their 2nd win to make it 3-2, by only a point. . . . and Im not sure if Brady and Eli will be in the league long enough for a Game 6.

You cannot even argue the AFC is weaker-----sans NYG v NE games, the AFC has won 4 out of 7 Super Bowls.

If there is a third Giants-Pats meeting in the Super Bowl however, id be shocked is the Patriots let the Giants beat them three times in a row. You HAVE to get that monkey off your back.

Purely subjectively, as a fan, it seems to me that the Giants under Tom Coughlin have tended to play up (or down) to their competition, playing the best teams tough, then laying an egg against teams they seemingly should beat. No idea if there’s any truth there, but that’s what it seems like.

Probably a more likely explanation is that there’s something about those Giants teams that makes them a bad matchup for those Patriots teams. Of course, there’s been so much roster turnover on both sides, so that might mean something about coaching philosophies or gameplanning. :shrug:

Random chance is also a possibility.