Quick Summary– I believe Simms sees the Packers winning.
Longer Version: Sometimes it is what isn’t said that is more important than what is said. Simms does not think the Giants will win because Francesa did not put him on the spot. That was by design. So Simms was a nice homer in giving the rah rah go get’m pitch. But his tone was less bold than last week when he firmly stated the Giants would be in it. He did not come off that way to me this time. That spoke volumes.
1) The place between the corner and the safety is where Favre is going to try to stick the ball in, and with the ball being harder to grip, this could be the place for a turnover.
2) If Favre has enough pressure and gets a little too aggressive, he can make mistakes. This point was echoed by Troy Aikman.
3) The Giants should use the same varied offensive game plan they have used the past few weeks.
4) With light winds, this favors Favre.
5) Since GB uses almost exclusively man-to-man, there are ways to attack that. (Not going to reiterate what he said, but there are formations and routes that can work.)
6) With Favre likely to go quick route against our pass rush, you use zone so that it takes him longer to figure out where to go with the ball. (When you go man, he just goes to his preferred WR.)
7) COMPLETE DISAGREEMENT. Simms liked the conservative playcalling at the end of the Dallas game. Simms might be my svengali, but we part company here. I emphatically disagree. And I will go down to the grave knowing that when the secondary is that stripped, you MUST get some first downs in that spot. They have tremendous field position and it is extremely fortunate that we are in the NFC Championship having lived to tell the tale.
8) The Giants need to avoid giving up chunks of yardage to the Packers. Make them drive the ball down the field and make a mistake which trips them up. Do not give them the huge catch and run. (This is easier said than done.. the pack are the #1 offense in the entire league in YAC.)
Notice how Simms spent little (if any) time discussing WHY the Giants could do all these things. He laid out a blueprint but by its absence, the implication is that it is an entirely different matter for whether the Giants can execute that.