It was over. Honestly, if you turned off the TV midway through the third quarter on February 5, 2017, nobody would have blamed you. The Atlanta Falcons weren't just winning; they were humiliating the New England Patriots. Then, the 2017 Super Bowl score did something that defied every mathematical model in existence. It sat at 28-3.
That specific set of numbers—28 and 3—has since become a permanent piece of sports shorthand for "it ain't over till it's over." But for the people in NRG Stadium in Houston that night, it felt like a funeral for the New England dynasty. Tom Brady looked old. Bill Belichick looked outcoached by Dan Quinn and Kyle Shanahan. The Falcons' defense was flying around like they had twelve men on the field.
Then the math started to break.
The Anatomy of the 2017 Super Bowl Score
To understand how we got to a 34-28 final, you have to look at the sheer volume of things that had to go wrong for Atlanta—and perfectly for New England. It wasn't just one lucky play. It was a rhythmic, agonizing grind where the Patriots scored 31 unanswered points.
Think about that.
Thirty-one points in about 17 minutes of game time.
💡 You might also like: When Did Mookie Betts Join the Dodgers? The Trade That Changed Everything
The first half was a disaster for the Pats. Devonta Freeman gashed them for a 5-yard touchdown. Austin Hooper caught a 19-yarder from Matt Ryan. Then the backbreaker: Robert Alford intercepted Tom Brady and took it 82 yards to the house. At halftime, it was 21-3. When Tevin Coleman caught a touchdown to make it 28-3 with 8:31 left in the third, the win probability for the Falcons hit 99.7%.
Why the momentum shifted (and stayed shifted)
Football is a game of fatigue. The Falcons' defense played 93 snaps. That is an absurd number. By the time the fourth quarter rolled around, the Atlanta pass rush, which had been terrorizing Brady, simply ran out of gas.
- The Patriots' drive for a field goal to make it 28-12 felt insignificant at the time, but it brought the game within two scores (if you count two-point conversions).
- The Dont'a Hightower strip-sack on Matt Ryan. This is the play most experts point to as the actual turning point. It gave the Patriots a short field and a shot of pure adrenaline.
- The Julian Edelman catch. You know the one. It bounced off a defender's leg, lingered in the air, and he somehow pinned it against a shoe an inch off the turf.
The Mathematical Impossibility of 34-28
If you look at the 2017 Super Bowl score at the end of regulation, it was 28-28. It was the first time a Super Bowl had ever gone into overtime. That's a wild fact in its own right. After 50 years of this game, the first overtime happened during the biggest comeback ever.
New England won the toss. They got the ball. At that point, everyone knew Atlanta was done. The Falcons' defense was essentially standing still. James White, who was the unsung hero of this game (he had 14 catches and three touchdowns), plunged into the end zone for a 2-yard score.
The final was 34-28.
But why do we still talk about this specific scoreline nearly a decade later? It’s because it represents the peak of the "Patriot Way." It wasn't just talent. It was conditioning and mental toughness. The Falcons had the MVP in Matt Ryan. They had the best receiver in the world in Julio Jones—who, by the way, made a catch in the fourth quarter that should have iced the game. If Atlanta had just run the ball three times and kicked a field goal after that Julio catch, the 2017 Super Bowl score would be 31-20 or 31-28 in favor of the Falcons.
Instead, they took a sack. They got a holding penalty. They knocked themselves out of field goal range.
The Kyle Shanahan Factor
Critics still roast Kyle Shanahan for his play-calling in the fourth quarter. It's a nuanced argument. On one hand, his aggressive passing game is what got them a 25-point lead. On the other, when you are up by two scores with less than five minutes left, you run the ball. You bleed the clock. You make the opponent use their timeouts.
He didn't.
New England took advantage of every single coaching "if" and "maybe." Brady finished with 466 passing yards. That broke his own record. He was 40 for 62. Those are video game numbers, especially when you consider he was 39 years old at the time.
A Legacy of "28-3"
The 2017 Super Bowl score changed the way we view leads in the NFL. Before this game, a 10-point lead in the fourth quarter felt safe. Now? No lead is safe as long as there is time on the clock. It turned "28-3" into a verb. To "28-3" someone is to collapse in spectacular fashion.
It also cemented Tom Brady as the undisputed GOAT. Before LI, there was still a debate between him and Joe Montana. Montana was 4-0 in Super Bowls with no picks. Brady had losses to the Giants. But after coming back from 25 points down? The debate ended.
People forget that the Falcons were actually a very good team. They weren't some fluke. They had the #1 scoring offense in the league. They blew out the Seahawks and the Packers in the playoffs. They were a juggernaut that simply ran into a buzzsaw made of composure and experience.
Lessons from the 2017 Scoreboard
For anyone looking to apply the lessons of Super Bowl LI to modern sports or even business, the takeaways are actually pretty practical.
- Conditioning is a weapon: The Patriots looked fresh in the fifth quarter. The Falcons didn't.
- Risk management matters: Atlanta's failure to kick a late field goal is a masterclass in not "playing the percentages."
- Mental Reset: Brady threw a pick-six and stayed calm. Most QBs would have crumbled.
If you want to relive the game, don't just watch the highlights. Watch the full fourth quarter. Watch how the Patriots stopped huddling. Watch how the Falcons' defenders started looking at the clock every three seconds. It’s a study in psychology as much as it is in football.
The 2017 Super Bowl score of 34-28 serves as a reminder that momentum isn't a myth. It’s a tangible force that can bury even the most talented teams if they don't know how to stop the bleeding.
For your next step in understanding this era of football, look into the defensive adjustments Matt Patricia made in the second half. Specifically, how the Patriots switched to a "bracket" coverage on Julio Jones that essentially forced Matt Ryan to look elsewhere, disrupting the timing that had built that 28-3 lead. Analyzing the specific personnel packages New England used in the fourth quarter—often going with "Pony" sets (two running backs)—reveals exactly how they exploited the exhausted Atlanta linebackers.