What does this Super Bowl teach us?

[Patler]

1. Defense still wins Championships.
2. Defensive line play is crucial to overall success.
3. You don't need a HOF quarterback to win the Super Bowl, a steady performer will do.

From that one can conclude (if they so chose):
A. TT's emphasis on the defense is well placed.
B. TT's more specific emphasis on the DL is well placed.
C. The Packers chances don't have to go out the window when Favre retires.

[BF4MVP]

I agree 100%, Patler. Nice post.

I like Ted's philosophy, and I like that he's putting an emphasis on acquiring talent on defense (but actually put together a supremely talented offense in the process).

I truely believe that this team can be very successful with Rodgers at the helm. I still hope Brett comes back, though.

[MJZiggy]

I thought it taught us that you can break your butt when you fall that far that fast...

And you're right. We're set up to be a strong team for quite some time.

[Patler]

I agree 100%, Patler. Nice post.

I like Ted's philosophy, and I like that he's putting an emphasis on acquiring talent on defense (but actually put together a supremely talented offense in the process).

I truely believe that this team can be very successful with Rodgers at the helm. I still hope Brett comes back, though.

I don't know if Rodgers will be the guy or not, he has to prove that he is. But we need not give up all hope when Favre announces his retirement some time within the next five years, or so. Obviously, great QBs help in winning Super Bowls, but they are not absolutely essential.

[fan4life]

It teaches us that championships are won by a team effort. By every single player playing his best game...

NY's defense was great, but NY wasn't going to win that game unless NY found a way to get into the end zone. NYs offense finally did that.

Defense doesn't win championships. But it is an important part of the formula that results in scoring more points than you let your opponent score.

[Patler]

It teaches us that championships are won by a team effort. By every single player playing his best game...

NY's defense was great, but NY wasn't going to win that game unless NY found a way to get into the end zone. NYs offense finally did that.

Defense doesn't win championships. But it is an important part of the formula that results in scoring more points than you let your opponent score.

Obviously you have to have some offense, or points on special teams, etc. Everyone has to contribute. But mostly everyone on both teams does, so that is more or less a wash.

However, when a defense holds a team to 14 points, you should have an excellent chance to win. And when the team held to 14 points is one that scored 589 points during the regular season, over 130 more points than the team with the second most points scored; I am comfortable with saying the Giants defense was THE key to this victory.

We saw a very good defense against a prolific offense, and the defense won.

The Giants had a decent offense, but not one that would have beaten, in order the #2 scoring offense, the #4 scoring offense and the #1 scoring offense without outstanding defensive play. And to hold the best offenses in the league to 17 points, 20 points and 14 points while winning by 4, 3 and 3 points in those games further emphasizes the value of a defense that is playing very well.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

I agree 100%, Patler. Nice post.

I like Ted's philosophy, and I like that he's putting an emphasis on acquiring talent on defense (but actually put together a supremely talented offense in the process).

I truely believe that this team can be very successful with Rodgers at the helm. I still hope Brett comes back, though.

I don't know if Rodgers will be the guy or not, he has to prove that he is. But we need not give up all hope when Favre announces his retirement some time within the next five years, or so. Obviously, great QBs help in winning Super Bowls, but they are not absolutely essential.

I disagree about the QB thing. I think you do need a very very good QB to win the super bowl; well at least if you want to multiple ones. Manning may not be a HOF QB, but his play in the playoff this year was better than Brady (future HOFer), other Manning, Favre, and was even as good as Joe Montana when he used to play. Did you see the play when he escaped the sack and completed that pass down field with only a minute left? Not many average QB's make that play. I think we have just seen Manning grow up and I think people are underestimating how good this is.

Last night both Brady and Manning proved why you need a QB to come up big when it counts. They both scored TD's on their last drives and put the team on their shoulders. Was this to much for us to expect from Favre in OT? I think not.

Point is you need a very good QB and VERY GOOD QB PLAY if you to win super bowl in this day in age. Without the heroics of Manning in that last drive the Giants would not be super bowl champs.

[Patler]

I agree 100%, Patler. Nice post.

I like Ted's philosophy, and I like that he's putting an emphasis on acquiring talent on defense (but actually put together a supremely talented offense in the process).

I truely believe that this team can be very successful with Rodgers at the helm. I still hope Brett comes back, though.

I don't know if Rodgers will be the guy or not, he has to prove that he is. But we need not give up all hope when Favre announces his retirement some time within the next five years, or so. Obviously, great QBs help in winning Super Bowls, but they are not absolutely essential.

I disagree about the QB thing. I think you do need a very very good QB to win the super bowl; well at least if you want to multiple ones. Manning may not be a HOF QB, but his play in the playoff this year was better than Brady (future HOFer), other Manning, Favre, and was even as good as Joe Montana when he used to play. Did you see the play when he escaped the sack and completed that pass down field with only a minute left? Not many average QB's make that play. I think we have just seen Manning grow up and I think people are underestimating how good this is.

Last night both Brady and Manning proved why you need a QB to come up big when it counts. They both scored TD's on their last drives and put the team on their shoulders. Was this to much for us to expect from Favre in OT? I think not.

Point is you need a very good QB and VERY GOOD QB PLAY if you to win super bowl in this day in age. Without the heroics of Manning in that last drive the Giants would not be super bowl champs.

You need a QB who is playing well. Heck, to win it you need your whole team playing well. But my point is that a performance like that can come from a QB who has been less than stellar in his career to date.

There seems to be a feeling among many Packer fans that when Favre leaves all hope of a Super Bowl will be gone, and that simply is not the case.

As for Mannings "great" play, there was as much greatness on the receiving end of it as on the throwing end, and a bit of good fortune too, I suspect, as well as on the interception dropped on the sidelines. Until he makes those kinds of plays with some frequency, it is merely good fortune. Until now, when he tried to do too much as on the recpetion, they generally resulted in interceptions. Eluding the rush as he did was very good, I agree; but the throw and catch was more fortuitous than planned, I think.

I will refrain from calling him great, as good as Brady and Montana, etc, until he shows it was more than just a few game run of good fortune.

To be honest, I feel much the same way about Tony Romo. Both are good QBs, but greatness is earned over time.

[Scott Campbell]

NY's defense was great, but NY wasn't going to win that game unless NY found a way to get into the end zone.

I don't really agree. The only chance to beat the highest scoring offense in league history was with a heroic defensive effort. They got that. And they got a decent though not stellar performance from the Giant offense.

[pbmax]

Hold on a minute. Montana destroyed defenses at his best. Manning had two long drives and a bunch of good, tough 3rd down completions. Very much like the QB play that beat the Packers.

He still could be scatter armed when forced to move and overthrew several passes. His receivers did not have the same dropsies they had in Green Bay.

The defense he beat has seen better days. They looked every single year of their veteran status last night and I don't think Seymour is healthy. Every hole they displayed at the end of the season was display, including slow linebacker play, run D and trouble covering 3rd and fourth receivers.

He did not have a killer turnover, he was patient in the pocket. But he wasn't Montana.

I disagree about the QB thing. I think you do need a very very good QB to win the super bowl; well at least if you want to multiple ones. Manning may not be a HOF QB, but his play in the playoff this year was better than Brady (future HOFer), other Manning, Favre, and was even as good as Joe Montana when he used to play. Did you see the play when he escaped the sack and completed that pass down field with only a minute left? Not many average QB's make that play. I think we have just seen Manning grow up and I think people are underestimating how good this is.

[pbmax]

Re: What does this Super Bowl teach us?

I would only add something about O Line play. The Giants pass blocked well all night, even when the Pats brought the kitchen sink in the 4th quarter.

Did you expect the Packer's O Line to out pass block the Patriots this post-season? I didn't. I tended to discount their numbers because of Favre's quick trigger, willingness to throw early and his pass pro reads. But they clearly can hold their own.

1. Defense still wins Championships.
2. Defensive line play is crucial to overall success.
3. You don't need a HOF quarterback to win the Super Bowl, a steady performer will do.

From that one can conclude (if they so chose):
A. TT's emphasis on the defense is well placed.
B. TT's more specific emphasis on the DL is well placed.
C. The Packers chances don't have to go out the window when Favre retires.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Re: What does this Super Bowl teach us?

2. Defensive line play is crucial to overall success.

What offense the Giants had was largely due to their offensive line. Manning had good protection against a good defense.

I agree tht the Giants defensive line is their forte, but don't overlook the white guys. sorry, that came out wrong.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Re: What does this Super Bowl teach us?

I would only add something about O Line play. The Giants pass blocked well all night, even when the Pats brought the kitchen sink in the 4th quarter.

Did you expect the Packer's O Line to out pass block the Patriots this post-season? I didn't. I tended to discount their numbers because of Favre's quick trigger, willingness to throw early and his pass pro reads. But they clearly can hold their own.

whups, sorry for duplicate post.

[twoseven]

My question then, is our DL good enough at this point to lead the way next year, and can they be as good as the NYG played in the playoffs? If not, what can we do about it before next season?

[Harlan Huckleby]

Bring back Gilbert Brown!