MR

Supposedly, the Patriots coach gave orders to let the Giants win.
http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/Bill ... nce-020612

INDIANAPOLIS (AP)

Bill Belichick gave clear instructions to his defensive unit: Let the runner score.

Super Bowl action
SUPER SHOTS
Check out the best action photos from Super Bowl XLVI: Patriots vs. Giants.

Playing the odds and inviting critics, the calculating coach of the New England Patriots told his players to get out of the way, open a wide path for Ahmad Bradshaw and give Tom Brady a chance to win the Super Bowl in the final 57 seconds.

steveo777 wrote:Supposedly, the Patriots coach gave orders to let the Giants win.
http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/Bill ... nce-020612

INDIANAPOLIS (AP)

Bill Belichick gave clear instructions to his defensive unit: Let the runner score.

Super Bowl action
SUPER SHOTS
Check out the best action photos from Super Bowl XLVI: Patriots vs. Giants.

Playing the odds and inviting critics, the calculating coach of the New England Patriots told his players to get out of the way, open a wide path for Ahmad Bradshaw and give Tom Brady a chance to win the Super Bowl in the final 57 seconds.

Let the Giants win? No. That's the most ridiculous "claim" I've ever heard. It was simply the most obvious tactic left to give the Patriots a chance at winning (baring ANOTHER easily missed FG.) If Bellichick didn't call a defense to let them score at 1:05 and with the Patriots only with one timeout left, the Giants would have milked the clock down to the waning seconds of the game and probably would have made the FG to win it with mere seconds remaining. Instead, Belichick ordered his defense to give up the touchdown (the Packers actually used this tactic on the Broncos in Super Bowl XXXII) to give his Hall Of Fame quarterback a chance at taking his team down the field and putting the ball in the endzone for the victory. It was the teams only shot at winning the football game playing the percentages.

Given the situation, I would have made the same decision. It would've worked too if the receivers could have hung to the ball.

Is that why nobody was within 5 yds of the runner???

YoungJRNY wrote:

steveo777 wrote:Supposedly, the Patriots coach gave orders to let the Giants win.
http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/Bill ... nce-020612

INDIANAPOLIS (AP)

Bill Belichick gave clear instructions to his defensive unit: Let the runner score.

Super Bowl action
SUPER SHOTS
Check out the best action photos from Super Bowl XLVI: Patriots vs. Giants.

Playing the odds and inviting critics, the calculating coach of the New England Patriots told his players to get out of the way, open a wide path for Ahmad Bradshaw and give Tom Brady a chance to win the Super Bowl in the final 57 seconds.

Let the Giants win? No. That's the most ridiculous "claim" I've ever heard. It was simply the most obvious tactic left to give the Patriots a chance at winning (baring ANOTHER easily missed FG.) If Bellichick didn't call a defense to let them score at 1:05 and with the Patriots only with one timeout left, the Giants would have milked the clock down to the waning seconds of the game and probably would have made the FG to win it with mere seconds remaining. Instead, Belichick ordered his defense to give up the touchdown (the Packers actually used this tactic on the Broncos in Super Bowl XXXII) to give his Hall Of Fame quarterback a chance at taking his team down the field and putting the ball in the endzone for the victory. It was the teams only shot at winning the football game playing the percentages.

I should have said that after a few drinks tonight, I could have done a quick read....out of context. I'm gonna read this again tomorrow with a clearer head. I posted it just to get some feedback, as it didn't look right to me, on first glance. I doubt any such shit would be allowed to occur that would give a decided win to any team. Sometimes I figure people make certain moves to please the odds guys in places like Las Vegas, but then again, that would be obvious rigging of a game. The general public would see though such shit.

steveo777 wrote:Supposedly, the Patriots coach gave orders to let the Giants win.
http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/Bill ... nce-020612

INDIANAPOLIS (AP)

Bill Belichick gave clear instructions to his defensive unit: Let the runner score.Super Bowl action
SUPER SHOTS
Check out the best action photos from Super Bowl XLVI: Patriots vs. Giants.

Playing the odds and inviting critics, the calculating coach of the New England Patriots told his players to get out of the way, open a wide path for Ahmad Bradshaw and give Tom Brady a chance to win the Super Bowl in the final 57 seconds.

I'm pretty sure that was the plan (underlined) and it was a good one.

Yeah I can't understand why any coach in the league, sane or not, instruct his team to let the other team win...especially in a Super Bowl!
I mean, really?

steveo777 wrote:Supposedly, the Patriots coach gave orders to let the Giants win.

You really need to give up your drug habit, Stat!

As a Giants fan, I was screaming at my television when Bradshaw went into the end-zone, because I thought he had just lost the game for the Giants. If he had just done what Eli had told him ("DO NOT SCORE!") the Giants could have sealed the deal right then and there.

One thing I didn't get though-- why bother giving the ball to Bradshaw and telling him not to score? Why not just take a knee, force the Pats to use a time out, then take a knee again, run 40 seconds off the clock, kick the field goal and take the lead, leaving the Pats with just 20 seconds and no time outs? By handing the ball to Bradshaw, they ran the risk of a fumble, an offensive holding penalty, etc. And it wasn't as if they needed any extra yardage to get that field goal.

DavidWT wrote:As a Giants fan, I was screaming at my television when Bradshaw went into the end-zone, because I thought he had just lost the game for the Giants. If he had just done what Eli had told him ("DO NOT SCORE!") the Giants could have sealed the deal right then and there.

One thing I didn't get though-- why bother giving the ball to Bradshaw and telling him not to score? Why not just take a knee, force the Pats to use a time out, then take a knee again, run 40 seconds off the clock, kick the field goal and take the lead, leaving the Pats with just 20 seconds and no time outs? By handing the ball to Bradshaw, they ran the risk of a fumble, an offensive holding penalty, etc. And it wasn't as if they needed any extra yardage to get that field goal.

That's exactly what he should've done, eh ...what we were expecting!! He knew of his error
right before he crossed over ...

DavidWT wrote:As a Giants fan, I was screaming at my television when Bradshaw went into the end-zone, because I thought he had just lost the game for the Giants. If he had just done what Eli had told him ("DO NOT SCORE!") the Giants could have sealed the deal right then and there.

One thing I didn't get though-- why bother giving the ball to Bradshaw and telling him not to score? Why not just take a knee, force the Pats to use a time out, then take a knee again, run 40 seconds off the clock, kick the field goal and take the lead, leaving the Pats with just 20 seconds and no time outs? By handing the ball to Bradshaw, they ran the risk of a fumble, an offensive holding penalty, etc. And it wasn't as if they needed any extra yardage to get that field goal.

I think if you take a knee from that point, you end up with a 27 yard field goal as you lose a few yards with every kneel down. The Ravens proved that no kick is a gimme and imagine having to live that one down if you lose the game on a shank.
Just ask Boise State, two potentially undefeated seasons ruined by a sure fire kicker missing chip shots.

Don wrote:

DavidWT wrote:As a Giants fan, I was screaming at my television when Bradshaw went into the end-zone, because I thought he had just lost the game for the Giants. If he had just done what Eli had told him ("DO NOT SCORE!") the Giants could have sealed the deal right then and there.

One thing I didn't get though-- why bother giving the ball to Bradshaw and telling him not to score? Why not just take a knee, force the Pats to use a time out, then take a knee again, run 40 seconds off the clock, kick the field goal and take the lead, leaving the Pats with just 20 seconds and no time outs? By handing the ball to Bradshaw, they ran the risk of a fumble, an offensive holding penalty, etc. And it wasn't as if they needed any extra yardage to get that field goal.

I think if you take a knee from that point, you end up with a 27 yard field goal as you lose a few yards with every kneel down. The Ravens proved that no kick is a gimme and imagine having to live that one down if you lose the game on a shank.
Just ask Boise State, two potentially undefeated seasons ruined by a sure fire kicker missing chip shots.

So he was just waiting for a tackle that wasn't going to come?!? ...he knew the clock was against them at that point.

Don wrote:

DavidWT wrote:As a Giants fan, I was screaming at my television when Bradshaw went into the end-zone, because I thought he had just lost the game for the Giants. If he had just done what Eli had told him ("DO NOT SCORE!") the Giants could have sealed the deal right then and there.

One thing I didn't get though-- why bother giving the ball to Bradshaw and telling him not to score? Why not just take a knee, force the Pats to use a time out, then take a knee again, run 40 seconds off the clock, kick the field goal and take the lead, leaving the Pats with just 20 seconds and no time outs? By handing the ball to Bradshaw, they ran the risk of a fumble, an offensive holding penalty, etc. And it wasn't as if they needed any extra yardage to get that field goal.

I think if you take a knee from that point, you end up with a 27 yard field goal as you lose a few yards with every kneel down. The Ravens proved that no kick is a gimme and imagine having to live that one down if you lose the game on a shank.
Just ask Boise State, two potentially undefeated seasons ruined by a sure fire kicker missing chip shots.

Just ask the Chargers who lost to the Chiefs because of a botched snap just wanting to kneel the clock away before a chip shot field goal. Rivers closed his hand too early and this one play cost them the division and playoffs. If you can score, you score.

Michigan Girl wrote:

DavidWT wrote:As a Giants fan, I was screaming at my television when Bradshaw went into the end-zone, because I thought he had just lost the game for the Giants. If he had just done what Eli had told him ("DO NOT SCORE!") the Giants could have sealed the deal right then and there.

One thing I didn't get though-- why bother giving the ball to Bradshaw and telling him not to score? Why not just take a knee, force the Pats to use a time out, then take a knee again, run 40 seconds off the clock, kick the field goal and take the lead, leaving the Pats with just 20 seconds and no time outs? By handing the ball to Bradshaw, they ran the risk of a fumble, an offensive holding penalty, etc. And it wasn't as if they needed any extra yardage to get that field goal.

That's exactly what he should've done, eh ...what we were expecting!! He knew of his error
right before he crossed over ...

No, what I'm saying is that Bradshaw should never have even HAD the ball in the first place. Eli should have just taken the snap and knelt.
But Don raises a good point-- they would have lost a couple of yards doing that. Also, it wouldn't have run off as much time. I guess the Giants just assumed that Bradshaw would be capable of NOT going into the endzone (I mean, really, how hard could it be to not get a touchdown?) Forunately, it all worked out in the end, but man, when he scored, I was not happy.

DavidWT wrote:

Michigan Girl wrote:

DavidWT wrote:As a Giants fan, I was screaming at my television when Bradshaw went into the end-zone, because I thought he had just lost the game for the Giants. If he had just done what Eli had told him ("DO NOT SCORE!") the Giants could have sealed the deal right then and there.

One thing I didn't get though-- why bother giving the ball to Bradshaw and telling him not to score? Why not just take a knee, force the Pats to use a time out, then take a knee again, run 40 seconds off the clock, kick the field goal and take the lead, leaving the Pats with just 20 seconds and no time outs? By handing the ball to Bradshaw, they ran the risk of a fumble, an offensive holding penalty, etc. And it wasn't as if they needed any extra yardage to get that field goal.

That's exactly what he should've done, eh ...what we were expecting!! He knew of his error
right before he crossed over ...

No, what I'm saying is that Bradshaw should never have even HAD the ball in the first place. Eli should have just taken the snap and knelt.
But Don raises a good point-- they would have lost a couple of yards doing that. Also, it wouldn't have run off as much time. I guess the Giants just assumed that Bradshaw would be capable of NOT going into the endzone (I mean, really, how hard could it be to not get a touchdown?) Forunately, it all worked out in the end, but man, when he scored, I was not happy.

1/4back kneel ...

Yes, I know what you meant ...I should've been clearer (Bradshaw knew of THE error/bad use of the clock), Bradshaw hesitated before crossing the line knowing, in my opinion, that
the clock was against them at that moment ...seemed as though he was waiting for a tackle, which never came ...he should've tripped
himself..haha!! I think losing the couple of yards was still the best bet!!
Geezuz, we're talking about what the champions should've done to win the game ...

Perhaps I'm giving him too much credit ...did he think he was just lucky?!?!



http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=en ... quXd7mWkCs

Michigan Girl wrote:[
Geezuz, we're talking about what the champions should've done to win the game ...

Good point!