Sharp Football Analysis’ Super Bowl XLVI Play:
New York Giants +3 (3 Units)
New York Giants +10/Under 62, 7 point teaser (3 Units)
My computer believes that this game is a pure pick’em at a neutral site.
Therefore, taking points with whoever is the dog is where you will find value, and
that is with the Giants. It also believes there is a slight value in the under.
Teasing the Giants
Aside from the fact my computer finds value on the Giants, and all the reasons
found later in this analysis, since 1990, no Super Bowl has been decided by fewer
than 3 points. Therefore, it's unlikely we do anything better than push unless NYG
win outright. Being that I think it's a good chance they do win outright, but not a
"bet of a lifetime" chance, I like having the 10 points. Because in the last 10 Super
Bowls,
l the
h favorite
f
i has
h never covered
d the
h spread
d by
b over 7 points.
i
I fact,
In
f
going
i
back to 1985, only 3 Super Bowls out of 25 would you have lost a leg teasing the
underdog to +7:
•1992 when Dallas, a 6.5 point favorite, beat Buffalo 52‐17
•1998 when Denver, a 7.5 point favorite, beat Atl 34‐19 (this lost by just a 1/2 pt)
•2000 when Baltimore, a 3 point favorite, beat the NY Giants 34‐7
Otherwise, having 7 points on top of the underdog's spread would have sent you
21‐0‐1 in the Super Bowl.
Teasingg the Under
Aside from the fact my computer finds value in the under, and all the reasons
found later in this analysis, since 1992, Super Bowls with a total set above 45 have
gone Under 9 times and Over 5 times, including 6‐1 to the under since 1999.
However, teasing the Under by 7 points has gone 13‐1, as only 1 Super Bowl
since 1992 with a high total has gone over by more than 7 points, and this was
the 1994 Super Bowl between San Diego and San Francisco.
Since 2004, NE off of a bye week has held their opponents to an avg of just 17 ppg.
No team has scored over 28 points against them. This season they held Pit to 25
and Den to 10 (perfect avg of 17). They are only 2‐2 SU/ATS since 2010 off of a
bye week,
week but they have made solid defensive adjustments to slow down
opponents.
For the NYG, off of a bye week they are likewise batting .500 ATS (4‐4) but are 6‐2
SU (since 2006), but they hold opponents to a similar 17 ppg.
So it was no surprise that in the Super Bowl the last time both teams played (and
both were off of a bye) the score was 17‐14
Sharp Football Analysis: Key Factors for SB XLVI: p y
g
NYG are the ultimate playoff underdog
Since 2002, the NYG have the best record as playoff underdogs of any team in the
NFL. It's hard not to have a better record: They are a perfect 8‐0 ATS.
There are only a handful of teams who have a better than .500 record as playoff
underdogs. The closest teams are Car and Ari, who are 5‐1 and 4‐1 ATS
respectively as playoff dogs since 2002. Other than that, there is no one close.
NE is no longer a solid playoff favorite
From 2002‐2006, the Patriots were 8‐0 SU and 5‐3 ATS as a playoff favorite. No
team was even close to their SU success, and the only team better in ATS success
was Indy.
But from 2007 onward, the Patriots are 1‐6 ATS as a playoff favorite, far and
away the worst mark in the league and it's not even close.
Another Super Bowl Myth ‐ The NYG are the Hotter Team,
and this Benefits Them
Last I checked, NE has won their last 10 games in a row. Over that same time
span, from week 10 onward, the Giants are 6‐5, and have won 5 in a row. In other
words, NE has had twice as many wins and none of the losses since week 10.
Therefore, it's impossible to say they are not "hotter".
However, that has not been a good thing entering the Super Bowl:
Since 2002, the team who has won the most games out of their last 8 games
played is 0‐8 ATS in the Super Bowl, failing to cover the spread by an average 11
ppg.
Often, these teams have been favorites, but occasionally the hotter team was a
dog, as were the Bears in 2006 and the Steelers in 2010. Favorite or underdog,
these hot teams have lost 8 straight games ATS in the Super Bowl, which bodes
well for the Giants on Sunday.
Fact or Fiction: NE Owns Rematch Games
I saw a stat earlier this week that proclaimed NE is 43‐15 SU and 38‐19‐1 ATS
avenging a loss. Those numbers do check out since 2001. However, there are
some major flaws with buying into these numbers blindly:
#1 ‐ 19 of the 58 games were divisional games, against a usually weak AFC East.
Remember that from 2001‐2007, the only team above 47% in the AFC East was
NE. The AFC East was the only division in the NFL with 3 teams winning 47% or
fewer games during this 7 year span. So while NE has been a stellar 16‐3 SU/ATS
vs. the AFC East, it's meaningless in this debate.
#2 ‐ The problem w/ the remaining record vs non‐divisional opponents, which is
27‐12 SU and 22‐16‐1 ATS, is that 25 of the 39 matchups were from 2+ years
earlier. In other words, one of the rematch games included is a 2004 NE victory
over Seattle. The game it's a rematch of? A 1993 NE loss to the Seahawks. No
one can possibly believe this matters at all. Only 3 games were same‐season
rematches. Only 14 total games were games that were a rematch of a game the
prior season or the
h same season.
#3 ‐ Looking at these 14 non‐divisional rematch losses which involved NE avenging
a same season loss or a loss from the year before, take a guess what NE's record
is? Try 8‐6 SU and 7‐7 ATS. Not so impressive, is it? In fact, in same season
playoff revenge games, the Pats are 1‐2 SU/ATS.
#4 ‐ So we've debunked NE rematch stats, but why not look at the NYG rematch
games: NYG is not avenging a loss, what they are doing is simply playing a same
season rematch game (much more relevant than a rematch from 11 years earlier).
And the fact is, NYG is 10‐4 SU and 12‐2 ATS from week 17 thru the Super Bowl in
same season rematches. That's a very relevant number. And in non‐divisional
games, they are 4‐1 SU and 5‐0 ATS, covering the spread by 11 ppg.
What we've done is taken a poorly researched stat that someone tossed against a
wall, and we have broken it down, tried to make sense of it, proved it's largely
bunk (and full of fluff), and actually showed some true numbers which strongly
support the NYG in this spot.
Brady vs. the Pressure Defenses
Brady was injured week 1 of the 2008 season vs. KC. Say whatever you want, but
here is how the numbers break down.
P I j
Pre‐Injury
(f
(from
2001 2007) NE wentt 15‐6
2001‐2007),
15 6 SU,
SU 14‐7
14 7 ATS and
d 11‐10
11 10 to
t the
th Over
O
vs.
teams who sack their opponent 3+ times per game
Post‐Injury (2009+), NE went 3‐3 SU, 2‐4 ATS and 6‐0 to the Under vs. teams who
sack their opponent 3+ times per game
Whether it's a result of a worse offensive line, a worse team in general, or Brady's
tendency to play worse when rattled, it's irrelevant at this point. The facts are
facts. NYG has averaged 3+ sacks on the season as a whole, and have totaled 20
sacks in their last 5 games (4/game) to teams who allow 2.4/game.
Remember also that in the last Super Bowl these teams met in 2007, it was pre‐
injury for
f Brady.
d And
d he
h was sacked
k d 5 times. So knowing
k
that
h pressure willll be
b
coming on a fast track could be an issue for that offensive line.
This means there's a good chance, assuming Brady will get pressured (some or a
lot) that NE struggles ATS and the game may be headed Under.
There's No Place Like Road
Since 2002, whichever Super Bowl team has played fewer home games in the
last month have better success in the Super Bowl. These teams are 5‐1 SU/ATS.
The only SU loss was by 3 points to a team who was a 7 point underdog. 3 of
these teams were underdogs, 3 were favorites, but they combined to go 5‐1 SU.
The Patriots have not played a road game since December 18th. They were home
for Christmas, home for New Years, and home for every playoff game.
NE's Biggest Games are Close Games
NE has played in 4 Super Bowls since 2001. They won 3 and lost 1. Every single
game was decided by exactly 3 points. And all 4 games were covered by the
underdog.
Since that first win in 2001, the Patriots have averaged wins of 15 ppg during the
regular season, 13.8 ppg in the Divisional Round, 9 ppg in the Championship
Round,
d and
d 3 ppg in the
h Super Bowl.l It's
' clear
l
this
h team is not about
b
the
h flashy
fl h
win in the postseason, it's securing the win however they need to do it. If it
means running the ball to grind out the clock, if it means going for 3 or punting, NE
is more likely to do whatever is in the best interest of getting the win, and more
often than not, it's been playing closer games and earning the narrow wins later in
the postseason.
NYG vs Great QBs
This season, Tom Brady is averaging 8.6 yds/attempt, the most he's ever averaged
in his remarkable career.
career This is second in the league only to Aaron Rodgers.
Rodgers The
rest of the top 5: Schaub, Manning and Brees. So as you can see, yds/attempt is a
very good indicator of elite QB play.
Since Tom Coughlin took over as coach of the Giants in 2004, they are the single
#1 team in the league against great passers:
Vs. teams who are throwing for 7.8 or more yds/attempt, the Giants are 19‐3 ATS.
It's remarkable. But they also are 15‐7 SU. That's 68%. To give some perspective
on these numbers:
There are only 5 teams above .500 SU vs. these great QBs: NYG, NO, Ind, Pit and
NE. But none of these 5 teams are even close to 19‐3 ATS.
Even more amazing: as underdogs of over 2 points to these great QBs, the Giants
are a perfect 14‐0 ATS and 10‐4 SU. They beat these great QBs outright as dogs
over 71% of the time!
Looking at those teams who had winning records vs the great QBs, the only one
with a winning record as a dog of over 2 points was NO, at 4‐3 (57%). Ind was 2‐4,
Pit was 3‐4 and NE was also 2‐4 as a dog of over 2 points to the great QBs.
So while most of these teams were close to or just under .500 SU as dogs of 2
2+,,
the Giants are 10‐4 SU and 14‐0 ATS. Which brings me to:
NE vs Great QBs
NE has absolutely owned bad QBs. Since 2009, QBs who average less than 6.6
ypa are 4‐26 SU vs. NE. They don't do well.
As I mentioned above, NE has done well since 2004 vs. great QBs, posting an
overall 11‐7 SU/ATS record. However, a little closer look needs to be made:
From 2002 thru 2008, the Patriots were almost NYG like, posting a 13‐1 SU and
10‐4 ATS mark vs. great QBs. Unlike the Giants, however, most of these wins
were as a favorite, so not as impressive as when the Giants won outright so
frequently as an underdog (and went 14‐0 ATS).
However, as the Patriots defense weakened over the years, it's no longer relevant
to look at the earlier years:
Since 2009, NE is just 2‐6 SU and 3‐5 ATS vs. great QBs, averaging over 7.8 ypa. As
a favorite in these games, they are 0‐4 ATS, 1‐3 SU, and all 4 games have gone
under. This season, they are 0‐3 ATS with 3 unders in games vs. Romo (Dal), Big
Ben ((Pit)) and Eli ((NYG).
)
So while much of the talk is about the great Brady vs. the NYG secondary, the fact
is, there is a much better chance NE does not fare well vs. Eli. Afterall:
Since 2009, NYG are 6‐2 SU and 7‐1 ATS vs. great QBs, including a perfect 4‐0 ATS
as a dog. (Vs. NE in that time, 2‐6 SU and 0‐4 ATS as a favorite).
Perry Fewell off of a Bye
Fewell was the defensive coordinator of the Bills from 2006‐2009. This team was
a 7‐9
7 9 team each of those seasons,
seasons they were not particularly good.
good
However, off of a bye they were very good:
•In 2006 they held the Green Bay Packers (who averaged 19 ppg) to just 10 points
in a 24‐10 victory as a 3.5 point favorite.
•In 2007 they held the Baltimore Ravens (who averaged 17 ppg) to 14 points in a
19‐14 win and cover as a 3 point home underdog.
•In 2008 they held the San Diego Chargers (who won their division and averaged
27 ppg) to 14 points in a 23‐14 win and cover in a pickem game.
All 3 games were wins SU/ATS
/
and went under.
In 2010 he came to the NYG and was defensive coordinator the last 2 seasons.
•In 2010 they held the Seattle Seahawks (who won their division and upset the
Saints at home in the playoffs and averaged 19 ppg) to just 7 points in Seattle in a
41‐7 road win. The game only went over due to NYG's 41 points.
•In 2011 they held the Miami Dolphins (who averaged 21 ppg) to 17 points in a 20‐
17 win.
Record
d since 05: TTotals Comb
bined: 281‐17
73 (62%); Personal Plays: 263‐184
4 (58%) The mark of a great QB is typically measured by the masses in passing yards.
I prefer to look at their rating as well as their yds/attempt. For this glimpse, let's
focus on yds/attempt:
In other words, in 5 games, the under went 4‐1 (the only over was a blowout win)
and Fewell's defenses held opponents who averaged 21 ppg to just 12 ppg (‐9
ppg) and his teams went 5‐0 SU and 4‐1 ATS.
Does the Dome Favor Either Team?
Since Bradyy started in 2001,, NE has p
played
y 17 ggames in domes. Theyy score 30 and
allow 23. They played these same dome teams in NE twenty times over that span,
and in those games, NE has scored 27 and allowed 17. So NE is scoring 3 more
ppg and allowing 6 more, a net of ‐3 in differential.
Since Coughlin came to town in 2004, NYG have played 24 games in domes. They
score 26 and allow 24. They played these same dome teams in NY 31 times, and
in those games, NYG has scored 23 and allowed 20. So NYG is scoring 3 more ppg
and allowing 4 more, a net of ‐1.
Interestingly, both teams have been destroyed by the Saints. If you remove games
in NO, NE is allowing 22 ppg, which helps them 1 point and gives them a net of ‐2
in ppg differential.
differential Removing those games from the NYG schedule,
schedule NYG is
allowing 21 ppg, which helps them 3 points and gives them a net of +2 in ppg
differential.
So truly, the dome does not really favor one team significantly more than the
other, but the NE defense is the unit hurt the most, so a slight edge could be given
to the NYG, particularly on offense.
The key is that the last 2 years, NE has played just 1 game in a dome (in 2010)
while NYG has played 7, including 3 this year. Since Brady's knee injury in 2008,
he has played just 4 games in domes, and is 1‐3 SU.
Red Zone
Based on my personal red zone rankings, in terms of just conversion percentage,
the Patriots played just 5 non‐divisional opponents ranked in the top half of the
league in red zone defense. Here are those 5 teams, how NE performed in the
red zone, and the total points they scored:
Bal: 2 of 5, 23 points scored
Was: 1 of 4, 34 points scored
KC: 2 of 4, 34 points scored
Pit: 2 of 2, 17 points scored
NYG: 2 of 4,
4 20 points scored
The averages of these 5 games is: 1.8 of 3.8 red zone trips into TDs, 25.6 points
scored.
Compare this to their average when they play weaker red zone defenses: 3.4 of
4.9 red zone trips into TDs, 34.8 points scored.
You can see that against these better red zone defenses, NE is scoring 9 ppg less,
making 1 fewer trip inside the red zone and converting 50% fewer trips into TDs.
Based on overall red zone defenseive rankings, Washington falls out of the top
half of the league on account of the number of trips they allow, leaving just Bal,
KC, Pit and these NYG as the best overall red zone defenses the Giants faced. And
they are putting up just 23.5 ppg vs. these 4 teams.
The other key to take away is vs. these 4 better red zone defenses (Bal, KC, Pit
and NYG) all 4 games went under. The avg total was set at just over 50, and the
avg points scored was 41.5.
In addition, if you believe removing Tyler Palko and the Chiefs performance is
warranted based on KC’s losing record, looking at the games vs. Bal, Pit and NYG,
these 3 were closely contested games, with NE averaging 20 ppg and their
opponents averaging 23 ppg, and NE went 0‐3 ATS and lost 2 of the 3 outright.
I went back and looked at every NE game since 2006 (excluding the Brady‐less 2008,
and excluding week 17 games which most often were meaningless games). There were
a total of 85 games, and they can be broken down as follows:
51 games NE won by 7+ points
16 games NE won by 1‐6 points (9 of 16 or 56% were won by 3 points)
12 games NE lost by 1‐8 points (NE was within 1 score at the end)
6 games NE lost by 9+ points
Removing the 51 games where NE won by at least 1 TD, let's focus on any keys we can
takeaway from the games which were not solid NE victories. The games where they
lost or won by a close margin.
Of these 34 games, 19 (or 56%) went under. The average total was 46 and the average
points scored was 45.
In these games, NE averaged only 21 points. Their opponents averaged 24 points.
In 5 games vs. the Colts, NE averaged 29 points, Ind averaged 30 points, and the games
went over 3 of 5.
Excluding these 5 games, NE scored 30+ points just 3 out of 29 games (once vs Buf this
season, once vs GB last
l season (Flynn
( l
was QB)) and
d once vs Phi
h in 2007.
NE averaged just 19.7 ppg in these 29 “tough” games.
Since 2007, only 4 of 22 games was lost by over 8 points. Those 4 losses were @ NO
and vs Bal in 2009, and @ NYJ and @ Cle in 2010.
Looking back over these “tough” games since 2006, let's focus on what prevented NE
from scoring points like we expect. We can trace it back to three primary stats:
Red Zone
Sacks
Interceptions
Red Zone:
In these tough games for NE, they made it into their opponent's red zone just 3.3
times/game, converting 57% or 1.9 red zone TDs/game
In all other NE games during this span, they recorded 4.7 red zone trips, converted
65%, or 3.0 red zone TDs/game
Therefore, these opponents held NE to 1.5 fewer trips to the red zone, 1.1 fewer red
zone TDs, and a 8% worse conversion
What can NYG do about it: It's clear NYG's defense has come a long way since earlier
this year. They played 1 great offense (GB), 1 mediocre offense (Atl) and one poor
offense (SF) but all 3 were quality opponents in this playoff run. They held these teams
to
in
I have
the
t 40% conversions
i
i the
th red
d zone. Using
U i my tailored
t il d red
d zone rankings,
ki
h
th
NYG as the #11 team in the red zone.
Since that week 13 loss to Green Bay, the Giants have faced a bevy of strong red zone
teams: GB, NYJ, Dal (2x) and Atl. The only bad red zone teams they faced were Was
and SF. While I think NE should be moderately successful in the red zone, the key is
limiting their trips: NE is averaging over 4.7 trips/game into the opponent's red zone
this year, best in the league. However, in the Giants last 4 "playoff" games (including
week 17), NYG held teams who average a total of 14 trips/game (between the 4
teams) to a total of just 7 trips! In other words, they cut their opponent's trips in half
vs their average (and a total of 1.75
vs.
1 75 trips/game),
trips/game) and these teams converted just 3 of 7
trips (43%).
It certainly looks like the Giants do possess the defense in the red zone, both in limiting
trips and defensive percentage, to cause problems for the NE offense that usually gives
them problems.
Record
d since 05: TTotals Comb
bined: 281‐17
73 (62%); Personal Plays: 263‐184
4 (58%) New England Patriots in Close Games
Sacks:
In these tough games for NE, Brady was sacked 2.3 time/game on avg (only 4 out of
these 29 games was he sacked 0 times).
In the other games which were easier NE wins, Brady was sacked just 1.3 times/game
and 16 of 54 games he wasn't sacked at all.
Therefore, opponents needed to sack Brady about 2x per game in order to throw off
that passing attack.
What can NYG do about it: NE allows just 1.8 sacks/game, 7th best in the NFL. We
know from above that it is paramount that NYG sack Brady at least 2x. In the 2007
Super Bowl, NYG sacked Brady 5 times. In their earlier meeting in NE, they sacked
Brady twice.
NE is just 4‐7 SU since 2009 when allowing 2+ sacks to a team with a winning record
thru 8 weeks of the season. Their only wins were: MNF in Foxboro vs. NYJ where they
lambasted Sanchez 45‐3 last year, that snow game in Chi last year where they thrashed
the Bears, a narrow 4 point win over Flynn's Packers, and this year beating Tebow in
Denver.
So can NYG get the job done? NYG have recorded 2+ sacks in each of their last 5
games. They have totaled 20 sacks in their last 5 games (4/game) to teams who allow
2.4/game, a 67% increase. Which means if NYG is able to sack Brady 67% more than
usual (1.8/game), they'll get him 3 times, so yes, they can get the job done.
Interceptions:
In the tough games for NE, Brady threw an avg of 1.1 interceptions, and the team had
a total of 1.9 turnovers per game. In 7 of the last 15 tough games for NE, Brady threw
2+ interceptions, and had at least 1 in 11 of 14 games.
In the easy NE wins,
wins Brady threw 0.4
0 4 interceptions/game,
interceptions/game and the team had fewer
than 1 turnover per game. In 21 of the last 30 easy wins, Brady threw zero
interceptions.
Therefore, these tough opponents forced Brady into at least 1 interception per game, if
not more, and needed an avg of 2 takeaways to make things tough on NE.
What can NYG do about it: The Giants haven't really excelled at interceptions this
year, recording 6 in their last 6 games (1/game) but overall, in turnovers, they are
taking the ball away an avg of 2.2 times/game.
It's clear that NYG do have the ability to at least get the type of turnovers that cause
problems for NE: 1 interception and 2 total turnovers. This is exactly what the Giants
are averaging during their latest run.
By Warren Sharp of Sharp Football Analysis
So many people compare this New York Giants team to the 2007 Super Bowl Champion team who beat the Patriots twice, once in the regular season and once in the Super Bowl. But the strengths and weaknesses of the 2011 New York Giants team are vastly different and in many ways completely opposite from the 2007 New York Giants team. York Giants team are vastly different and in many ways completely opposite from the 2007 New York Giants team.
The only similarity is both Giants teams got hot at the end of the season, which obviously must happen to advance through the playoffs.
Instead of comparing these 2011 Giants to the 2007 Giants, there is another team who they are very similar to, in a very bizarre yet intriguing way. This team also beat the Patriots twice in the same season en route to a Super Bowl Championship: once in the regular season and once in the playoffs. It's not the 2007 New York Giants, it's the 2006 Indianapolis Colts. And these Giants are so eerily similar to those Colts that it bears comparing as well as looking to the 2006 Colts for insight into next Sunday'ss Super Bowl.
the 2006 Colts for insight into next Sunday
Super Bowl
Why are the 2011 New York Giants so similar to the 2006 Colts?
In the regular season, the 2011 New York Giants had a great offense but a bad defense, just like the 2006 Colts. Both teams started the season well, sputtered, then regained momentum and ran thru the playoffs. Looking at the 2006 Colts may provide a critical clue as to how the 2011 Giants could once again beat the Patriots this year: •The 2006 Colts were led by a 30 year old QB named Manning, who was a former #1 overall draft pick, who was playing his 9th year as a pro and guided his team with four 4th quarter comebacks and 4 game winning drives that year.
•The 2011 Giants are led by a 30 year old QB named Manning, who was a former #1 overall draft pick, who is playing his 8th year as a pro, and guided his team to five 4th quarter comebacks and 6 game winning drives this year.
•The 2006 Colts started out the season very hot, 9‐0, and then dropped 4 of their next 6 games before ending the regular season with a needed win, and then began their dominant performances in the postseason.
•The 2011 Giants started out the season very hot, 6‐2, and then dropped 5 of their next 6 games before ending the regular season with 2 straight wins, and then began their dominant performances in the postseason.
•The 2006 Colts had a tremendous offense but a significantly worse defense. Their offense was 3rd in yds gained
b t th i d f
but their defense was 21st in yds
21 t i d allowed, a decrease
ll
d d
of 18 spots.
f 18
t
•The 2011 Giants had a tremendous offense but a significantly worse defense. Their offense was 8th in yds gained
but their defense was 27th in yds allowed, a decrease of 19 spots.
•Contrast with the 07 Giants, who had a mediocre to average offense but a great defense. Their offense was 16th in yds gained but defense was 7th in yds allowed, an increase of 9 spots.
•The 2006 Colts had a brilliant pass offense, but their rush offense not nearly as productive. They passed for 31 TDs
(
(#1 in league) and rushed for just 17 (#6 in league).
)
(
) They passed 557 times (#6 in league)
(
) and averaged 7.5 ypa (#1 (
in league).
•The 2011 Giants had a brilliant pass offense, but their rush offense not nearly as productive. They passed for 29 TDs (#6 in league) and rushed for just 17 (#6 in league). They passed 589 times (#6 in league) and averaged 7.7 ypa
(#4 in league).
•Contrast with the 07 Giants, who had a much better rush offense than pass offense. They passed for just 23 TDs (#14 in league) yet rushed for 15 (#7 in league) at a huge 4.6 ypr avg (#4 in league). They threw infrequently (#17 in league)
league) and averaged just 5.5 ypa
and averaged just 5.5 ypa (#22
(#22 in league).
in league).
•Both the 2006 Colts and 2011 Giants finished the regular season +7 in turnover margin. The 07 Giants finished the regular season ‐9 in turnover margin.
As you can see, from the way the teams were built (pass not run, offense not defense), to the way they started and finished the season, the 2011 Giants were VERY similar to the 2006 Colts (and very dissimilar to the 07 Giants). But the similarities persist during their respective playoff runs:
•The 2006 Colts, despite their bad defense during the regular season, held their first 2 opponents in the playoffs to extremely low scores, winning 23‐8 over the Chiefs at home and 15‐6 over the Ravens on the road. •The 2011 Giants, despite their bad defense during the regular season, held their first 2 opponents in the playoffs to extremely low scores, winning 24‐2 over Atl at home and 37‐20 over GB on the road.
•The 2006 Colts were viewed as a team whose defense could not stop the run, and would lose their game to the best rushing team in the playoffs, the Chiefs. They stopped the rush and won handily.
•The 2011 Giants were viewed as a team whose defense could not stop the pass, and would lose their game to the best •The 2011 Giants
were viewed as a team whose defense could not stop the pass and would lose their game to the best
passing team in the playoffs, the Packers. They stopped the pass and won handily.
•The 2006 Colts won in the Conference Championships in a very tight game (unlike their prior 2 playoff games) by only 4 points in a game which required them to come from behind to pull off the narrow win.
•The 2011 Giants then won in the Conference Championships in a very tight game (unlike their prior 2 playoff games) by only 3 points in a game which required them to come from behind to pull off the narrow win.
And just when you thought the similarities couldn't get any creepier:
•The 2006 Colts met the Patriots during week 9 of the regular season in New England as an underdog. They upset the Patriots 27‐20 in a very even game which saw both teams gain 24 first downs, but the Colts only had 2 turnovers and forced 5.
•The 2011 Giants met the Patriots during week 9 of the regular season in New England as an underdog. They upset the Patriots 24‐20 in a very even game which saw both teams gain 23 first downs, but New York Giants only had 2 turnovers
and forced 4
and forced 4.
So why is it important that this team is similar to the 2006 Colts?
The 2006 Colts beat the Patriots twice in the same season, but more importantly, from 2005 thru 2009, these Colts went 5‐1 vs. the Patriots, and their only loss was a game that the Colts actually covered during New England's incredible 2007 season. You could say they were “built” to beat the Patriots, and it looks like the Giants are built in a similar manner and have seen similar success against the Patriots.
After being bounced twice by the Patriots in the 2003 and 2004 playoffs, and after dropping 6 straight to the Patriots through 2004, the Colts figured out how to beat New England in 2005. During the next 5 seasons, the Colts were one of 2 teams who knew how to beat New England (the Colts and Broncos were, both at least 4‐1 SU vs New England) while most teams had no idea (Bills were 0‐10, Jaguars was 0‐4, Jets were 3‐8 vs New England). Every single one of the 5 games vs. Patriots from 2006‐09 was decided by 7 or fewer points. The more they played, the closer the margin got: closer
the margin got:
7 and then 4 points decided the two 2006 meetings. 4 points decided the 07 meeting. 3 points decided the 08 meeting. 1 point decided the 09 meeting.
Now fast forward to the years 2007‐2011. Just like the Colts from 05‐09, these Giants are one of very few teams to have sustained success vs. the Patriots. They are 3‐0 ATS and 2‐1 SU vs. the Patriots since 2007, with the only loss being a meaningless (for the Giants) week 17 game as they tried to stop New England from completing a perfect regular season. They narrowly failed but succeeded in stopping the Patriots perfect season that year in the Super Bowl. Like the Colts, the Giants and Patriots games have been very close, with none being decided by more than 4 points.
So the question is, what were some of the keys that the 2006 Colts did vs the Patriots that these Giants have also been able to do? Looking at the 6 games vs the Patriots where the Colts went 5‐1 and comparing them to the 3 Giants games vs the Patriots where the Giants went 2‐1 there are several notable “keys to success”, which, if duplicated, should lead to another Giants victory over the Patriots.
KEYS to SUCCESS
Keep the Game Close ‐ Since 2001 the Patriots are 113‐10 with a halftime lead, the 92% win rate is far and away best in the NFL. But when trailing at the half, this team is very mortal: just 22‐30 SU and 14‐37‐1 ATS. The Colts were trailing at halftime in just 2 of 6 games (and came back to win both) and the Giants were only trailing in 1 of 3 games (and came back to win). So neither team allowed the Patriots to dominate early, and if they were unfortunate enough to trail at the half, both were good enough to overcome that and beat the Patriots in the second half
both were good enough to overcome that and beat the Patriots in the second half.
Get into the New England Red Zone ‐ Since 2001 the Patriots allow less than 3 trips into their red zone per game. They are 99‐11 (90%) when allowing 3 or fewer trips into their red zone, #1 in the league over that time. But when allowing over 3 trips, they win just 54% of their games. And, if the opponent scores TDs on over 2 of these trips, New England is just 11‐21 (34%) including 6‐26 ATS (19%). The key number appears to be at least 4 red zone trips. In their 6 games vs New England, the Colts averaged 4.3 red zone trips per game, with 3 games of 4+ trips. In their 3 games vs New England, the New York Giants averaged 4.7 red zone trips per game, with all 3 games gaining 4+ trips.
Keep the Ball ‐ Since 2001, the Patriots are 101‐4 (96%) if they win the turnover battle, the 96% win rate is, again, best in the NFL. But when they don't win the turnover battle (if it's even or they lose it) the Patriots have won only 50% of their games. And they have won just 12 of 42 games (29%) if not a large favorite in the game. The Colts did not lose the turnover battle once in 6 games played vs the Patriots. The Giants went 2‐0 vs New England if tied or ahead in the turnover margin, but 0‐1 in the one game they lost it.
Maintain a Balanced Attack, Trending Toward the Pass
Maintain
a Balanced Attack Trending Toward the Pass – In their meetings, New England has tried to make these teams 1 In their meetings New England has tried to make these teams 1
dimensional, by bottling up the run, and believing Brady can beat either Manning. In the 6 Colts games, New England held Indy to 3.5 ypa rushing. In the 3 Giants games, New England held NY to 3.8 ypa. But in these games, the Colts averaged 37 passes to 27 rushes, and New York Giants averaged 35 passes to 25 rushes. The ratios were (yet again) extremely similar, and these teams were able to do more of what they do best (throw) but importantly kept New England honest in the run game, even if the run game didn’t generate a ton of yardage. Many coaches would abandon the run far too early against the Patriots if it didn’t work. Since 2001, the Patriots rank #3 in the league in fewest opponent rushes per game. But neither the Colts nor the Giants have abandoned the run in their games vs New England.
Ensure Multiple Routes to Victory ‐ Although both the Colts and Giants relied heavily on their Manning QBs, both teams were good enough to win even if their QB did not play perfectly:
In 2006, Peyton had his worst game during this span vs the Patriots, passing for just 56% and 7.0 yds/attempt (both well below season averages of 65% and 7.9 yds/attempt) and was sacked 3 times. But the run game and the defense stepped up, rushing for 4.2 ypa and the Indy defense held the Patriots to just 36% on 3rd down, and the Colts won by 4 points.
Earlier this year, Eli passed for just 51% and 6.4 yds/attempt (both well below season averages of 61% and 8.4 yds/attempt). But the New York Giants defense recorded 4 takeaways and held the Patriots to 33% on 3rd down and just 50% in the red zone, and the Giants won by 4 points. Many teams do not have the balance and all around talent of the Colts and Giants, and cannot beat the Patriots unless their QB plays flawlessly. But because both the Colts and Giants had this balance, they could overcome a poor performance to record the victory.
Both
the Colts and the Giants knew the importance of these 5 keys and as importantly were able to execute them with
Both the Colts and the Giants knew the importance of these 5 keys, and as importantly, were able to execute them with success. Which is why those Colts and these Giants were two of the very few teams to enjoy extended success against the Patriots. And because these Giants are built so similarly to those Colts were from 05‐09, there is a good chance that this success will continue on Sunday.