Response to a friend:
Yes, the Giants also had a gameplan, but it would not have worked had the Packers played smart and adjusted to it. That is the whole point of coaching, to come up with a gameplan prior to the game and adjust as necessary once the game starts. McCarthy never adjusted on either side of the ball, even though his plans weren’t working. On offense, the Giants’ plan was to attack the press coverage. They did this masterfully. All the Packers had to do was back off the corners 2 yards, and this gameplan has to be trashed. Then it goes back to who is better, and I feel the Packer defense would have shut down the Giants had their corners been back. On defense, you say the Giants’ plan was to stop the run and short passes. Let’s say we agree that was their plan. Stopping the run means nothing to me, as I hate running anyway and it’s not necessary. They can’t stop the short passes, as no team can. Favre’s first two passes of the game were 12 and 11 yards and the receivers were wide open. It was then that they started the first-down runs and deeper passes. A defense can’t take away short passes. If you try to take away a slant, which is nearly impossible, all you have to do is have the receiver start to slant, and then slant the other way. I’ll grant you the Giants stopped the Packer running game, but that emphasis just made it easier for a short passing game to work, which the Packers did not try to do. It wasn’t that the Giants stopped them and forced Favre to throw long, it was the Packer gameplan that was to throw long. The first two short passes worked, and then the Packers went away from it. So, if you’re saying the Giants gameplanned to take away the short passes, that failed.
I keep bringing up the Miami-bear game because my point is that if Miami didn’t do those things, the bears win by 30. I’m e-mailing all of you saying Miami would have killed the bears had they had a smart gamemplan, and you’d be responding saying the bears dominated and I’m out of my mind. This is why gameplans and adjustments to gameplans are so critical. You might have predicted the Giants would win, but I would have also told you they had a good chance if I knew the Packers’ offensive gameplan would be idiotic and if I knew their defense would stay in press coverage when it was being exploited on every play. Had the Packers gone with their successful offense and made the obvious adjustment with their corners, their superior talent wins the game easily.
Let me also respond to the bear game, as you said the bears adjusted in the second half and forced Favre’s interception to Urlacher. Let me recap the game. Favre is 20 of 21 in the first half and can’t be stopped. The Packers run the second-half kickoff back to the bear 33. On the first play, Favre passes for 20 yards. Some adjustment by the bear defense. The Packers then run three straight times and kick a field goal. This looks to me like an adjustment by the Packers, not the bears. Then the Packers get the ball back, and run two more times. Again, an adjustment by the Packers. The next play, third and long, was the Urlacher interception. As I’ve always told you, Favre’s bad passes are not forced by the defense, and in this case, the bears did nothing to force it. It was 5 straight runs, costing the Packers a TD, that frustrated Favre and then he thew the pass.
The Giants were hot, as you said, but so were the Packers. In addition to being 15-1, the Packer offense was on a roll. In the last game of the season, they scored TDs on all 3 possessions they were in the game for. They fumbled on the first two possessions against Seattle, then scored TDs on 6 straight possessions. This means they scored TDs on 9 of 11 possessions, and fumbled on the other two, so they weren’t stopped on downs. They were just as hot, have better talent, and were at home. In regular weather, they destroy the Giants, but weather is part of the game. They would have still won easily had they played smart, as their gameplans were as bad as possible and the game still went into overtime. Now, your comments about Brett in the cold. I give you the bear game, as he didn’t show up for the first time in his career. I know the cold had an effect, but I believe the wind had far more of an effect. He threw passes before the game, and it was extremely difficult. Bottom line is I agree with you that he didn’t show up this game. The Giant game is another story. He has played many games like he played the Giant game in good weather. When the gameplan stinks and frustrates him, he doesn’t play well at times. I knew when they had the gameplan they did in the first half, it would frustrate him. Both QBs had to have numb hands. Manning didn’t play so great. He completed half his passes, and many of them were very short (which was smart) to exploit the press coverage. Favre would have looked great in the Giant game even with the weather had the gameplan been smart. That had a lot more to do with it than the weather.
To summarize, my feeling is this, although we probably disagree. If the Packers go to their slants and high-percentage passes, the Giants can not stop them regardless of the adjustment they would attempt, and the Packers score over 30 points. If the Packer corners back off 2 yards starting in the first quarter, the Giants score less than 14 points as the Packer defense is much better than the Giant offense. I firmly believe this. It’s easy to say and easy to argue against, but I see the talent on both teams and fully believe this.