Journalistically: Giants win or Patriots loss?

The primary story is that the Patriots fell short of an undefeated season. Everywhere other than in the New York area, the headline should reflect that.

 

The Patriots are the greatest team in NFL history? Tom Brady is the best QB in NFL history? Do some fact checking.


But the story is part of each. Depends on the market you are in.

 

If you're in New York it's Giants win, everywhere else it's Patriots lose.
18-0 team loses to a 12-point dog?
Tape this. Take that.

 

I'd argue that ANY of the 90s Super Bowl Cowboys teams were better than the Pats, who won each of their Super bowls by 3 points. The Cowboys demolished their foes, adn their defense was way better.

 

Listen to spnited.

 

My headline this morning was:
"18 and uh-oh"

This from a bitter Packers fan.

 

The Patriots didn't have a bunch of turnovers/mistakes that lost the game. The Giants won because they made more plays in the fourth quarter. Looking at the line of scrimmage, the Giants' defensive line forced the issue, and physically beat the Patriots offensive line to get to Brady.

 

This is not about being positive or negative. It's about identifying the most significant aspect of a story. To the vast majority of the country, this Super Bowl will be remembered for the Patriots' failure to go undefeated. That's your headline.

 

Exactly, broadway. It's not about being positive or negative. As a previous poster said, there have been 41 previous SB winners. There had never been a SB loser that came in undefeated. That's the big news. There's still plenty of room to give the Giants credit, but the biggest news (except in NY) is the Patriots' inability to close the deal.

 

But it is still David beats Goliath, not Goliath loses to David

 

Actually, it's:

GOLIATH LOSES
-- David brings down the giant

 

clever, real clever.