NFL 2018 Super Bowl LIII - Los Angeles Rams vs New England

Super Bowl options.


  • Total voters
    46
  • Poll closed .

Demonic Ascent

Brownlow Medallist
Feb 21, 2006
14,665
10,133
Muckertal
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
Eltham Turtles, NY Jets, Celtics
Anyone else think the Rams were too clever by half when they elected to receive? Thought it was strange when they gave the ball to the Pats seemingly for no other reason than they knew the Pats would've deferred if they won the toss.

Didn't make much difference to the actual game considering Brady turned it over but it did indicate the Rams mindset
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

peterbuch74

Premium Platinum
Oct 10, 2007
4,696
8,025
Punt Rd Oval, Tigerland
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Denver Broncos
Anyone else think the Rams were too clever by half when they elected to receive? Thought it was strange when they gave the ball to the Pats seemingly for no other reason than they knew the Pats would've deferred if they won the toss.

Didn't make much difference to the actual game considering Brady turned it over but it did indicate the Rams mindset
I thought it was a little negative too... You've got this high powered offense and you shy away from using the ball first.
 

Macpotata

Norm Smith Medallist
Mar 22, 2017
8,496
9,429
AFL Club
Geelong
Anyone else think the Rams were too clever by half when they elected to receive? Thought it was strange when they gave the ball to the Pats seemingly for no other reason than they knew the Pats would've deferred if they won the toss.

Didn't make much difference to the actual game considering Brady turned it over but it did indicate the Rams mindset
I thought it was shit tbh. Pats didn't score obviously, but why give Brady the opportunity to do so and already play catch up potentially.

With you. Shit mindset to adopt.



Shit game all around.
 

JeffDunne

TheBrownDog
Dec 12, 2003
50,988
21,657
Jury Duty
AFL Club
St Kilda
Other Teams
New Orleans Saints
Since the Pats had struggled to score TD's early in playoff games I can understand the logic in giving them first use of the ball.

If the Rams had marched down the field on their first possession after the INT then nobody would be questioning the call. Quite the opposite actually.
 

juice t

#TheExers
Aug 28, 2012
16,846
26,758
South Perth
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
NE Patriots, Manchester United
Since the Pats had struggled to score TD's early in playoff games I can understand the logic in giving them first use of the ball.

If the Rams had marched down the field on their first possession after the INT then nobody would be questioning the call. Quite the opposite actually.
And if they had scored before the half it would have looked very good
 

Mad_Hatter

Norm Smith Medallist
Nov 12, 2015
9,710
18,131
AFL Club
Geelong
I felt the decision was almost based on expecting to be behind just before half time and being able to "double dip" score either side of the break.
Worst thing you could do is give Brady the ball and the opportunity to generate momentum, of course that didn't happen anyway but the chance was there to instantly be on the back foot and play catch up from the beginning of the game.
 

Dixie Flatline

Saviour Sam
Jun 3, 2005
27,166
24,999
Leafy eastern suburbs
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Cartagena C.F., NYJ, A's
Belichick loves getting the ball out of half-time, because he believes that Brady can orchestrate a sub-60 second drive to end the half and put points on the board, and then have the opportunity to put more points straight after half-time.

I didn't have problems with the Rams electing to take the ball first after half-time. I don't think McVay expected his offence to be so insipid in the first half (or the full game for that matter).
 

TheGreatBarryB

Brownlow Medallist
Mar 20, 2007
21,091
20,645
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Texans, Astros, Leeds
Since the Pats had struggled to score TD's early in playoff games I can understand the logic in giving them first use of the ball.

If the Rams had marched down the field on their first possession after the INT then nobody would be questioning the call. Quite the opposite actually.
They scored a TD on their first 4 drives against the Chargers and went within 5 yards of scoring TDs on their first two drives against Chiefs, so some logic behind the decision I guess.
 

JeffDunne

TheBrownDog
Dec 12, 2003
50,988
21,657
Jury Duty
AFL Club
St Kilda
Other Teams
New Orleans Saints
Yeah I can think of plenty of things the Ram's did worse than the decision after winning the coin toss.

Brady was lucky Goff stunk as much as he did. Otherwise he'd be the one being cticised for his ratshit performance.

Two of the worst players on the field were the QB's. The difference between the two was one was mature enough to stay composed. The other went to pieces.

Goff's SB performance was even worse than Cam Newton's. Poor bastard.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

_M_16_

Premiership Player
Nov 26, 2009
3,213
3,936
Melbourne
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
Liv FC, LA Rams, Pitt Pen, Michigan
No problem with the Rams choosing to take the ball in the second half. It's a big advantage if you have a half time lead, to come out straight away and push the game even further out of reach. Given the Pats are a second half team like the Rams have been of late, could mean one more extra possession for either team which the Rams would want for themselves and not the Pats. Obviously they backed themselves to score some points and probably didn't expect to play so s**t as much as anyone else did.
 

JeffDunne

TheBrownDog
Dec 12, 2003
50,988
21,657
Jury Duty
AFL Club
St Kilda
Other Teams
New Orleans Saints
They scored a TD on their first 4 drives against the Chargers and went within 5 yards of scoring TDs on their first two drives against Chiefs, so some logic behind the decision I guess.
Two games is not a trend. Has Brady ever scored on his first possession in a SB?

The Rams not only stopped the Pats on their first possession, they picked off Brady when he did throw it.

Tactically it was the right call. Pity for them it was all downhill tactically from there.
 

Demonic Ascent

Brownlow Medallist
Feb 21, 2006
14,665
10,133
Muckertal
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
Eltham Turtles, NY Jets, Celtics
Since the Pats had struggled to score TD's early in playoff games I can understand the logic in giving them first use of the ball.

If the Rams had marched down the field on their first possession after the INT then nobody would be questioning the call. Quite the opposite actually.
I wasnt questioning the logic of the call, more that I thought it showed an insight into their mindset. It just seemed like they were trying to play games with the Pats rather than play the game on their own terms.

I acknowledged that it didn't have much effect on the game considering the turnover but I thought it was an "interesting" decision.

By the way the Pats seemed to score pretty easily early against the Chargers and Chiefs in their last two playoff games before the Super Bowl.
 

TheGreatBarryB

Brownlow Medallist
Mar 20, 2007
21,091
20,645
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Texans, Astros, Leeds
Two games is not a trend. Has Brady ever scored on his first possession in a SB?

The Rams not only stopped the Pats on their first possession, they picked off Brady when he did throw it.

Tactically it was the right call. Pity for them it was all downhill tactically from there.
Tend to agree but I think the decision not that important anyway.
 

imadodgyumpire

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 10, 2011
18,724
13,599
AFL Club
Carlton
Idk how much longer this thread will go on for? To sum up my thoughts, I actually thought this was one of the better sb I've seen. As the game went on with both offences not getting any momentum, each play/possession becomes more crucial to the outcome and you get more drawn into it.

With games like American football (and rugby league), I like it when offences really have to work hard to score points, where defences make it an honest game.

People shit on the Rams, and Goff in particular, but I don't think it was as bad as it looked. When everything's on the line, the pressure does weird shit to you, and sometimes that can only be exposed in the biggest game. People crapping on about how many points they averaged, only to score 3 in the sb? That sort of season has happened a lot in recent decades, so we should be used to it. Even then the Rams had two opportunities for tds that would've been taken on another day.

The psychological trauma people try and heap on the Rams (on various forums), and with other losers in the past, is actually starting to give me the shits.
 

GG.exe

Killer on the Road ™
Sep 6, 2005
101,274
54,161
in every girl's wet dream ℠
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
Ravens-Dolphins Hurricanes-Terps
Idk how much longer this thread will go on for? To sum up my thoughts, I actually thought this was one of the better sb I've seen. As the game went on with both offences not getting any momentum, each play/possession becomes more crucial to the outcome and you get more drawn into it.

With games like American football (and rugby league), I like it when offences really have to work hard to score points, where defences make it an honest game.

People shit on the Rams, and Goff in particular, but I don't think it was as bad as it looked. When everything's on the line, the pressure does weird shit to you, and sometimes that can only be exposed in the biggest game. People crapping on about how many points they averaged, only to score 3 in the sb? That sort of season has happened a lot in recent decades, so we should be used to it. Even then the Rams had two opportunities for tds that would've been taken on another day.

The psychological trauma people try and heap on the Rams (on various forums), and with other losers in the past, is actually starting to give me the shits.
I thought it was a great Super Bowl. A Super Bowl for the tactically-minded, for the purists. There was so much strategy going on from both teams, the game was on tenterhooks in that we (the purists, that is) were sitting there waiting for the Rams to cotton on and adjust and do something, a wrinkle, to even up the score and wrestle momentum back....as New England had ALL the momentum all game really. Belichick was all over McVay and didn't let up, and McVay couldn't strategize his way out that spider's web. The Rams, to the credit, had a couple of moments, but they blew them both -- a) the long bomb into the endzone that was broken up, and 2) the dropped TD in the endzone. Shows you how much NE dominated LAR that they only had a couple plays all game. But a lot of credit to Wade Phillips for keeping the game so even thruout, giving that offense more than enough time to do SOMETHING. The D must've been so gassed and so pissed with McVay/Offense.

But the whole game was on that tenterhook, that knife's edge of suffocating D's and both offenses TRYING so hard to sneak some life out from that suffocation. Trying to find that play or two to break the game open. The Patriots were the ones to do it -- with those three consecutive plays that were the exact same play called three times in a row, resulting in the Gronkowski TD, 3 plays 79 yard drive. They finally found something, and like a "boss" they rammed it in deep by going it consecutively as the Rams got duped.
 

GG.exe

Killer on the Road ™
Sep 6, 2005
101,274
54,161
in every girl's wet dream ℠
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
Ravens-Dolphins Hurricanes-Terps
I personally would use "experienced team" rather than "boss". It took them til the 4th quarter to score a td, there was no bossing imo.
The "bossing" was that very moment when they found a play and cheesed it. The Rams didn't even expect it. It's like they were so aware and awake for a very long time but for just one brief moment they nodded off, and the patriots had that boss moment where they quickly pulled their pants down and jammed into their rectums before they knew what hit them. That's why it was a "boss" moment.
 

imadodgyumpire

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 10, 2011
18,724
13,599
AFL Club
Carlton
The "bossing" was that very moment when they found a play and cheesed it. The Rams didn't even expect it. It's like they were so aware and awake for a very long time but for just one brief moment they nodded off, and the patriots had that boss moment where they quickly pulled their pants down and jammed into their rectums before they knew what hit them. That's why it was a "boss" moment.
The use of the term "boss" triggers me. You might not like motor racing. But on numerous motor racing forums, a lot of mentally challenged Lewis Hamilton fans refer to him being a "boss" or "bossing" when he performs a nondescript win in the best car in the field, or does something numerous other drivers have in the past.
 

GG.exe

Killer on the Road ™
Sep 6, 2005
101,274
54,161
in every girl's wet dream ℠
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
Ravens-Dolphins Hurricanes-Terps
The use of the term "boss" triggers me. You might not like motor racing. But on numerous motor racing forums, a lot of mentally challenged Lewis Hamilton fans refer to him being a "boss" or "bossing" when he performs a nondescript win in the best car in the field, or does something numerous other drivers have in the past.
I sympathize and understand.
I guess "bossing" is a bit incorrect, as a literal boss isn't generally like that, or it doesn't really describe the acts of a boss.
A boss might laud it over you, and generally order you around, but a more apt description is probably "stand over tactic" or thuggishness.
 

Top Bottom