All things considered, the Patriots were better than the Giants in the 2007-08 season.

You have impressed me, young one. Unfortunately, you still have much to learn. First off, I will be combining some arguments, since they are about the same subject matter such as: Schedule comparison and record, Tendencies and Records, and the significance of head-to-head and the Super Bowl. With that said, let's look at my opponent's arguments in the last round: 1. My opponent asserts that the Patriots had a weak schedule in the 2007-08 season. But what he fails to recognize, is that they did not lose a single game. Until the Patriots lose a game against one of those poor teams, he can argue that. But they didn't. Look at it this way: Say a proverbial 'better' team will always lose to a lower seeded team. If the Pats are #1, they would beat every other team, including those poor teams. My opponent trys to claim that the Patriots would be say around #15, and, since they are playing these bad, lower seeded teams, they would win all of their games. My opponent simply can not prove this. Regardless of their Strength of schedule, they still beat every team they faced. Secondly, the Pats absolutely CRUSHED the teams they faced. Observe: NE 38 @ NYJ 14, SD 14 @ NE 38, BUF 7 @ NE 38, NE 34 @ CIN 13, WAS 7 @ NE 52, NE 56 @ BUF 10. Third, the Pats beat great teams in their season. They beat San Diego, an 11-5 team, Indianapolis, a 13-3 team in 'Super Bowl 41 1/2,' and Dallas, a 13-3 team with the best record in the NFC. Fourth, the Giants got killed by Dallas (Twice, while the Pats beat them) and Green Bay, two great teams. Furthermore, they lost to bad teams such as an 8-8 Minnesota and a 9-7 Washington lost to the Patriots by 45 points. Fifth, if the Giants were a great team, they could win all of their games. If they were truly the best, they would not have lost 6 games. 2. He then asserts that the records set were done better than the Pats players who broke them. First of all, this does not disprove the resolution. It in no way makes the Giants better. Jerry Rice played for San Fran, while Peyton played for Indy. Second, I didn't see any Giants players break the record! Third, they still set the record. Maybe that's the formula for success- more plays. They still should be highly regarded for making more TDs than anyone else. Fourth and most importantly, he does not mention team records. The Pats broke the record for most points and PPG, something that everyone, including the Giants, had an equal amount of games to do. He also fails to mention that the Patriots were first in points (obviously), passing yards, and overall yards in the regular season. 3. The Super bowl means everything. In fact, it does not. Take a look at this: http://youtube.com... You can see numerous starters playing for the Giants, including Eli Manning, Plaxico Burress, Brandon Jacobs, Amani Toomer, and many other defensive players. Clearly, my opponent is wrong when he says the starters were not playing. This game WAS A-game vs. A-game. As for the Super bowl, I'm sticking with my original story. The Giants were extremely lucky in getting the final catch, while the Pats were domination most of the way through. Yes, they did win the game. But think about it. Pats had already set a numerous amount of records, and were the only perfect regular season team. The fact that Tyree made a once-in-a-lifetime play that was necessary to win the game certainly does not make the Giants the better team. Plus, just for clarification, if you haven't seen the video, here it is: (http://youtube.com...) If he had not made that miraculous play, the Patriots would've won. A single play can not determine if a team is better than another. 4. Spygate. First, Spygate was only one game. This does not question the other 17 games in a row that they won. Second, this is irrelevant. A scandal does not make the team better or worse at football. Sure, they probably shouldn't have done it, but still, the talent that the New England Patriots have can not be called into question by a scandal by the head coach. Now to re-enforce my points. 1. The Patriots won 17 games in a row. They even beat the Giants in a game A-game vs. A-game. They also beat teams the Giants failed miserably to. This argument trumps all. The fact that they won more games than the Giants in 10 weeks than the Giants did all year simply proves that the Patriots were the better team. 2. The records set by the Pats are insurmountable. The Patriots had the most points in a season, most PPG, most pass TDs, most recieving TDs, most wins in a single season, and most QB-WR TDs. These records will be around for a while. I challenge my opponent to provide one major record that the Giants broke in the regular season. 3. The championship game means nothing, based on the fact that it was a hard fought fight, won on an unrepeatable throw. It was pure luck, while the regular season game featured the same type of skills that were shown by the Giants all year. At best, these to games can be considered a wash and should not be weighed for either side. Thank you. I patiently await my opponent's response.