Didn't Eli win two super bowls?

[KJJ]

He only deserved it in the 2nd one.

Justin Tuck was the MVP in the 07 super bowl.

If Eli doesn’t escape what appeared to be a certain sack in the final seconds of that Super Bowl and get the ball off to Tyree the Giants lose that game. He was clearly the Super Bowl MVP in that game. That was arguably the greatest play in Super Bowl history.

 

[kskboys]

If Eli doesn’t escape what appeared to be a certain sack in the final seconds of that Super Bowl and get the ball off to Tyree the Giants lose that game. He was clearly the Super Bowl MVP in that game. That was arguably the greatest play in Super Bowl history.

If the Giants D doesn't shut down Tom Brady w/ 5 sacks and constant pressure, the game's not even close. One play does not win a game.

 

[Aven8]

How did he even get to the playoffs if he didn't play well other times? The Giants couldn't get to the playoffs solely off playing the Cowboys twice a year.

RB’s and defense

 

[OmerV]

It's never harder to play defense with a lead lol.

No, I don't think that's the case. I think you're better off trying to win a shootout than you are trying to grind out a game. The league is officiated to be that way. Being resistant to that is a death sentence.

I didn't say it was harder to play defense with a lead.

But It's not necessarily easier to play defense with a small and early lead. A small lead early in the game doesn't change what the opponents offense will do, and doesn't somehow prevent the opponent's offense from scoring.

I think the problem here is you are only looking at extremes - an all out shootout, or a low scoring, grind it out game on both sides. And, really, even if that were the case, neck and neck to the end is neck and neck to the end, regardless of whether both teams have 30+ points or 20- points.

But the reality is there is a whole lot of room in between those extremes, and having a good defense doesn't somehow mean you have to have an offense that isn't capable of anything more than to "grind out a game". Seattle, for example, won largely on their defense, but they still had Russell Wilson passing the ball.

Ultimately, being able to achieve the best possible combination of scoring and preventing the opponent from scoring is what works. That can mean either the offense or the defense is a little stronger, or it can mean a good balance of the two.

 

[RonnieT24]

Here's what you missed: It's not that you have to have a dominant D to win a super bowl, but you have to have a D that can get stops. You're completely misinterpreting the statement that D's win championships. What the statement really means is that you're not going to win it all w/o a D.

Take 2011, the year you yourself picked. Are you aware that the Giants D held every team they faced in the playoffs under 21 points? And that includes holding the 3rd ranked GB to 20, and the 2nd ranked Patriots to 17. D was huge in that playoff run.

Yeah I've never understood how anyone could say "Eli won two Super Bowls" when the defense held the 2007 Pats, at that point the highest scoring team in NFL history with 589 points scored in the regular season to 14 points and then the 2011 Pats who had scored 513 points that year to 17 points. Eli deserves credit for not reverting to his normal turnover prone self in those games. But that's about it.

 

[DFWJC]

Eli did win two superbowls.

The guy is so-so in the regular season but he stepped up in the playoffs when needed. The Giants didn't need him to be like Rodgers or Mahomes. They needed him to make plays when needed and avoid turnovers. He did that.

Has to be the only guy in history that was so extremely all or nothing in the playoffs

In his very long career, the Giants never advanced past the first round of the playoffs except for the two Super Bowl years.

• 4 playoff years....one and done all four years, and played poorly each time

• 2 playoff years ...Super Bowl Champs and was solid to even very good at times

 

[Future]

I didn't say it was harder to play defense with a lead.

But It's not necessarily easier to play defense with a small and early lead. A small lead early in the game doesn't change what the opponents offense will do, and doesn't somehow prevent the opponent's offense from scoring.

I think the problem here is you are only looking at extremes - an all out shootout, or a low scoring, grind it out game on both sides. And, really, even if that were the case, neck and neck to the end is neck and neck to the end, regardless of whether both teams have 30+ points or 20- points.

But the reality is there is a whole lot of room in between those extremes, and having a good defense doesn't somehow mean you have to have an offense that isn't capable of anything more than to "grind out a game". Seattle, for example, won largely on their defense, but they still had Russell Wilson passing the ball.

Ultimately, being able to achieve the best possible combination of scoring and preventing the opponent from scoring is what works. That can mean either the offense or the defense is a little stronger, or it can mean a good balance of the two.

Yes you did, verbatim.

First of all, it's going to be harder to play with a lead if you don't have good defensive personnel (and good defensive coaching).

The rest of this post is off the rails.

My point is that if you score on your early possessions, you're putting your defense into an advantageous position. That's more important than building a strong defense, because the best defenses in the NFL can't stop the best offenses, not by a long shot. There is no such thing as a defense-first team that can win a championship in today's NFL. You either score points, or you lose.

 

[KJJ]

If the Giants D doesn't shut down Tom Brady w/ 5 sacks and constant pressure, the game's not even close. One play does not win a game.

Despite the 5 sacks and constant pressure the Giants were still behind with the game on the line. That Super Bowl came down to Eli having to make a play with time running out and if he didn’t make it the Giants would have lost!

 

[DFWJC]

Yeah I've never understood how anyone could say "Eli won two Super Bowls" when the defense held the 2007 Pats, at that point the highest scoring team in NFL history with 589 points scored in the regular season to 14 points and then the 2011 Pats who had scored 513 points that year to 17 points. Eli deserves credit for not reverting to his normal turnover prone self in those games. But that's about it.

That 2007 feat had to be the most amazing all-time performance by a defense in a Super Bowl.
That Pats offense was unstoppable, yet they held them to 14 points.

 

[OmerV]

RB’s and defense

That's a big oversimplification, and it's really not logical to suggest that the Giants beat Dallas because Eli played well, but they didn't need him to play well in other games. Eli is 8th all time in passing yards, and 9th all time in passing TD's, and he had to play well much more than you indicate to do that. Sure longevity is part of those stats, but a QB doesn't get that kind of longevity without playing well.

And look at his last Super Bowl winning season - the Giants had a terrible running game, and a weak defense. Only 1,427 rushing yards at 3.5 yards per carry, and the defense was bottom 10 in both yards and points allowed.

All this said, don't get me wrong, I don't think Eli was a great, or elite QB, but he did play well much more often than you give him credit for.

 

[Brax]

Of course he didn't! His defense did....

Just a gentle reminder to the DDS crowd.....

Critically speaking, the defense has been absolutely frightful. If it could just become middle of the pack, our fortunes would drastically change.

This defense is nearly last in every category, I can't see any qb being able to consistently overcome being let down knowing that everything is always 100% on their shoulders. There is virtually no help and especially no timely defensive stops.

I'm not sure nolan makes it through the season if the defense doesn't show some life.

Just a gentle reminder how did the 9th to 11th ranked D effect the W-L record in 2019???? What you really want is top 3 D to play with the overrated O.

 

[Blake]

Eli GREATER than Romo and it's not even close. He stepped up in December and the playoffs; Romo wilted.

 

[OmerV]

Yes you did, verbatim.

The rest of this post is off the rails.

My point is that if you score on your early possessions, you're putting your defense into an advantageous position. That's more important than building a strong defense, because the best defenses in the NFL can't stop the best offenses, not by a long shot. There is no such thing as a defense-first team that can win a championship in today's NFL. You either score points, or you lose.

What you say is verbatim is actually just a part of the sentence. Look at the entire sentence as you quoted it this time - I was saying it was going to be harder to play with a lead if you don't have a defense that can help you get a lead.

You still seem to be arguing as if having a good offense somehow means the opponent can't score, or even that the opponent cannot be the one that scores first. That makes no sense at all.

There really is no way in the world to argue that winning requires some combination of scoring yourself and having the ability to stop the other team from scoring. It's completely illogical for you to keep acting as if a good offense somehow, on it's own, without the benefit of a good defense, prevents the other team from scoring.

 

[rnr_honeybadger]

The defense has been horrible for years and the secondary has been laughable since Darren Woodson retired. What has been done to fix it? Do they draft safety? Do they go get talent in free agency? Who in the last 20 years can claim to be a respectable safety in the Cowboys system? Fact is that Jerry Jones wants every game to be a track meet.

 

[Future]

What you say is verbatim is actually just a part of the sentence. Look at the entire sentence as you quoted it this time - I was saying it was going to be harder to play with a lead if you don't have a defense that can help you get a lead.

You still seem to be arguing as if having a good offense somehow means the opponent can't score, or even that the opponent cannot be the one that scores first. That makes no sense at all.

There really is no way in the world to argue that winning requires some combination of scoring yourself and having the ability to stop the other team from scoring. It's completely illogical for you to keep acting as if a good offense somehow, on it's own, without the benefit of a good defense, prevents the other team from scoring.

Putting an "if" clause after doens't mean you didn't say it.

No, I'm not.

Never said it prevents the other team from scoring.

 

[RonnieT24]

Eli GREATER than Romo and it's not even close. He stepped up in December and the playoffs; Romo wilted.

One player had a regular season passer rating of 97.1 and a playoff passer rating of 93.0
The other player had a regular season passer rating of 84.1 and a playoff passer rating of 87.4.


So one guy was MUCH better than the other in the regular season and in the playoffs.

One guy threw 8 TDs and 2 INTs in his playoff career while the other guy threw 18 TDs and 9 INTs. Seems like 4:1 is better than 2:1. Anybody really wanna argue that?

One guy's best postseason run yielded a 103.3 passer rating in that postseason.. The other guy's best postseason run yielded a 125.7 passer rating.. Which guy "stepped it up" again?

Eli led the NFL in INTs THREE times.. He threw more picks than TDs twice in his career. Something Romo never did. Eli played on better teams with better coaching.. Romo was the better player and the numbers bear it out in both the regular season and the playoffs.

 

[baltcowboy]

Of course he didn't! His defense did....

Just a gentle reminder to the DDS crowd.....

Critically speaking, the defense has been absolutely frightful. If it could just become middle of the pack, our fortunes would drastically change.

This defense is nearly last in every category, I can't see any qb being able to consistently overcome being let down knowing that everything is always 100% on their shoulders. There is virtually no help and especially no timely defensive stops.

I'm not sure nolan makes it through the season if the defense doesn't show some life.

I got to give Eli and the Giants defense credit. They were clutch in the biggest games and facing the best teams. I still feel we would have beaten them 2007 if TO was healthy. The Giants beat the Packers in the cold. They beat the best team except the 93 Cowboys I have ever seen in the Super Bowl. We beat that team like a drum in the regular season. There defense was like Eli. Solid but not spectacular. But when the pressure mounted they stepped up.

 

[CouchCoach]

Just because they don't tackle well, don't cover well, don't rush the passer well and hired a DC with a spotty record is no reason to be so critical. I swear, ya just can't please some people.

 

[SteveTheCowboy]

Eli is one of the lickiest QB's to ever play the game. Two big bruiser RB's that people like Aira would never have these days. 3-4 receivers that would go get the ball when eli just chucked it up. Good coach too.

 

[CouchCoach]

Eli is one of the lickiest QB's to ever play the game. Two big bruiser RB's that people like Aira would never have these days. 3-4 receivers that would go get the ball when eli just chucked it up. Good coach too.

Sorry, I am not licking Eli. I try to avoid mouth breathers.