The 2008 Super Bowl Thread

I'm torn over which team to root for - my dad and I are Giants fans, but I wouldn't mind seeing the Pats put up a historic 100% perfect season, just to say I saw it in my lifetime.

Re: the pre-game shit, I'll pass until the last half-hour. I'm not that anal that I need to know about every player on the field, their shoe sizes, etc.

Re: commercials - unless it's a new trailer for a movie (Iron Man, Dark Knight, etc.), most of the commericals I'll just ignore.

Couple of thoughts about teams that didn't get it done.

1)Why are we surprised the Colts went out early, against an inferior rival? Last year was the aberration for Tony Dungy, not this year. Between Indy and Tampa Bay, he has had seven or eight teams that were not only Super Bowl caliber, but probably would have been Super Bowl favorites, and he typically manages to underprepare them for the divisional playoffs or conference championships. Jon Gruden came in and what happened? Dominated en route to the Superbowl, with arguably the worst Tampa Bay team of the last three or four years.

2)Brett Favre is clearly the golden calf. He had two horrible throws that led directly to New York points. One was just a miserable, miserable decision (and a bad throw), the other was just a horrific throw (the OT interception). Did the announcers discuss how unacceptable these mistakes were? No, not really.

3)Ladainian Tomlinson needed to get his helmet off his head and go cheer on his team. Also, if San Diego had scored TDs on just two of the five trips they had to within the New England 15 yard line, they win that game. When you're settling for field goals or turning it over, you are going to lose.

4)I'm still waiting for Mike Vrabel to get called for leg whipping Phillip River's knee on his first interception. How does a referee miss that call?

5)New England's offensive line is massive. Not "fat", just big, muscular guys. They still don't get called for holding nearly enough, but that's the best line I've seen in the NFL since the early 90s Dallas teams.

There's a shot of David Garrard running for the first down on that 4th and 2 in the Jax/Pitt. game in last week's SI, and on the left side, just behind Garrard, you can see the Jax OL with his arm wrapped around the Pitt DL, holding on to his shoulder pad. I thought that was sort of an ironic picture to use, as even the ESPN announcers mentioned during the highlights that there was obvious holding on the play, but no call.

The refs for the playoffs are usually flaky, in that they compile "all star" teams instead of entire teams of refs that have worked together during the season. (I use that emoticon because it's my first post since the upgrade)

Pittsburgh really hasn't complained as much as I thought they should have about that play. It was blatant holding right at the point of attack; no holding, Garrard almost certainly gets stopped behind the line of scrimmage.

Maybe they feel that they owed the refs after that Super Bowl victory a few years back.

Maybe they know their offensive line held some Jax defensive player at some other point during the game and got away with it.

13 days from now...The New York Giants will defeat New England 28-24!

Cool...I am avatar less no more.

Pretty sure that's not the reason.

Well, the opportunity to go play in New England wasn't that appealing to me as a Steelers fan. And I'd say that maybe only the Titans were the weaker team in the AFC playoffs.

Pretty sure it is. Complaining about not getting a holding call is merely a pointless exercise in blame-shifting. If you start complaining about not getting holding calls, you're going to find your offensive line being more scrutinized by refs. Every game has its share of no-calls on each side.

As my brother told me after the Giants won, this Super Bowl is either going to be really great or really crappy. I know that seems like an obvious statement, but I'm contrasting it against a Pats vs Packers game which would have been a great showdown between Brady and Favre.

You're right that they're not complaining because it's pointless. I think you're wrong that they're not complaining because "they got away with holding earlier in the game."

So you don't think they're vividly aware that they were on the good end of a few missed holding calls?

If you ask, no, that's not the reason they'll give. But they know for a fact that it goes both ways and so to whine about one play when you had a few go your way is just stupid. And yeah, if you start publicly ripping the refs for a lack of holding calls going your way, you're going to find your team getting more 10 yard penalties called against them the next game.

Just because you or your team may or may not have gotten away with a call earlier in the game doesn't mean you're not going to argue or be upset about every call that doesn't go your way. That's not the way it works Guttenberg. If a referee gets enough complaints about the same infraction being committed by the same player, you bet it's going to be called at least once during the game. And, if referees started racking up penalties on every team that constantly complained, or yelled at them, every game in the NFL would end with negative yardage and no points.

The extent of my football playing experience ended when I went to college, but I don't care if it's a pass interference call or a neutral zone infraction, you argue your case, because if you make one that's compelling enough, you'll get a call your way later in the game. Of course, that's not an absolute, and I guess you can equate it to a buy-back at a bar; you're not guaranteed one, but more than likely if you're not a straight up douche bag about it, you'll get one.

We're not talking about during the game, we're talking about after the game is over. Calling out the refs during a game is part of coaching strategy, doing it in a public setting in front of the media is an exercise not just in futility, but in pissing off refs. Yelling at the refs does work both ways, you know. Sometimes it can backfire and if you get on them for not calling holding, they're going to watch your team more closely, as well.

The semantic police are running wild on CHUD lately.

Oh, well I was talking about during the game. And if you're talking about semantic police? Didn't this whole conversation start because you're still bringing up a game from three weeks ago?

I didn't bring up anything.

And I didn't mention the semantics thing to be a dick. I've just had conversations get confused lately over small differences/confusions. I'm sure it came out like I was being a dick, though. My apologies.

Semantics.

Oh, and complaining about holding is a pet peeve of mine.

EDIT: You said I brought up a game from three weeks ago. I didn't bring it up, I just responded to a post. Another semantic difference in conversation!

There's an odd feeling I get while thinking about this match-up; for some reason I see the Giants beating the Pats. Sure, it was a close and interesting game when the played in the season finale, but there's something else that makes me think they can pull it off. Over the last seven weeks the Patriots have been walking a fine line between victory and upset, and the deciding factor in this game may be the Giants defense and running game. They've undoubtedly been on fire the last month, and I don't see this being a blowout on the Patriots part, and if this game goes into the fourth quarter, the defense may stun the Pats.

EDIT: Listen, if I talk about the holding penalty that was bullshit when I was a junior in high school, eventually one day the big referee in the sky will give me a call to go my way. It's science.

If the Pats can handle the Giants' d-line, it'll be a cake-walk. If you force them to blitz, they don't have the corners good enough to handle the Pats' receivers. Shit, it'll still be tough. I mean, the Chargers DBs played great, they enabled their backers to blitz, get pressure on Brady and force him into his worst game of the year, and the Patriots still scored 21 points.

Well, with LT not in the game and Gates and Rivers in pain, they couldn't put it in the end zone. I don't think the Pats will lock the Giants out that impressively once they get in the red zone. Like someone said before, the Chargers score twice out of the four times in the RZ, it's a completely different game.

I also think that if they had put more pressure on the Patriots offensively by scoring more points, the Patriots would have responded. By the second half, the Pats knew that all they really had to do was not make any major mistakes, and they played pretty close to the vest.

Not to mention, the other side of that argument is what if Tom Brady had played an even average game (for him)? They'd have at least 7 more points (that interception in the endzone when they were inside the 5).

As for LT, it's not like Michael Turner is a huge drop off. His YPC were about the same as LTs this year. No, he's not AS good, but Turner is at least as good as Brandon Jacobs, if not better.

I brought up the Pittsburgh holding thingie for two reasons, simply because Overlord mentioned lousy officiating and also New England's OL and how they never get called for holding. It reminded me of the pic I saw in SI last week when I was flipping through the mag at a doctor's office. I said I thought the pic was ironic because it was to show the game-changing play, but also caught a penalty that wasn't called.

However, holding can pretty much be called on any play, it just depends on how blatant it is, and whether it affects the play or not. When I coached 10-yo football last fall, there was even a rule for the refs that they could call holding at their discretion...so if a play went right, and there was an obvious hold on the left side away from the play, they wouldn't call it.

The Pats couldn't have asked for an easier road to the Super Bowl. Atleast Farve might have given them a game.

I know people will pick the Giants but I can't see how. The Giants were at home and gave it all in week 16 and still lost. Now add perfect weather and the Pats passing game should chew up that defense.

I hope the pregame has all the 72 Dolphins crying over the potential loss of their record. I'm sure they will say they had the record first but I just want to see them cry about it.

I could careless about either team in this one. if I had to pick who I was for it would have to be the Giants I just hate the Pats. I think its going to be a blowout though unless Jacobs or Bradshaw run for about 200 and keep Brady off the field.

Oh and if Randy Moss can break his leg in 4 places I would be ok with that too.

Well that may be, BUT, if the Pats were trailing in the game they wouldn't of kept running the ball with Mulronney and Falk. Brady would have thrown the ball downfield to get them back in it.

That's like saying they weren't scoring enough points, so all they have to do is score some points.

Here's the thing a lot of people keep forgetting, the Giants secondary is weak, especially so after factoring in injuries, and none of the teams they've faced in the playoffs have found themselves in a position to really take advantage of it. Be it due to injuries (Buccaneers, Cowboys), or inclement weather (Packers), the Giants have had outside help slowing down their opponent's passing attack for going on a month.

Now couple this with the fact that A) the Patriots' pass attack is remarkably healthy, and B) the Super Bowl is going to be played in a dome, and what we're left with is a recipe for disaster.

As for magical hypothetical land, where, we just magically give the Chargers eight points for reasons I don't fully grasp, I just don't know what to say. At some point, you have to give the defense some credit. In the second half of the Giants game, down 12, the Pats put up 22 unanswered points. The Jaguars, after getting to halftime with it all knotted up at 14, simply stopped scoring touchdowns. And the Chargers, after looking like they could make a game of it, were held to three points in the second half.

Regardless of how weak the Patriots have looked, at times, on defense, if you haven't noticed, whenever these games get tight, their opponents simply stop putting up points.

Well, Belichick's master plan has begun...Tom Brady was spotted wearing a walking cast. "Tom's hurt...we may have to get Cassel ready to play." The evil genius!

I don't think we're doing that since no one is running around telling everyone that the Chargers won.

I just hate these hypothetical arguments, where, if the Chargers were the Giants, and the exact same set of events had occurred, the outcome would have been different. How about the NY Giants are a completely different animal, and to try and extrapolate how the San Diego Giants would perform against the New England Patriots would be a pointless exercise.

It's almost as bad as having to hear people bash Dungy and Manning as two guys that just can't win, within a year of them doing just that. The better team doesn't always win the game, and in the NFL playoffs, the chance of that happening is exponentially higher than in any of the other major sports.

The Indianapolis Colts have gone 73-23 and won the Super Bowl since Tony Dungy teamed up with Peyton Manning (Manning had a sterling 32-32 record prior). The Tampa Bay Buccaneers were a terrible franchise before Dungy's arrival, and during his tenure became perennial playoff contenders with a record of 54-42. What exactly is there to knock here? How about we look at Jon Gruden's tenure as the Buccaneers head coach, since, he was used to, somehow, damage Dungy's record. Since becoming head coach some six years ago, the Buccaneers have gone 48-48, made the playoffs three times, and outside of winning the Super Bowl his first year with someone else's team, hasn't won a playoff game since.

Clearly a desirable alternative.

It's about sustained success, it's about getting those shots at the playoffs, because if you're good enough, chances are, you'll win the big one.

Are you actually telling me that Tony Dungy hasn't been a chronic underachiever in the play-offs? Really? You believe that?

As for the Buccaneer's post Dungy record, that team was aging fast. Gruden actually did more with less. Tony Dungy, even more so than Schottenheimer, has done the least with the best talent of any NFL coach I can think of in the post salary cap/free agency period. But, he did finally break through and make it to one Super Bowl (and win), so folks forget the six straight underachieving years.

According to here he was out last night walking without a cast.

Gotta love the Post.

I'll never understand this line of thinking, where, the best teams always win every game, and any reason they don't is directly attributable to underachieving. Of all the major sports, the NFL is the least likely to play out so neatly, unless, of course, you're the 2007 New England Patriots.

There's a lot of luck involved in a short series, just look at the AL playoffs this year, where, had the RedSox played the Indians in the first round, instead of the Yankees, Cleveland just might have won their first World Series in 59 years. And that's baseball, do you really think a one and done playoff format is, in any way, an accurate barometer of, well, anything?

As for Gruden, how long are we going to be talking about the aging Buccaneer team he inherited? It won him a Super Bowl, and it's been six years, are they ever going to field a good team?

Moss has two receptions for 32 yards and no touchdowns in the post-season. You should be wishing this on Brady or Welker.

I would say that Randy Moss being shut down has been because both the Jags and Chargers told themselves MOSS IS NOT going to beat us. Double and triple team him and make Brady throw underneath, which was exactly what he did. Plus, pound the ball with Malronney and Faulk.

You also have to consider the weather which was bad this past Sunday (mostly winds) which took away the passing game from the Pats. That won't be the case in Az. where they can close the dome giving the PAt's receivers open range on the Giant's secondary, which is not very good to begin with.

Vegas has the Pats about a 13 point favorite. EVeryone thinks that's crazy they're all betting the Giants thinking New York will cover. I say that means New England is going to kill the Giants, afterall Vegas always wins right.

My prediction: Giants 18 Patriots 35

Nah I just cant stand Moss. I am not a big fan of Brady but wouldn't want to see his career ruined. Moss however fuck him I am still bitter about him stealing 10-15 million of the Raiders for two years by not even making an effort to play well.

That's cause he realized he was playig for the Raiders, who would give a shit.

He is supposed to be a pro. No matter how crappy your team is you are still supposed to try.

The two other teams that have made it to the Super Bowl four times have, between them, five Super Bowl championships. Four teams have gone five times each, and they've all won at least two. Three have gone six times, and have won at least twice. And finally we have the Dallas Cowboys, who have gone to the show eight times, winning five.

The Bills and the Vikings are a couple of anomalies, that's for sure, but they hardly represent the norm. Of the 18 teams that have made it to the Super Bowl multiple times, only four have yet to win a Super Bowl.

Vegas doesn't think New England is going to kill the Giants, Vegas thinks everyone willing to gamble on the game thinks New England is going to kill the Giants. So, in order to offset that, they initially set the line at what, two touchdowns? I'm not sure where it is now, but Vegas could care less who wins the game, only that action is split on both sides.

I miss the reputation system so much.

For about 48 hrs I was drinking the Giant kool-aid. But with a healthy WR corps, OL, and a fast field shielded from the weather, New England can drop 42+ on NY.

I can't wait for the impending draft/offseason thread by the way.

Correct. I see it the same. Alot of people are pointing to the last game b/ween New York and Pats saying, "well, the score was 38-35. See, the Giants almost beat the Patriots, they also lost by 3 they COULD beat them in the Superbowl." That score is very misleading. NE, dominated that game, more first downs, never trailed, and the Giants scored late touchdowns to make that score close.

I don't think the Giants wil be able to keep it close. The weather won't be factor, Randy Moss and co. will be on turf, the Patriot's players have been their before, and even though Eli Manning has looked good in the playoffs earlier this season people were questioning if he was any good, and he doesn't have the experience Brady does.

This game will be over midway through the 3rd qrt.

New England never trailed? Sorry but the Giants were up by 12 mid way through the 3rd quater.

I basically agree with you though,. I think the New England will win by 2 scores but hopefully it's a decent enough game.