Let me preface by saying that I am not a New England fan. Nor really a fan of any other team. During the off-season, I follow San Francisco (hoping they do something get better), Dallas (hoping they do something to get worse), and SD, PIT, and NE to further my education as to how to do things right. During the season itself, I have no interest in even watching (much less cheering for) the 49ers, because - more than anything else - I'm a fan of good football, and you don't generally see much of it during 'Niners games.
I admit that I am cheering for NE this season, for two reasons. First, if ever there was a bunch of arrogant pretentous fucks who deserve to get knocked off their pedestal, it's the '72 Dolphins. The Dolphins won 12 regular season games, and their opponents' combined records was 70-108-4; they spend the season whipping on losing teams. The Pats this season went 16-0 against teams that were 94-89, including wins against SIX playoff teams. They won more games against better opponents, in the age of parity. Please Jesus, let the Pats win in all, so we never need to hear another word from the '72 Dolphins. Second, I'm cheering for the Pats because I'm a fan of good football, and right now, the Patriots are playing the best football that anyone has ever seen.
Moving along: I let the title of this post stand for itself, and only add as afterthoughts that NE's "weak" running game gained more yards against JAX's "excellent" run defense that JAX's "excellent" run against NE's "weak" defense. NE also led in time of possession. Bottom line: NE would have won that game even if the two teams had the same number of possessions, and was helped by winning the turnover battle.
On the other games, my heart is doing a little dance that the Cowboys lost, but I fell asleep during the game, so I'm not qualified to comment on how the game actually went.
In SD at IND, anyone going back to the old saw about Peyton being unable to win the big game needs to watch the game tape, because he wasn't the reason they lost. They lost because their highly rated defense couldn't shut down SD, even with Gates hurt and Tomlinson on the sidelines. The problem with the offense wasn't Manning, it was the receivers. Yes, balls were tipped and defelected a few times, but even so, they were still ctachable. The IND receivers (especially sans Marvin Harrison) looked soft: they are so used to the ball hitting them in the chest that they're not very good at fighting to make a big catch, which they needed to do in a hard-fought game. And they're so used to all the blame falling on Manning (justifiably or not) that they didn't come through for him when he needed them to.
The SEA at GB game was a snooze-fest after the first quarter, and hammers home the point that - as good as they are at home - SEA is not a threat to the elite teams in the league. GB spotted them 14 fucking points! The SEA defense, especially their astronomically hyped LB corps, should be embarrassed for the way things turned out. Also, Shaun Alexander will be cut in the off-season, and rightly so.
Turning to the upcoming games: last weak, I would have said that SD is a tougher opponent for NE than JAX: better overall defense that's mcuh less predictable (lots of blitz packages in SD's 3-4 set than in JAX's plain-vanilla 4-3), a more explosive ground game, and - most importantly - SD generates a lot of turnovers.
But there are recent developments: Gates, Rivers, and Tomlinson are all injured. While all of them are expected to play, none will be at 100%. Per my last post, winning games is simple: you either need to outscore the other team on an equal number of possessions, or else you need to find some way to get more possessions. Even with LT, PR, and AG intact, San Diego is not going to outscore New England given equal possessions. Banged-up, it will be even less close. But SD leads the league this season in having more possessions than its opponents: they led the league in turnover ratio, at +24. (NE is third, at +16.)
Here's how I see it shaking out: San Diego will be able to get some pressure on Brady, which is something not a lot of teams have been able to do. But it won't matter. Lots of people compare Brady to Montanna, for various reasons. I agree, and the biggest parallel I see is their demeanor. Joe never got tight, he never got tense. No matter if he got hit, sacked, or knocked down, he went right back out and ran the next play utterly unfazed. It was just simply impossible to rattle him. Brady is the same way. SD might knock him down, but they won't be able to get to him, and he will continue to do what he's done all season, and score touchdowns instead of field goals.
On the other side of the ball, SD will score points as well. Their offensive line is excellent, and will be able to create room for LT (or Turner) to run. But it won't matter. The NE defense will continue to do what it has all season: bend but not break. They will stop a few drives in the red zone, force SD to settle for field-goals instead of touchdowns, and that will be it.
The only things that might change the outcome are if SD can significantly win the turnover battle (+2 or +3) or else get some "free" points on special teams (a punt or kick-return for a TD). I don't think either is very likely against NE in NE.
As for the NFC championship, I wouldn't bet either way. Both teams can play in bad weather with their running games. Both teams have up-and-down QBs. Both teams are solid in their front-7 defensively. These are two pretty well-matched teams. So, barring either team getting two or three turnovers, my gut tells me this game is going to be decided by who melts down. I don't think it's going to be Brett Farve; he's been good all season, and has enough talent around him that he hasn't had to force it this season the way he had to the last few seasons. He's enjoying himself and looking good. So the melt-down will either be Eli Manning, or the GB secondary. Eli can be flustered pretty easily, and does some dumb things with the ball that lead to turnovers, both fumbles and INTs. But if Eli can get a few seconds in the pocket, the GB corners and safeties are not going to be able to keep up with big, fast receivers (see: Burress, Plaxico), and will take penalties, just like they have all season (see: Harris, Al). They will simply grab on to the receiver, and get flagged for it. The result will be a couple interference or illegal contact penalties that revive Giants drives, or else put them in scoring position.
To protect the secondary, the GB defense will need to put pressure on Manning to get him to throw early in the pattern, before Burress and Toomer can get downfield. Getting that pressure will be tough to do and still play solid against the Giants' running game, but will be a bit easier since they won't need to worry about Shockey in the flat. All in all, if the Pack can get to Eli and shake him up, they will win. If it were me, I call some big blitzes early, to try to get into Eli's head, even if it means giving up some yards and/or scores. Some Green Dog assignments, or blitzes from the corners or secondary (Harris and Bigby are good tacklers who'd love a run at Eli). Might get burned early, but I'd rather play from behind against a battered Eli than with a lead against a comfortable Eli.
On the flip side, if I were running things for the Giants, I spend the week polishing plays to keep the Pack defense honest. Some max-protect schemes, since if Eli can stay upright for long enough to throw downfield, it probably won't matter if Plax catches it or not, since a flag will fly. I also dust off the screen-pass and end-around sections of play-book, to take advantage of a possibly over-agressive rush from the Pack LBs. Slow down the rush, keep Eli calm, and take what they give you.
Should be fun to watch either way.
No comments:
Post a Comment