So, here we are. The last day of true football for 2011. It is arguable that these have been the most depressing 19 weeks of my football watching career. From the moment it was announced that Peyton needed another surgery back in September, until now, I have seen passing offenses bastardize the game to a level where three guys threw for 5,000+ yards, and one more got stuck in the 4,900's (not to mention Rodgers who ended with 4,600+ and didn't play Week 17). I finally got some respite last weekend as the Saints and Packers were both exiled by teams who had great defensive performances. The Giants are not the great defense that the 49ers are, but when that pass rush is coming, they are about as good. Only one great offense is left (although Mr. 4,900 yards is still around as well), but defense can really show who owns the NFL if Baltimore can take out the Patriots.
I will say now that I am praying for the Ravens to beat New England. If they do, I honestly would not care one minute about who wins the Super Bowl between the three remaining teams (Ravens, Giants, 49ers). If the Patriots win, well, I don't care who wins in the NFC, because I think they are really close to even, and either could beat New England in the Super Bowl. That said, I just want the football Gods to grant me this one wish. Sure, I've been given a Super Bowl as a gift, but I also had to deal with heartbreaking loss after heartbreaking loss. Colts fans have already experienced losing like the Steelers did to Denver this year. We were there, in 2008, playing as a 12-4 Wild Card at an 8-8 champ from the AFC West. We too didn't see the ball in OT. We too fell victim to a higher power. No, it wasn't Tebow, but it was Mike Scifres pinning four punts inside the 10 yard line. Colts fans have also experienced what Packers fans feel now. We were there, in 2005, as the clear best team in the NFL, playing with a heavy heart after the tragic death of a coach's sun. We were playing a team we had already beat, but fell victim to a hot QB, and a great pass rush. Colts fans have also experienced losing like the Saints. We were there in 2007, twice blowing the lead in the 4th quarter, and having the ignominy of giving up a 4th quarter comeback to Billy Volek of all people. I've been there. All I ask is this year, let those damn Pats lose. Let Ed Reed get a chance at a ring. Tom Brady doesn't need any more. Gronk will have plenty more opportunities to get one. Ed Reed is deserving. He's a top-5 all-time safety. He should get a ring. Anyone but NE. Anyone but NE.
On the other side, the Pats defense is no more or less awful than it was one week ago. Being able to stop Tim Tebow is nothing like stopping the Ravens, even if the Ravens themselves aren't a great offense. That said, they are better than what they showed against the Texans. Their offense ranked 13th in Football Outsiders' DVOA. While the Patriots defense ranked 30th. That seems to be a bigger mismatch than the Ravens #1 defense against the Patriots #3 offense (it should be noted that the only reason the Pats are #3 is that the Packers and Saints had historically good offenses, and Baltimore is one of the 'worst' #1 defenses that they've ever rated). Anyway, Ray Rice should get his, but the key is Flacco. Flacco has the weapons. He also has two good tight ends (of course, none of them is as good as Gronk, but at least my opinion is Ed Dickson is at least Hernandez), and one receiver who in their meeting last year the Patriots couldn't really stop (Boldin). Torrey Smith is still there, and there was even a Lee Evans sighting last week. The real issue is pass protection. The Ravens were awful at it on Sunday. The Texans pass rush is better than the Patriots, but they will have to block a lot better to have a chance. Personally, I think they will.
I will say now that I am praying for the Ravens to beat New England. If they do, I honestly would not care one minute about who wins the Super Bowl between the three remaining teams (Ravens, Giants, 49ers). If the Patriots win, well, I don't care who wins in the NFC, because I think they are really close to even, and either could beat New England in the Super Bowl. That said, I just want the football Gods to grant me this one wish. Sure, I've been given a Super Bowl as a gift, but I also had to deal with heartbreaking loss after heartbreaking loss. Colts fans have already experienced losing like the Steelers did to Denver this year. We were there, in 2008, playing as a 12-4 Wild Card at an 8-8 champ from the AFC West. We too didn't see the ball in OT. We too fell victim to a higher power. No, it wasn't Tebow, but it was Mike Scifres pinning four punts inside the 10 yard line. Colts fans have also experienced what Packers fans feel now. We were there, in 2005, as the clear best team in the NFL, playing with a heavy heart after the tragic death of a coach's sun. We were playing a team we had already beat, but fell victim to a hot QB, and a great pass rush. Colts fans have also experienced losing like the Saints. We were there in 2007, twice blowing the lead in the 4th quarter, and having the ignominy of giving up a 4th quarter comeback to Billy Volek of all people. I've been there. All I ask is this year, let those damn Pats lose. Let Ed Reed get a chance at a ring. Tom Brady doesn't need any more. Gronk will have plenty more opportunities to get one. Ed Reed is deserving. He's a top-5 all-time safety. He should get a ring. Anyone but NE. Anyone but NE.
Baltimore Ravens @ New England Patriots (-7.5)
This is a large line. This is definitely a classic case of overrating the previous weekend. All the time we hear that the NFL, much like March Madness, is about winning and advancing. That there are no style points, that this isn't a BCS system, and all that matters is you get the win and move on. Well, the Ravens got that last week. And for how mediocre they played in the first half, they shut the Texans down in the 2nd. The Texans drives in the 2nd half went: punt, punt, punt, int, punt, int, downs. Foster didn't get much in the 2nd half. On the other side you have the Patriots who obliterated Denver. That said, Denver should never have even been in the playoffs. Denver wasn't worthy of being one of the last eight teams. Denver has lost games just like that before. Hell, they lost a game by a worse score at home. Detroit slammed Denver 45-10. They were up 45-3. They sacked Tebow 7 times, and returned a pick for a TD. What did Detroit then do? Lose three of their next four. Beating Denver one week doesn't automatically make you "unstoppable". We went through this exact same thing last year with Green Bay. They smashed Atlanta 48-21 in the divisional round, and then squeaked by Chicago, nearly blowing a 14-0 lead to a third string QB (they did cover, but their offense was slowed down - a lot). That was actually more impressive, beating the NFC's #1 seed on the road. This was beating the playoff fraud. I have a feeling that if just two of those Brady TD passes, were rushing touchdowns, this line is two points lower. Also, people always overreact to teams coming off of big wins. Teams in the playoffs coming off of wins of 20+ points are 8-12 the next week, and teams that score 40+ points in a playoff win are 4-8 the following week, and just 2-10 against the spread (the two ATS wins were the 2010 Packers and 2003 Colts; the 2009 Saints and 2004 Pats won the following week but lost ATS). Simply put, teams that were great in one game get overrated.
As for the matchups. The key for NE is getting pressure. You aren't going to take away their tight ends. The best way is just to make Brady throw it soon enough to limit them. Baltimore's pass rush was below par against the Texans, but the Texans have a great o-line. The Patriots line isn't nearly as good as the Patriots o-lines of years past. Suggs and Ngata both have favorable matchups. The Ravens don't have the cover guys to really stop Gronk one-on-one (personally, I think you play to stop Gronk. Hernandez is just merely a nice TE, not a monster like Gronk, but he gets pumped up due to playing with Gronk), but they do have the players in the middle to make them struggle to get open and get YAC. I don't think there will be any plays for Gronk like that TD in the Redskins game where he broke tacklers all over the place. No, the Ravens will get him on the ground. The Ravens also won't allow the run game to really get going.
On the other side, the Pats defense is no more or less awful than it was one week ago. Being able to stop Tim Tebow is nothing like stopping the Ravens, even if the Ravens themselves aren't a great offense. That said, they are better than what they showed against the Texans. Their offense ranked 13th in Football Outsiders' DVOA. While the Patriots defense ranked 30th. That seems to be a bigger mismatch than the Ravens #1 defense against the Patriots #3 offense (it should be noted that the only reason the Pats are #3 is that the Packers and Saints had historically good offenses, and Baltimore is one of the 'worst' #1 defenses that they've ever rated). Anyway, Ray Rice should get his, but the key is Flacco. Flacco has the weapons. He also has two good tight ends (of course, none of them is as good as Gronk, but at least my opinion is Ed Dickson is at least Hernandez), and one receiver who in their meeting last year the Patriots couldn't really stop (Boldin). Torrey Smith is still there, and there was even a Lee Evans sighting last week. The real issue is pass protection. The Ravens were awful at it on Sunday. The Texans pass rush is better than the Patriots, but they will have to block a lot better to have a chance. Personally, I think they will.
Overall, I'm going with my heart. My head says New England. That Baltimore's defense is merely very good and not great, and that the Patriots offense is great (but not other-worldly). Then, I look to one year ago. The Patriots were the #1 seed. The Jets were a very good but not great defense (by any measure, the 2010 Jets defensively were worse than the 2009 Jets defense). The Patriots offense actually had a better year in 2010 than 2011. That Patriots team was stopped. They scored 14 points (added 7 in garbage time). They slowed them down. It is possible. Anything is possible. This is the NFL for fucks sake. Also, the Ravens are too good to be underdogs by this many points. They've only lost one game this year by more than 7, and although that was a thrashing given out by the Chargers, the Chargers attacked the Ravens deep, which is something New England does not really do. Give me the defense. Give me the team with two lock Hall of Famers, over the team with One.
Ravens 27 (BAL) Patriots 24
New York Giants @ San Francisco 49ers (-2.5)
I really think this will be a great title game. That is why I hope even more that the Ravens win the AFC game, because then I can properly take in what should be a great football game. The rain could temper it a bit, but it should be what football is. Two teams that have solid defenses, stocked with players that can whip blockers one-on-one (Justin and Aldon Smith, JPP, Osi and Tuck). They feature offenses that have true identities, with the short passing and running game for the 49ers and the deep passing of the Giants. They have two coaches that are fun to watch on game-day (the stares of Coughlin, the focused exuberance of Harbaugh). The game is being played in one of the three cathedrals of the sport, in that Candlestick is one of the few remaining stadiums that have been host to memorable games and plays along with Lambeau Field and that mountain in Oakland (Oakland gets the nod, since original Soldier Field, Giants Stadium, RFK, Texas Stadium and Three Rivers are all gone, as well as the Orange Bowl). It should be a hell of a ride.
There are a lot of odd similarities to this and the 1981 NFC Title Game between the Cowboys and 49ers. Both 49ers teams entered with a 13-3 record. Both teams had the NFL's #2 scoring defense, and similar scoring numbers (357-250 in 1981, 380-259 this year). Obviously, one QB being Montana and the other being Alex Smith seems like a super stretch of a comparison, but they had similar years (Montana: 311/488 (63.7%) for 3,565 yds (11.5/7.3 ypc/ypa) and 19 TDs, 12 INTs and a passer rating of 88.4; Smith: 273/445 (61.3%) for 3,144 yds (11.5/7.1) and 17 TDs, 5 INTs and a passer rating of 90.7). Both were coached by ex-Stanford coaches (Walsh, Harbuagh) and both faced a recent NFC Champion (Cowboys were NFC Champs in 1978, Giants in 2007). Anyway, I have no idea if the 49ers are about to start another dynasty in two weeks, but there are some interesting parallels. Anyway, let's get to the actual games.
The Giants offense has been on a roll with their passing game, featuring long YAC plays that lead to quick TDs that jump-started the team. Their offense was better against GB, but that is no surprise given how bad the GB defense was. The 49ers, in my opinion, are not a great matchup for the Giants on offense. The 49ers are as sure tackling as any team in the NFL and should limit YAC. The 49ers can get pressure with four, and will definitely pressure Manning more than the Packers did. The 49ers are the best 3rd down defense in the NFL. The 49ers also should erase any potential run game, which could be crucial in a wet, sloppy Candlestick Park. I don't see the Giants approaching 37 points this week, unless they get some turnovers from the 49ers.
Therein lies the issue for the Giants. Including last week's game, the 49ers have a turnover ratio of 43/11. That is scary. All week people claimed how many turnovers the 49ers force and how few they give up, and they went out and did just that to the Saints. If the 49ers can force a couple more this week, and win field position (which they almost always do), they should be tough to beat. That is basically the formula they used to beat the Giants earlier in the year. The 49ers offense really runs through Vernon Davis. Crabtree was awful against the Saints, and the other receivers (Kyle Williams, and whoever else) didn't do much. They might need to, or moreso, be able to, this week. The Giants, as per Football Outsiders, are average defending #1, #2 WRs and TEs, but are really bad against other WRs. Another little matchup is that the 49ers o-line has been good against a 4-man rush. Now, I don't know if anyone can be good against the Giants 4-man rush right now, but the 49ers are a lot more susceptible to the blitz, as shown by their performances against blitzes brought by the Saints last week, and the Cardinals and Ravens earlier in the year (their only two losses since September). The Giants might want to think about bringing the blitz a little more. Gore should be nuetralized, because when the Giants front is playing like it is, running is never really a successful option.
I have no idea where to go with this game. A lot of what I wrote would make it seem that I am leaning towards the 49ers, and that is what my head says. My head thinks that this team is special. Their defense, especially at home, is awesome. They have the same special sauce as that 49ers team 30 years earlier. They really do. But then again, the Giants have that look of that special team of four years. The only difference is instead of scraping by, this Giants team has dominated, winning their first two playoff games with a combined score of 54-29, including thoroughly dismantling the NFCs top seed, a lot like last year, when the Packers thoroughly dismantled the NFCs top seed. I'm flipping a coin basically here. I just think that at the end of the day, the 49ers defense is just a little too solid. In the regular season, the Giants showed they could move it at ease against the bad defenses (Packers, Patriots) but struggled in some games against better defenses (Washington, Philly #2, and the 49ers). I also don't like Eli in the elements. He's conquered the cold, but wind is still an enemy. Give me the 49ers. One last parallel between this 49ers team and that one from 1981. The record of the 1980 49ers: 10-6 - the exact same as the 2010 49ers. Candlestick is an eerie place.
Giants 17 49ers 23 (SF)
