Now if only that New Yorker Hillary can win it all!!!

one of the more peculiar games i've seen in many years.

the better team didn't win--the lesser team got some exceptional breaks at just the right times--and escaped by the skin of their teeth with a one-field-goal win.

New England's defense, with a few key plays, would've turned the game entirely the other way. they were uncharacteristically bad. Tom Brady outplayed Manning statistically, despite being sacked more times.

i wasn't rooting for either team, but thought it might be nice to see NE polish off their perfect season.

may the Giants enjoy their 15 minutes while they can. i doubt they'll be back next year...but i don't think NE will either.

the better team didn't win

A contradiction in terms. It's why they play the game.

may the Giants enjoy their 15 minutes while they can.

It's more like nine months.

naw, the better team sometimes loses in pro sports--unless the only definition of "better" is "you won."

still, the Giants earned their way there and earned the win. 15 minutes of glory, a well-deserved rest, then back at it in late July.

think they'll fire the NE defensive coach?

Not being a big watcher of football, I did (with the benefit of TiVo) watch most of the fourth quarter. I found it exciting, and thought the better team (in that time period at least) in fact did win.

unless the only definition of "better" is "you won."

Do you have a better definition?

i like both teams--they have few weaknesses.

why did i call New England the "better" team? because all season they've shown that they can win under any circumstances against any team, and dominate in most (if not all) statistical categories while doing it.

in fact, they were so often the better team you could have reduced New England's total score and total yards in most games by 50% and they *still* would have won.

anyway, i was happy whichever team won this time.

NE was running out of gas the last half of the season once people started figuring out to rush Brady and jam Moss at the line. What did Moss have all playoffs about 9 catches after a ba-zillion TDs in the reg season? And they didn't really blow anyone out either.

NY should give each def line guy a trophy (including the backups who rested the starters.) I wonder if Strahan thought it was worth coming back for one more season to pay his alimony? :)

The play of the game is the 3rd down conversion by Eli at about 1:30 left in the game; escapes when 2 NE players have him by the jersy and throws a 35 yrd bomb that was caught by the receiver with the help of the top of his helmet.

Eco-

NE's defense kept them in the game and had huge stops when Brady & Co. could not move the ball during most of the game.

Although, had NE won, Welker gets MVP.

Massachusetts's Catholic's may have forgiven them, but obviously, God has something else in mind today.

escapes when 2 NE players have him by the jersy

Does the NFL still have a call for "in the grasp"? That one looked as though it might have qualified for it.

i dint really have a dog in this hunt, but i felt good for eli.

archie has got to be a real happy fellow having two sons with championship rings.

the game itself was quite boring and for once i actually paid attention to the commercials, which turned out to be an error in judgment.

NE's defense kept them in the game and had huge stops when Brady & Co. could not move the ball during most of the game.

Brady threw for 266 yards, no interceptions and one TD, despite 6 sacks. the Patriots had more first downs than the Giants, better red zone efficiency and both teams had essentially the same time of possession and only about a 50-yard difference in total yardage. NE was one incomplete pass shy of a win.

And they didn't really blow anyone out either.

9/2: 38-7 over Buffalo
10/14: 48-27 over Dallas
10/21: 49-28 over Miami
10/28: 52-7 over Washington
11/18: 56-10 over Buffalo

and about a half-dozen other wins by 20+ points over winning teams.

my 2008 prediction--the Colts will be back in the Super Bowl. wouldn't a Manning vs. Manning Superbowl be something.

in the grasp

It would have qualified, but fortunately that call is long gone. Everyone hated it and that play showed exactly why it was a dumb idea.

Thanks for the info, Bean. I check in and out on pro football, and so I missed that rule change. This year with the 'dog pool, I was mostly in (except for my cat box period). The G-Men did me right all playoffs long, and I should have had a C-note on them in the Super Bowl.

I could care about the game, the cities and teams involved, the pregame rankings, the advertisements, or the halftime entertainment. And I didn't watch any of it. But I did note the outcome of the contest for this reason.

"And they didn't really blow anyone out either."

I meant after mid-Nov. NE is still one of the best teams in the NFL, they have some issues on the defensive side of the ball they are going ot have to address though.

"The better team didn't win"?
New England hasn't been the best team in football since they escaped New York 38-35 the last week of the season. They were sloppy all postseason, and New York just kept coming on. And if you want to talk flukes and almosts, New York was outplaying New England offensively for almost the whole game. Until New England's scoring drive late in the game, they had the second-fewest offensive yards in Super Bowl history. That's no fluke: it had been coming since early December.

We voted the E-Trade spots with the little guy #1. Tied for #2: Napoleon seeking Waterloo with Garmin and Wieden+Kennedy's Coke with Carville and Frist Clever stuff; big bucks!

I think Bill Belichick learned something yesterday: The game's a lot harder when you don't cheat.

They were sloppy all postseason

they beat every single postseason team (before the Super Bowl) in points, total yards, and time of possession. which part of that is "sloppy"?

And if you want to talk flukes and almosts, New York was outplaying New England offensively for almost the whole game.

Brady outthrew Manning. the teams had about the same total yards and time of possession. and so on. take a look at the summary of the game.

Until New England's scoring drive late in the game, they had the second-fewest offensive yards in Super Bowl history.

and the Giants had about the same amount at that point-- and barring an almost miraculous throw, the Giants *still* would have lost.

I'm betting in a couple of years we'll look back on this era, similar to the way we look at the Steriods era in baseball.

Except this will be known as the Cheating era.

The Pats have been exposed.

The better team or individual always wins...that's why they have a score board. Who cares if Brady had better stats than Manning...Manning WON the game, and if everyone is playing by the rules that is all that counts in sports...unless you're talking about little kids playing in recreation leagues and such.

The better team or individual always wins...that's why they have a score board.

you mean, like when we vote for president? so, John Edwards will win the Presidency in 2008?

you mean, like when the winningest college teams always get the most prestigious Bowl assignments?

It was a GREAT GAME and had the highest audience ratings for a Super Bowl. Best of all it was a close game - not a blowout as some past Super Bowls have been.

"you mean, like when we vote for president? so, John Edwards will win the Presidency in 2008?

you mean, like when the winningest college teams always get the most prestigious Bowl assignments?"

Dude we are talking about two totally different things here. The Giants beat the Pats, and as a consequence of that victory they're considered the better team until the Pats prove it on the field of play at some point in the future. It doesn't have anything to do with politics or the BCS fiasco. End of story.

Dude we are talking about two totally different things here.

nope, i'm going with your philosophy--the better team or individual always wins.

the good part is, you've solved that old "who's the best?" dilemma, because now we know only the scoreboard matters.

like all those Hall of Fame quarterbacks who dominated but never won a Super Bowl. it's clear they were never the better player, since they didn't win.

right? right. end of story.

"like all those Hall of Fame quarterbacks who dominated but never won a Super Bowl. it's clear they were never the better player, since they didn't win."

Once again we are talking about two different things. My point was that the Giants are better than the Pats because they won the game. We can go back and forth all day long and argue if Superman is better than Spiderman, but it doesn't really mean anything. BTW all those QB's who were good, but never won a championship have a huge stigma attached to their record, and they are never really considered to have been "great ones" even if they manage to get into the Hall of Fame with a bunch of pity votes 20 years or so after their careers are over. Sports at the professional level are about winning the game, and anything else is just a bunch of babble around the proverbial water cooler.

My point was that the Giants are better than the Pats because they won the game.

The better team or individual always wins...that's why they have a score board.

nope, sounds like you just can't make up your mind, man. maybe they should just stop keeping stats, though? because obviously they're meaningless.

We can go back and forth all day long and argue if Superman is better than Spiderman, but it doesn't really mean anything

oh, so, we're talking superheroes, not football or politics? you *really* can't make up your mind.

BTW all those QB's who were good, but never won a championship have a huge stigma attached to their record...and they are never really considered to have been "great ones" even if they manage to get into the Hall of Fame with a bunch of pity votes

yeah, what a bunch of amateurs. lucky we took pity on them and let them in. like Dan Marino--never won a Super Bowl, despite out performing his opponent? poor sap. he should've realized he was not the best player.

Sports at the professional level are about winning the game, and anything else is just a bunch of babble around the proverbial water cooler.

you're talking about "what pro sports is about." i've been talking about what it means to be the better team/player.

see you at the water cooler, Kevin.

eh, that was over the top. sorry, Kevin. i'm still getting over Joe Montana's retirement.