YOUR FRIENDS' ACTIVITY

    Discover Yahoo! With Your Friends

    Explore news, videos, and much more based on what your friends are reading and watching. Publish your own activity and retain full control.

    To get started, first
    Shutdown Corner

    The Giants won the ‘Brain Bowl,’ too

    Science agrees -- the Giants have reason to celebrate. (Getty Images)

    The New York Giants beat the New England Patriots in the Super Bowl this past Sunday not just by being better between the lines but, according to Dr. John F. Murray, by being better between their ears.

    The Mental Performance Index (MPI) was developed by Dr. Murray, a south Florida-based sports psychologist who has been called by the Washington Post the "Freud of Football." MPI shows how closely a football team comes to achieving perfection in a game across multiple domains. The system ranks a team on a scale of .000 to 1.000 -- .500 is roughly average and .600 is extraordinary. No Super Bowl-winning team has ever topped .600 in the MPI rating.

    According to Murray, who authored The Mental Performance Index: Ranking the Best Teams in Super Bowl History, the Giants' MPI for the Super Bowl came out to  .522, compared to the Patriots, who managed a .500 ranking for the game.

    "This game was played at a higher than average level for a Super Bowl game. Overall, the Giants clearly outperformed the Patriots in terms of total team performance, so we know that the better performing team in fact won the game," Dr. Murray said. "Justice was realized! Over 90 percent of the time, the higher-performing team will win a football game as reflected on the MPI total score, so the theory that performance wins games is indeed valid."

    What MPI does is factor in overall consistency as part of its formula and very rarely does a team with a lower MPI lose the Super Bowl. The last time was in 2005 when the Pittsburgh Steelers had a lower MPI than the Seattle Seahawks, who lost the game.

    Through statistical analysis, Dr. Murray has created a balance system that values plays based not only on their outcome but also their impact. In essence, MPI weighs in a comprehensive, balanced fashion each team play as it objectively looks at how the 11 players as a unit performs. It is the truest way to measure how in sync a team is not just physically but also mentally.

    Adjustments are made based on the observed mental performance. More than raw yardage or basic statistics, captured within this number is the pressure and significance of the moment and the execution of the team in the moment. It requires an expert human being to evaluate the moment and the significance of the play in the scheme of all four quarters. Field position, clock time and score are all factors that must be weighed.

    It is in the pressure packed moments that this game was won according to MPI. Given that the Giants won on their last drive of the game, this shouldn't necessarily be a surprise, but the disparity between the two teams in the clutch according to MPI is shocking.

    "The main advantage for the Giants came in pressure situations, as the Giants outperformed the Patriots in all pressure situations combined by a .569 to .461 margin," Dr. Murray said. "But whereas the Patriots offense in pressure situations was identical to the Giants defense as both teams scored .536, it was when the Giants were on offense that the greatest difference occurred.

    "The Giants offense dominated the Patriots defense in pressure moments by a wide margin of .591 to .417."

    Related Super Bowl content from Yahoo! Sports:

    Watch Full Count!
     

    13 comments

    • Ham  •  3 months ago
      "very rarely does a team with a lower MPI lose the Super Bowl. The last time was in 2005 when the Pittsburgh Steelers had a lower MPI than the Seattle Seahawks, who lost the game."

      Yes, but the refs took that game from the 'Hawks, and essentially admitted it a couple years after the fact.
      • THOMAS 3 months ago
        that was the worst SB i can remember ever watching. i hope those refs were fired & released permanently from league.
      • Lazarus 3 months ago
        I hear ya, Thomas. That was a travesty. And the head official in that game (Bill Leavy) is still employed by the league, unfortunately. He did his best to screw the Giants at Lambeau in the the playoffs this year on a couple of mind-blowingly bad calls, but thankfully it didn't affect the outcome. So yeah, he's just as incompetent (or corrupt?) as ever.
      • KEYBOARDWHIZ 3 months ago
        Terrible calls ruined that Super Bowl. Equally bad call that went the Giants way in NFC Championship against the Niners. But the Seahawks did get the worst of the jobbing ever. Sickening.
    • Logan C  •  3 months ago
      I dont need some super computer program to tell me the Giants out played the Pats in critical areas, and add that the Giants got every loose ball back (Pats didnt fumble at all) or that the Giants receivers caught passes when they counted most under pressure, where the Pats receivers droppped under pressure, or that the Pats had bad field position for most of the game, or that the Pats had more starters on IR than the Giants. Giants win, too many factors outside and within the game in their favor,end of story - they might do it again next year - both should be better than this year.
    • Andrew K  •  Beverly, Massachusetts  •  3 months ago
      Seems like a pretty useless metric: The team who performs better in crunch time usually wins. No #$%$ Sherlock. That's like saying the person who just ate is less likely to be hungry.
    • Eric  •  3 months ago
      I already know that the patriots are dumb.
    • Bruce M  •  Pennsauken, New Jersey  •  3 months ago
      sounds like a made up fairy tale to me
    • Phil M  •  Dallas, Texas  •  3 months ago
      I don't need a stat to tell me that the Pats blew the game in the 4th quarter.
    • Bill Jones  •  Burlington, Canada  •  3 months ago
      How to the Giants three fumbles rate for mental toughness or was it luck they recovered them. (one was called back on penalty).
      • Jeff 3 months ago
        Sore loser - it wasn't luck, the Patriots were outhustled on those two recoveries and the third was their fault for having 12 men on the field. Anyhow, losers always look for excuses.
      • MacaroniSalad 3 months ago
        They did just have 12 men on the field, they had 12 men lined up and playing D. Luck doesn't dive on the loose ball, a heads up player does. Shouldn't you be watching the type of football that give singular point chances on kickoffs, anyway?
    • Buddy  •  Irvine, California  •  3 months ago
      IT IS ALWAYS THE BRAIN AND THE EXCUTION DUE TO FOCUS AND CONFIDENCE THAT MEANS THE DIFFERENCE IN A TEAM SPORT, WHEN IT COME DOWN TO ONE SOMETHING AS SIMPLE AS SPEED CAN BE THE DETERMINING FACTOR, BUT IN A MULT-PLAYER SPORT, IT IS ABOUT INTELLIGENT TEAMWORK AND GREAT INTELLIGENT LEADERSHIP!
    • Patriotic Lefty  •  New York, New York  •  3 months ago
      The Giants offense was thought to be better than the Pats defense before the game. This just proves it.
    • DS  •  Newark, New Jersey  •  3 months ago
      giants win end o story
    • Justin M  •  Hermosa Beach, California  •  3 months ago
      It shouldn't be this complicated guys... As a giants fan, i'll tell this "nerd stats guy" *pointing to the scoreboard* "that W is all we care about."
    • Bk2Az  •  3 months ago
      let's get something straight once and for all...i'm so sick and tired of all of you salty sore-losing clowns acting like the patriots were the only team playing in the SB!!!
      you better wake up out of your funk and recognize that the patriots did NOT beat themselves...the NY GIANTS beat them!!! and the score was 21 to 17 in case you forgot Phil.
      the patriots didn't blow it...they got BEAT!!!!!!!!
      • Daniel 3 months ago
        either one of those two Giant fumbles goes to the Pats, the Pats win. that and many other arguments can be made that it was more the Pats losing the game than the Giants winning it. one of the more unexciting SB's in long time anyhow. it will soon be forgotten.
      • MacaroniSalad 3 months ago
        So its unexciting bc you didn't like the outcome? Neither one of those fumbles were covered up by the Pats, because they were covered up by Giants, wasn't New England vs. fate/luck/chance. Sour grapes much? Can I hear the "many other arguments'? Start w Wes Welker, who had to jump and do a 180 at the sametime to ctach that ball. A ball badly thrown. A ball badly thrown because the QB was playing w a strained shoulder. A shoulder Strained by a Justin Tuck sack.
    • Peter Hsu  •  San Diego, California  •  3 months ago
      The ability to retrodict past outcomes is not a very useful one. How about predictions on future outcomes instead.

    Meet The Shutdown Corner Team