Skip to main content

Super Bowl XLIII recap

So I finally got a Super Bowl prediction right. Believe me, I care even less than you do: that game was terrible.

Congratulations to the Pittsburgh Steelers and their fans, I guess, though the guys in the stands didn't really do anything different this year. I know I hate it when my team wins a big game or championship and people with no emotional stake in it talk about how disappointing or lame the game was. Since I'm about to do exactly that, Steelers fans, go ahead, be proud, and move on to another blog.

Here's what I realized tonight: I should love the Pittsburgh Steelers. They're one of the very best organizations in the NFL, and they're competitive for the title all the time, it seems. They're tough, they're physical, they play offense and defense well, and they always seem to have a guy step up (or at least a guy the other team flat-out refuses to guard even when he's catching fifteen passes in a row on the final drive). They play a distinctive and effective brand of football. But I can't put into words how offended I was by the Steelers' first score. They go all the way down the field, Ben Roethlisberger makes a tough scramble and almost scores a touchdown. Fourth and goal with inches, but it's the championship on the line and you want to make a statement, right? What do the Steelers do? They kick a field goal! That's fine, I guess, it worked out, and they won the title tonight, but gosh that was lame.

Most of the game was pretty lame, actually, and sort of low-key. At one point in the second half, I think when Pittsburgh was up 20-7, we saw Steelers coach Mike Tomlin on the sideline joking about something. Since when are coaches joking around during the Super Bowl? I'm not questioning Tomlin's competitiveness or determination at all; I just think the game doesn't feel like the same event it used to. (Thoughts?)

In fact, I only cheered twice all night: when Larry Fitzgerald scored the go-ahead touchdown in the fourth quarter for the Cards (I picked the Steelers, of course, but discovered with that three-pointer that I don't much care for them and started pulling hard for Arizona) and, of course, during that epic Heroes commercial when John Elway flew onto the field to save the NFL legends. I love that guy so much. The commercial didn't even make that much sense unless you're a total John Elway fanboy, which made me wonder if they were showing a different ad in other markets, but according to my brother in D.C. they showed the Elway spot there, too. Oh, it was fantastic.

And by the way, since when does the Super Bowl MVP go to a player who drops a potential winning touchdown in the final minute? (Lucky he got a second chance, I guess.) And since when does Mike "We should really give up a touchdown here" Holmgren tell anyone what to do in the Super Bowl? And why was Tomlin talking about Steeler football lasting 60 minutes when his team clearly took much of the second half off? Man! That game could have been so cool, but it just ends up feeling like a letdown.

Comments

blaine said…
I agree, this was not a very good game in the sense that the quality of football seemed much lower than in years past. It seemed like there was a penalty on every single play! Overall, I thought the game was over-officiated and it made watching the game much less enjoyable for me.

The fourth quarter was pretty exciting. I really wanted to see Arizona pull it off, but that was a pretty amazing drive by Roethlisberger so they definitely deserve the win. Plus, any team that lets a linebacker run 100 yards to score in the SUPER BOWL should lose the game.

I don't understand what the Arizona defensive backs were doing on that last TD catch by Holmes. Yeah, they had three guys on him (so at least it seems like the D coordinator suspected they would throw to Holmes) but they were all like 8 feet away from Holmes as he was catching that ball. Not one of them was in position to make a play on the ball. That made no sense to me.

Also, I HATE listening to Michaels and Madden. Did you hear Madden say during the review of the Harrison TD that any player that makes that effort deserve a TD? So, even if the replay showed that Harrison didn't get in, then Madden thinks that they should award him a TD because of his effort!? How in the world did that guy win a single game he coached, not to mention a Super Bowl?!
Mike said…
The D-coordinator suspected they might throw it to Holmes? What gave it away, the fact that Holmes got the ball twice on every play that drive? I have a hard time agreeing that Roethlisberger had a great drive (though he managed some sweet scrambles throughout the night) considering how open Holmes was on every friggin' down. The Arizona D just sucked when it mattered most.

As for the refs, I thought it was lame when Kurt Warner was called for a fumble on that last play, which looked like an incomplete pass to me. I mean they're not going to score but don't end it like that. That happened another time, I think, and it was stupid then, too.

I like Al Michaels generally, though I have to admit I had the sound pretty much off for the second half. Madden, of course, is just bizarre at this point.
blaine said…
I was upset that they didn't review the last Kurt Warner pass attempt. I thought is was weird that the officials were so meticulous the entire game, and then, on the last passing play of the game they don't review it?! I don't understand. I also thought it looked like an incomplete pass.
David said…
Mike. We need to talk about this cutler business stat

Popular posts from this blog

National Basketball Association Finals Preview Blowout!

If you're looking for a stereotypical matchup breakdown for the NBA Finals between the Detroit Pistons and San Antonio Spurs, (Game One is tonight, 7 o'clock Mountain, ABC), you've come to the right place! Center: Ben Wallace, Pistons vs. Nazr Mohammed, Spurs Wallace might be the league's top defender, winning his third Defensive Player of the Year award this season and leading the Pistons in both blocks and steals. It's said he's an improved offensive player, but he still scores primarily on tips and wide-open dunks. "Big Ben" is horrific from the foul line, connecting on 42.8% this season. Also, his brother has taken on NBA players and can probably beat up Mohammed's brother. Mohammed has been a good fit for the Spurs since being traded from the Knicks. It appears Isiah Thomas may have finally made his first mistake as general manager in New York, as Mohammed has started every Spurs' playoff game, averaging 8.1 points to go with a solid seven...

Forget Brett Favre (*)

From my 2007 NFL season preview : Favre's not as good as he once was-who is?-but he's not the disgrace people make him out to be...I don't think he "deserves" to go out with another Lombardi or anything, but I hope he gets to leave on a good note. Oops. What a mistake. And I even knew this day was coming. Let me say that Brett Favre deserves to go down in history with whatever records he earns, so long as a giant asterisk is placed by each and every one of them. As you may have heard, Sunday's victory over the New York Giants made Favre the winningest quarterback in NFL history. I don't know what ESPN did on TV, but this record practically went unnoticed in the places I follow sports. But it's of crucial importance to me. Why? "Maybe someday down the road it will mean a lot," a typically humble Favre said after the 149th win of his career, moving past Hall of Famer [and indisputable greatest quarterback of all time] John Elway. Humble...

Did CU ever win the Pac-12?

In 2010, I bet a college buddy of mine (who longtime readers may remember as the only other contributor to Hole Punch Sports) that CU’s football team would not win the Pac-12 in the next 15 years. Guess what? It’s time for me to gloat, because I was right. Why we were doomed Back in the day, a lot of people made the argument that CU should join the Pac-12 because we’d get so much more TV money there. Of course, given college football is the answer to the question, “what if you had a sport where multiple teams were like the Yankees, and you created a whole universe of haves and have-nots?”, then yeah, you want to be aligned with some of the haves. But the question in my mind wasn’t, “will CU be better off with more money?” That’s an obvious yes. The question I asked was, will CU be any more competitive in their own conference if they’re competing against teams who are also getting more money? I couldn’t see why they would be. The mathematical angle Legend has it that Cowboys runn...