You are here: Home / Morning Links / Giants Walk The Talk, Break New England Hearts All Over Again

Giants Walk The Talk, Break New England Hearts All Over Again

February 6, 2012 By

You gotta hand it to the Giants. What a team.

They backed up all their talk and guarantees from the last two weeks and Eli Manning came through once again as the New York Giants won their second Super Bowl in the last four seasons, beating the Patriots 21-17.

There isn’t much more to say. Well, actually there is, plenty of it, just not by me.

Crushing loss leaves Patriots feeling empty - Tom E Curran has the Patriots devastated after this loss.

Patriots get caught in end - Mike Reiss says that the Patriots defensive plan was sound, and working, until Mario Manningham’s miraculous grab.

Much-maligned defense wasn’t the problem - Greg A Bedard agrees that the problems last night were not with the defense. Jeff Howe says this one goes on the offense.

Ten Things We Learned Sunday: With greatness in their grasp, Patriots can’t seal the deal - Christopher Price has a teary-eyed Wes Welker blaming himself for dropping a late pass. Jonathan Comey also cranks out 10 things we learned.

A bad sense of deja blew - Karen Guregian has the Patriots lamenting late drops and mistakes.

Brady wants another shot - Mark Farinella has Tom Brady hoping for more chances to win a Super Bowl.

Plenty to talk about when Patriots meet Giants - Bill Doyle analyzes the job done on the NBC broadcast.

I guess I can’t ignore this one, but I probably should – Not so safety call: Blame Brady for this one - Eric Wilbur’s post, published literally minutes after conclusion of the game, reads more like a drunken fan rant than something crafted by a veteran journalist.

Filed Under: Morning Links
  • classless

    Welker=Buckner. 122 catches and he drops the biggest one of his career. Manningham then makes the biggest catch of his career with 2 people draped over him. That’s the game.

    • mandb97

      Class, I have to disagree with you. I put the blame on Brady for that throw. Can Welker make that catch? sure. Should he have needed to make an acrobatic catch? absolutely not. There was not a player within at least eight yards of Welker on the play. All Brady has to do is put it on the numbers. Instead, Brady threw it high and behind him. It was a terrible throw. As far as Manningham goes, he does a great job keeping his feet in bounds. The difference is Manning threw a perfect pass. He put it right in the hands of Manningham and there was no chance a Patriot was going to make the play. The fact that Felger, Maz, Ordway and Holley are all blaming Welker makes me even more sure I am correct.

      • APimpNamedDaveR

        I agree. It was a bad, rushed throw that would have been a great catch by Welker, not a good throw that was botched by him.

  • Doc Michaels

    That Eric Wilbur piece is unreal, even by the low standards set by Borges and others in this town. Absolutely unreal. Clip and save that for next season.

  • whitey bulger

    Eric Wilbur should come visit my jail cell. I'll teach him a thing or two about manners. That guy's a true criminal in my book.

  • Sam

    Wilbur is usually just an embarrassment to Boston.com. Now he's an embarrassment to himself and is a topic nationally (see the Big Lead) for his lameness. What a clown.

  • Tom

    Sorry, classless, he's not Buckner. Buckner's was a routine gronder, Welker should have made it, but it wasn't like he dropped a short, lob pass right between the numbers either.

    Ok, seriously, that Eric Wilbur piece is bizarre. Total hit job. Of course, if Welker catches the pass, or any number of other things happen, that have nothing to do with Brady, his rapid-reaction article would have been a homage to the greatness of Brady/Belichick. Again, bizarre.
    Brady's performance was "hideous"??? He hasn't "sniffed a Superbowl in 7yrs"??? Hey look, criticize Brady all you want (and count me as one who thinks the offense is most at fault for the loss) but at least don't make things up.

    • Classless

      Really? How come the Giants WR's made tough catch after tough catch but the alleged best receiver on our team drops a wide open throw to ice the game? It pains me to say it, but that was the difference. He drop the 4th title.

      • APimpNamedDaveR

        I'm not sure what game you were watching, then. The Giants WRs only made about three or four truly tough catches in the game. For the most part, Manning was putting the ball right where they wanted it. The Pats receivers actually made a lot more tough catches on rushed throws. They didn't make the one that counted, though.

  • NutCracker

    I'm amazed how slight the difference is between 'greatness' and 'choke'. Welker makes that catch and more than likely we're calling Brady, Belichick and the Patriots the greatest ever. Bottom line, Gronk not being at 100% really cost the Patriots.

    • latetodinner

      See this is where and why I think the media in this town and maybe nationally resort to hyperbole to get heard. There were a plethora of reasons the Pats lost this game. If it was only as simple as "Gronk not being 100%" then there would be no reason for sports talk. The facts are lots of things contributed to this team losing. Start with the ridiculous safety on the Pats first drive…rookie mistake. Forced the defense to effectively be on the field the whole first quarter. 3 forced fumbles not one recovered by the Pats. Several inopportune penalties that were completely out of character (12 men on the field, lining up in the neutral zone). They seemed to straighten things out to end the first half and start the second. Heck they were up 9 with 15 minutes to play. Brady throws another impatient deep ball into coverage (eerily similar to what he did again Baltimore), killing a drive while putting a tired defense back on the field. They had 5 dropped passes in the last two drives. They had 9 during the game. I am not sure as a team they had 9 drops in any 3 game stretch this year. If you are not going to dress Kevin Faulk (a decision I totally agree with) then use Steven Ridley. Instead they went with the sure handed BJGE who could not break into the Giants secondary…and there was no threat of a home run…which meant the safeties never had to cheat. How about going back to Ocho. he ran a great route…you hit him for an 18 yard play…then he disappears…go back to that well. They should have won the game with or without Gronk. However this is the second SB in 4 years I seriously question the offensive game plan. I saw all sorts of John McDaniels in this one and to be honest…he scares the heck out of me with his impatience.

      • Classless

        Dressing Faulk is redundant when you have Woodhead. Ridley was dressed for insurance. He'll be a bigger part next year.

      • APimpNamedDaveR

        John McDaniels wasn't forcing balls to his favorites.

        • latetodinner

          no but since he has gotten here the offense has had a little more 2007 in it than I would like considering the personnel.

  • Doc Michaels

    What the game boiled down to me was this: the components of this team you thought were the most sound, the most clutch, and the most dependable were ultimately the elements that didn't get the job done.

    Brady couldn't connect with Branch and made a bone-headed safety so bad it basically put the D in a hole for most of the 1st quarter. Welker makes that catch — despite it being a bit awkward for him position wise — about 98 times out of 100 (as Phil Sims said on the FAN this afternoon). You count on these guys to make plays, and Brady WASN'T in distress — unlike 4 years ago — which is why it was so heartbreaking to watch.

    Other than some too-conservative play calling (and too many runs on 1st down in the 4th quarter — IMO they should have been doing the no-huddle more often in trying to pick the pace of the game up), the GAME PLAN worked. The Giants didn't move it all over the field on the worst-defense-in-NFL-history. The offensive line played extremely well. The D didn't give up huge plays (other than the big end of game catch, but I give the Giants credit for making a big play). They were unlucky (Giants got two fumble recoveries that fell right to them) too.

    The offense simply failed the team. All they needed to do was get another score when they were ahead 17-9, 17-12, 17-15 — and they couldn't do it. All season we heard the Pats D would be their undoing, that it was their weakness — yet in the end, the offense was the reason they didn't win the Super Bowl.

  • whitey b

    I'm gonna take that Wilbur kid out. What kind of name is Wilbur, anyway? Sounds like something you'd call a pig.

  • bsmfan

    I've avoided all media until about now as well. Not sure I want to even catch up on the ~500 or so tweets since then because the analysis is on the web.

    The positive to take out of this is that we got this far with the "stick with what works" defense. Imagine if we draft a good WR and spend the rest on D? We're the first or second most favored team to go back and 20m under the cap. It's not like we're screwed like Pittsburgh or in a bad position like Greenbay to go back or do something over the next few years.

    Also, we play the NFC West next year. Besides SF, and maybe Seattle, our schedule should not be too hard.

    Houston and Balitmore would be the teams that I would fear the most.

  • mandb97

    I hope bsmfan does not mind but I have some good links about the game yesterday. Some of you may have read them but others may not and may like them:

    1) Dan Wetzel at Yahoo has great article on Tom Brady after the game yesterday. He looks at the one hour after the game. You see just how painful this loss is Brady. http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=dw-wetzel_t…

    2) Matt Boutwell of the Maine Sports Network coined the phrase "Yoko" Bundchen a few years back. It was a tongue-in-cheek way to blame Gisele Bundchen for the Patriots problems recently in the playoffs. Yesterday the national media started picking up the mantra after Bundchen, who was being hammered by Giants fans, got frustrated and blamed the receivers for the loss. Bianca Wilfork is with her. Here is the video from the Big Lead who got it from the Insider. Click on the photo if the video does not come up. http://www.theinsider.com/gossip/49452_Gisele_Bas…

    3) Bruce Arthur of the National Post up in Canada has a good breakdown of the game. http://sports.nationalpost.com/2012/02/05/super-b…

    4) Finally the great Jerry Thornton at Barstool Sports has his final and depressing, Knee-Jerk Reaction to the game. He then eviscerates Eric Wilbur for his ridiculous article on Tom Brady. (both are NSFW for language) http://boston.barstoolsports.com/random-thoughts/…
    http://boston.barstoolsports.com/random-thoughts/…

  • Tony

    The worst part about this loss? We STILL have to hear it from media morons and certain NFL players/morons about Spygate. Two Steel'roiders tweeted about "cheaters never win" and "0-2 since Spygate" after the game was over last night. Yeah right, the Steelers calling the Pats cheaters. The most 'roided-up team in the NFL with a QB who is lucky to not be in jail, and whose former coach admitted two years ago on Boston radio that he videotaped signals, too. Yeah, that team….chortling about how the Pats don't win Super Bowls anymore because they can't "cheat" anymore. GRRRRR…1 or 2 plays go the other way last night and we'd never have to hear that kind of nonsense about that NON-STORY ever again.

    • Tom

      There is nothing more annoying than hearing the "Patriots haven't won a SB since spygate". It is almost as moronic as 'spygate' itself.

      The Patriots have won more than any team in the league since 2007. They have been to 2 Superbowls since then, matching the Steelers, and of course, the Giants. The offense (where the videotaping allegedly gave them an advantage) has been not only tops in the league over that span, but has been historically great.

      In the end, saying the "Patriots haven't won a SB since spygate" is as arbitrary as saying the "Patriots haven't won a SB since Reche Caldwell was a starting WR". Both are true, and both are colossally stupid.

  • Tony

    And folks…Welker should have caught that ball. Please. I know Brady didn't make a perfect throw, but Welker makes that catch in his sleep 99 times out of 100. And it's clear that Brady threw the ball to the back shoulder on purpose because he was wary of the safety help coming in from Welker's right–I don't think it was a rushed throw. I think he threw it back shoulder because he wanted to keep it clear of the safey and he had confidence that Welker would catch it. Oh well…..the bright side is this: relatively young team; 4 picks in the first two rounds; $20 million or so in cap room. This year was just the beginning IMO.

    • tl;138

      More like one pick in the first. The other will be traded for value picks in later rounds to make up for the picks wasted on Ocho and Haynesworth.

      • Tony

        Dude, they "wasted" 5th and 6th rounders on Ocho and Haynesworth. They were classic high risk/high reward moves. BB isn't as dumb as you think he is: he wouldn't give up a pick in the first two rounds for guys like that.

        • Tony

          I meant to say "low risk/high reward moves" above, of course.

        • bsmfan

          We have 2×1 (27, 31), 2×2 (Raiders + our 31st), 3rd + 4th at 31 in 2012.

          If I had to take a guess, Hoodie is going to trade one of the first rounders for more and there seems to be a bit of DE/OLB that are projected to go in the 20s-32 that might be attractive.

        • tl;138

          I know. But Bill apparently like quantity when it comes to draft picks and not quality.

        • bsmfan

          Actually, F+M on SportsHub just brought this up:

          The 2011 draft took place with a CBA looming. While the slotting was proposed, it was NOT FINALIZED.

          BIG BIG BIG difference. There are now guaranteed locks or at least ballpark figures salary wise for picks in the later rounds. We're also 20m under the cap. Remember that.

          The also quoted Kraft saying, "I look forward to our two first and two second round"

          Could this be the year we're not trading a first for a first next year and 2nd this year?

          Also, Kevin Fishbain @ PFW has a great column that highlights a bit of what they're talking about and the needs for 2012:
          http://www.profootballweekly.com/2012/02/06/loss-…

          An insider take on the Superbowl:
          http://www.profootballweekly.com/2012/02/07/insid…

  • bsmfan

    And, another one bites the dust…
    http://bostonherald.com/news/columnists/view/2022…
    ——————–
    Quotes:
    Super Bowl Sunday offered a telling glimpse into the Brady/Bundchen household.

    Our suspicions may be true.

    It was never Tom’s idea to dress like a girl in headbands with hair down his back.

    Or buy a $1,000 Toto toilet with water jets and blow dryers.

    Or ride a bike through town with Gisele’s 5-pound ratty dog in his front basket like a teeny, tiny, nasty ET.

    At least Tom put his foot down when Super Gi had the Super Idea to name Super Baby Benjamin … River. “Something always flowing, immortal,” blogged Super Gi after her Super Pregnancy and Super Childbirth in the tub, where she meditated for 8 hours. And don’t forget: She wanted a law requiring all mothers to breast-feed and claimed she’d potty-trained Benjamin by six months.

    I mean, beyond nauseating.

    EndQuotes
    ———–

    Margery Eagan this time.

    I don't read the Herald often nor really pay attention to her. When I used to listen to her on 96.9 years ago, she was normally very reserved and very measured in what she said. I guess Borges got to her. I'd love to respond in my natural tone but I'm sure there is some censorship on the board that would prevent me from doing so. If this is your reaction 24-36 hours after the game, that is very sad.

    • Tony

      Amazing…and just imagine if Welker catches that pass. NONE of this is brought up or discussed. But now, because Brady threw a ball slightly behind Welker (after getting his injured shoulder reinjured, by the way), and Welker failed to come up with it, suddenly it's all Gisele's fault again. With rare exceptions, the media in this town is a sad joke.

  • hambone

    avoiding all sportsradio/espn/papers until further notice. mandb97 had the link up top… http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=dw-wetzel_t… … only piece i've read. unreal. how can anyone hate the guy?

  • bsmfan

    As usual, the good folks at ESPN who care about good journalism and/or would be fired for garbage like Eagan's column, provide some calm in the storm:

    QUOTES:

    "Sometimes teams just lose. It's not because of a colossal blunder or an abysmal performance or a team "not showing up to play." Sometimes teams don't walk off with the trophy because the other guys are better.

    This is one of those times.

    Sunday night's football game was flawed. Both teams made mistakes. The Giants fumbled twice, but were fortunate enough to have neither cost them. Conversely, the Patriots paid dearly for their miscues. "

    ENDQUOTES
    http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story/_/id/7548732/…

    Not surpsingly, Greg Bedard joined D+C around 9:05 this morning with a rational observation of the game and the future. His columns have also been good reads during this time. The most interesting topic I heard on the interview was the situation with Welker. If they can't work a salary out, definitely below what market is and the franchise tag dictates (9.4M/yr), they'll likely tag him. However, he might hold out and said that the Krafts will most likely give Hoodie final say in what to do.

    He predicted that the team will most likely cut 85 and Branch, maybe offering one of them the minimum, but stock up on WR during the draft and maybe free agency. He also speculated that some of our high round picks might/should be used to get an OLB/pass rush.

    Link to the clip: http://t.co/SZxFj8Bo

    • Tony

      I think at this point, we have to admit that the Giants were slightly better in 2011 than the Pats were. 2007, that was not the case. They just got hot at the right time, played an unbelievable game defensively, and got a couple of breaks at the end. The Pats were better in 2007 and they just didn't play well in the big game. This year, you have to say, with two close wins–but wins nonetheless–over the Pats, that the Giants were just a hair better. No shame in that. The Pats made more mistakes than the Giants on Sunday, and they probably deserved to lose. But it's not like the Giants made zero mistakes either: two blown timeouts early in the fourth quarter, which could have been huge; Nicks running out of bounds with 1:09 left; and Bradshaw scoring the TD with :57 left instead of taking the knee. All of those could have come back to haunt them–especially if that Hail Mary deflects another foot closer to Gronkowski before hitting the ground. Two evenly matched teams, but the Giants were just a bit better. The Pats, hopefully, will close the gap with a good offseason. They have to picks and the cap room to get it done.

  • etak

    My goodness, that Wilbur column does not make him look good. At all. He's also being very defensive on Twitter.

    The other columns I would have mentioned (the Yahoo one, Bruce Arthur, etc), people got to. Thanks for the Barstool links, I generally avoid them, but that was good stuff.

    Yes, Welker should have caught the ball. But there was more that could have been done in the game to have won, other than him. So it's /not/ all on him, or on Brady.

  • bsmfan

    F+M mentioned these lost chances.

    In 2006, we would have dumptrucked the Bears as Indy did. At least one of the 07 or 2012 Superbowls could have been won in the coin-flip. It does suck to leave these on the table.

    • Tony

      I don't count the loss in 2006 so much as a loss, but more like the NFL officials' gift to Peyton Manning. The Pats were completely jobbed on three horrid calls in that game–one was so bad the NFL had to apologize for it a few days later, officially.

%d bloggers like this: