Super Bowl XXXIX discussion thread

[Slayer 0]

I recognize sports dynasty's importance to the history of sports, but just like NL said, I've always tended to hate the dynasties I've experienced heretofore (49ers, Cowboys, Bulls, Yankees, Lakers) and this is the first time it's happened to a team I like.

[Guest Failed Mascot]

I can understand a spirited debate with facts backing up your claims and acting as evidence

That's what I try to bring everytime. Evidence as to why I feel one team will win over the other rather than the mindless homerism or speaking from the heart.

 

Its nice to love your team and hope they win but sometimes that love can easily turn into ignorance.

[Vern Gagne 0]

I was ready to say it was alcohol...until they continued to type like that Monday afternoon and this morning.

 

I really don't understand all this trash talking. We the fans aren't playing the game so why are any fans trash talking? The trash talking is more annoying and more pathetic than people who say "we won" if you ask me.

 

Now if you want to trash talk and then settle it in a football game...sure, talk away. Otherwise, what the hell?

I never understood trash-talking, particularly since you can never predict the outcome of a sporting event, and half the time you'll look like an ass afterwards.

I'd rather just make a prediction, and be complety wrong than drop a bunch of ifs. If this happens for NE they win. If this happens to Philly they win. Thanks for the obvious analysis.

 

Early thought. NE by 4. Philadelphia's too good to be blown out. One thing that concerns me is TO. He's not going to be a factor, so the sooner Reid rules him out the better it is for the Eagles. As for the game. As strange as this sounds. The Eagles can throw on NE. Yes, Manning was shutdown. That's different though. Belichek is in Manning's head. McNabb doesn't have that burden to deal with. Eagles needs to show patience on offense, and take what's given to them. On the defensive side of the ball, be in Brady's face. Whether it be the blitz or just a great pass rush. Outside of Manning, QB's lose alot when there's pressure put on them.

[Guest Vitamin X]

Also keep in mind that the Pats had earlier experience this season against the teams they beat so far in the playoffs, whereas this Eagles team is much better than the one they whipped on last year, and pretty different as well. Healthy.

 

I think it's going to be a much better game than most people are expecting, and I wouldn't be shocked to see the Eagles win, as much as I hate to say it. I realized this mid-season, and it's pretty surprising noone is giving Philly a snowball's chance in hell for this game.

[The Man in Blak 0]

Here's a scathing little ditty from Skip Bayless at ESPN.com that I thought might be worth a read:

 

The greatest? I'm not convinced

By Skip Bayless

Page 2

 

These days, things get old quicker than you can hit "enter."

 

Media outlets race toward the apocalypse, telling the easily misled that THIS or THAT is now THE GREATEST EVER, at least until this afternoon. Advertisers rip out one another's conscience to control the spending impulses of males ages 18 to 34, who now have the cyber world at their fingertips. They want MORE. More sex, more violence, more alcohol, more YOU'VE NEVER SEEN ANYTHING LIKE THIS IN NFL HISTORY!

 

Maybe we haven't. Maybe I'm clinging to the past the way Dwight Clark did to The Catch.

 

But I'm still not quite convinced.

 

A year ago, leading up to Super Bowl XXXVIII, I repeatedly wrote and said on TV and radio that I was offended by two comparisons Brady to Montana, and Belichick to Parcells.

 

Tom Brady was already another Joe Montana? Another Greatest Quarterback Ever? Please, stop it.

 

Now, e-mailers and debate partners are demanding I admit it: Brady is better.

 

Not over my dead manual typewriter.

 

A year ago, when New England coach Bill Belichick had won just one Super Bowl and made it to a second, a talk-radio groundswell gave Belichick the edge over his mentor, Bill Parcells. What closed the case? Parcells hadn't won a Super Bowl without Belichick as his defensive coordinator.

 

So what?

 

Now, e-mailers and debate partners are demanding I admit it: Belichick is better.

 

Give me a break.

 

Let's start with the 2001 playoffs, when New England got nothing but breaks. Fate lifted a second-year, sixth-round pick named Brady from fourth string into Drew Bledsoe's starting job, and nobody paid much attention to the kid until he had won Super Bowl MVP. There was nowhere near the pressure of expectations on Brady that recently turned Pittsburgh rookie Ben Roethlisberger into a playoff pumpkin. And who remembers now that Brady's fumble should have eliminated the Patriots in their divisional playoff game that year?

 

Yes, who can forget the Snow Job game and the worst call I've ever seen in the playoffs? Please, Patriots fans, don't e-mail me about the Tuck Rule unless you have carefully read it and can cite the sentence that clearly and completely exonerates Brady.

 

If he had lost control of the ball while trying to pump-fake or stop his forward throwing motion, yes, the Tuck Rule would have applied. His intent would have been to "tuck" ball back into his body, and the correct ruling would have been: incomplete pass. But Brady obviously had finished "tucking" -- finished his pump-fake. He had cocked his arm back into the set position and was about to throw when blitzing Raiders cornerback Charles Woodson hit him.

 

Brady fumbled. The Raiders recovered. The game should have been over. The Patriots should not have had the chance to shock St. Louis in the Super Bowl.

 

For that matter, the most special plays made by Patriots the following week in the AFC title game at Pittsburgh were special-teams plays. So the vast majority of media members in New Orleans for the Super Bowl figured Kurt Warner's Greatest Show on Turf would be able to name the score indoors on a fast track. But Rams coach Mike Martz called as poor an offensive game as Belichick game-planned a brilliant defensive one. And still, it took a 48-yard field goal at the final gun to win it.

 

The Patriots missed the playoffs the following season.

 

So, just one year ago, I wasn't even remotely ready to call the Pats' quarterback Tom "Montana," or take Little Bill over Big Bill. After all, Parcells' first-year Cowboys had just beaten long preseason odds to go 10-6 and make the playoffs with the NFL's No. 1 defense. Parcells already was turning around his fourth NFL team.

 

Parcells, of course, won two Super Bowls with the Giants. He guided his Patriots to a Super Bowl with the statuesque Bledsoe at quarterback -- a Hall-of-Fame feat in and of itself. Parcells' Jets made it to the AFC championship game. Now, his first-year Cowboys appeared headed in that direction, quickly.

 

Meanwhile, just one year ago, I picked upstart Carolina to beat Brady/Belichick in the Super Bowl. What I did not predict was that the game would turn into a fourth-quarter shootout. Who could have imagined that Tom "Montana" would let the Panthers back in the game by throwing an inexcusable end-zone interception? Who could have dreamed that Belichick's defense would allow Jake Delhomme's offense to roll up 387 yards and 29 points while running just 53 plays to New England's 83?

 

In my wildest nightmare, I couldn't have foreseen Carolina's Pro Bowl kicker, John Kasay, hooking the kickoff out of bounds after Carolina tied the game with 1:08 remaining. That gave New England the ball at its 40. Brady needed only to orchestrate a 26-yard drive to set up another championship-winning field goal by Adam Vinatieri, this one from 41 yards. New England, 32-29.

 

Yet leading up to next week's Super Bowl, I'm hearing that Brady has already proven to be better than the quarterback widely acknowledged as the best ever -- Montana.

 

I feel positively prehistoric when I recollect that in Montana's first season as San Francisco's starter, he beat Tom Landry's big, bad Dallas Cowboys 45-14 in a regular-season game at Candlestick Park. His go-to wideout that year was a former college quarterback named Freddie Solomon. His running backs were the immortal Wendell Tyler and Lenvil Elliott.

 

Montana beat the mighty Cowboys again in the NFC title game at Candlestick. On third and three from the Dallas 6 yard line, with his first option (Solomon) covered, Montana rolled right and lofted one for Dwight Clark, who was working the back line of the end zone. Clark rose and made a remarkable fingertip catch -- The Catch. It's possible Montana was trying to throw the ball away. Yet that was the first of many late, great throws the man made.

 

His 49ers went on to beat Cincinnati in the Super Bowl -- a game that wasn't nearly as close as the 26-21 score suggests. Montana (still without Jerry Rice) outran and outgunned Dan Marino's Dolphins 38-16 to win his second Super Bowl -- and second MVP. Jerry Rice was voted MVP of Montana's next Super Bowl victory, yet it was Montana's touchdown pass to John Taylor in the final moments that broke the hearts of Boomer Esiason's Bengals 20-16. Montana won his fourth and final ring -- and third MVP -- by throwing a 55-10 party on John Elway's Broncos.

 

Brady has won two Super Bowls by directing drives that set up 40-plus yard field goals by a kicker who belongs in the Hall of Fame. Does that make him better than Montana?

 

Please, let's wait a little while before we carve that in Mt. Olympus stone.

 

Like, four or five years.

 

Understand, I'm in awe of Tom Brady. He grows on me by the game. His performance in the AFC championship game at Pittsburgh -- after shaking off a 103-degree fever the night before -- was his greatest yet. Somehow, his arm strength appears to get stronger by the season. He has at least as much velocity as Montana did -- maybe more -- and his passes are just as accurate and catchable. At 6-foot-4, Brady is two inches taller and a little stronger in the pocket than Montana was. Brady's ability to sense pressure and ballroom-dance to buy time and create passing lanes make him Montana's equal, even though Montana would have smoked him in a 40-yard dash.

 

But before I anoint Brady, I need to see more.

 

I need to see Brady's offense blow out the Eagles. After all, Brady now benefits from the NFL's most dominating power/speed back, Corey Dillon. Brady now relies on the NFL's deepest and surest-handed receiving corps. This sensationally underrated group is a collective star, as opposed to the one standout (Rice) that Montana had. And Brady invariably finds an open receiver because no offensive line gives its quarterback more time than New England's does.

 

So Brady's offense should be able to do to the Eagles what it did in the AFC title game to the Steelers -- score 40-plus on them. A third Super Bowl in four seasons would match Troy Aikman's run in Dallas, but Aikman's Cowboys twice demolished Buffalo, and had a fairly easy time with the Steelers.

 

Hypothetically, if Brady goes three for four and then decides to retire, he would be a first-ballot Hall of Famer on the strength of his rings alone. But he would not be better than Montana.

 

Show me more fourth-quarter comebacks, more last-minute magic. Show me you can win at Pittsburgh when your running back and favorite target are hurt. Without Dillon and Deion Branch, Brady looked like a sixth-rounder in the regular-season loss to the Steelers.

 

Show me you can win next season when your offensive coordinator, Charlie Weis, is coaching Notre Dame.

 

As Brady will tell you, being called the best has its privileges.

For that matter, I'm curious to see how the defensive genius, Belichick, does without Weis. And I remain curious about how Belichick could go 37-45 and get fired after five seasons in Cleveland if he's the greatest coach ever.

 

But understand, I'm in awe of Belichick just as I'm in awe of Brady. There has never been a better defensive teacher and strategist. He has created the finest parity-beating organization in pro football. If I were starting a team from scratch, I'd want Belichick to organize and coach it.

 

But if I owned a struggling franchise and wanted to win quickly, I'd want Parcells. Parcells is one of the all-time great commanders and motivators. He and Belichick are extraordinary in different ways. Just because Belichick is HOT and Parcells is NOT -- his Cowboys went 6-10 this year -- do not lose sight of Parcells' greatness.

 

Do not get swept up in the media race to proclaim Belichick or Brady THE GREATEST EVER.

 

Now feel free to Google Brady's girlfriend, actress Bridget Moynahan.

[C Dubya 04 0]

You know, I read that Bayless article earlier and I have to agree with a lot of what he says. But I think that it is widespread and not just an issue when discussing the Patriots. Everyone has to be the second coming of someone else in every sport now. Why can't people just be what they are. Tom Brady is a clutch QB, why need to make him the next Joe Montana, why not be happy with him being the first Tom Brady.

 

I'm C Dubya, and thanks for watching the Sports Reporters.

[alfdogg 0]

Here it is, they beat the Bulls in the Semi-finals. Getting to the Semi-finals in the NBA playoffs is a whoopity shit moment with all their playoff seeds.

 

In the playoffs New York defeated the New Jersey Nets in four games to set up a rematch with the Bulls in the conference semifinals. This time the Knicks prevailed, four games to three, and then needed seven games and obviously bribed game 7 officials to drop the Indiana Pacers in the Eastern Conference Finals.

Edited for accuracy.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

I agree that the Brady/Montana comparisons are nonsense. I really can't see how you can fairly compare a QB with 192 games against a QB with 64 career games played. Let's at least wait until Brady's past his prime before making historical comparisons. Otherwise, you tend to make yourself look quite foolish down the line.

[Damaramu 0]

You know, I read that Bayless article earlier and I have to agree with a lot of what he says. But I think that it is widespread and not just an issue when discussing the Patriots. Everyone has to be the second coming of someone else in every sport now. Why can't people just be what they are. Tom Brady is a clutch QB, why need to make him the next Joe Montana, why not be happy with him being the first Tom Brady.

 

I'm C Dubya, and thanks for watching the Sports Reporters.

I'm going to have to agree on this.

Why does Lebron James have to be the next Michael Jordan? Why can't he be Lebron James?

Was everyone hailing Jordan as the "next past star"

or Montana as the "next past star"????

 

No seriously I wasn't alive when Montana and Jordan came in(i'm sure on montana, what year did Jordan come in?) so I don't know.

[Guest Vitamin X]

I disagree with Skip Bayless. He was especially reaching on the Belichick argument, going back to Bill's years in Cleveland. Other than his time with the Giants, has Parcells really been THAT great of a coach? I think he's terribly overhyped. It must be the nickname.

 

The Brady argument is a little closer, but NE hasn't always had the offensive line chemistry it doers today, and I'd still make an argument that they're on the lower end of a top 10 list in football, if that. And don't even bring up the Tuck Rule bullshit; under current NFL rules it was the right call. Not to mention Brady was forced to throw a lot until this year when they got Corey Dillon to balance the offense a bit more, but is his receiving corps really all that impressive? Brady's lone 1000 yard receiver was Troy Brown in 2001. For a team that's reported to be as deep and speedy as NE's, they sure don't seem to have one standout guy that you can look to to make plays. I wonder how good Deion Branch would fare with the Dolphins? Wonder if Troy Brown will be setting career highs with the Falcons? Brady makes them look good because he spreads the ball around, doesn't turn the ball over, is cool under pressure, and has a very fast, accurate throw. I'm sure at the time Montana was making a name for himself he had the same doubters, but I think Brady will finally justify these comparisons within the next two years as well. It's not because there HAS to be a next great player of an era, though if I were to make a list, I'd say it looks like this:

 

Joe Montana=Tom Brady

Dan Marino=Peyton Manning

Brett Favre=Byron Leftwich

John Elway=Daunte Culpepper

Randall Cunningham=Donovan McNabb (fitting)

Jim Kelly=Chad Pennington (I believe Chad will be able to get them to the big game)

 

I think you might be able to switch around the last 3, but that's what I'd put it at right now. I picked them on playing style, not on accomplishment by the way, otherwise I would have had Daunte be Randall Cunningham, McNabb as Kelly, and Pennington as the new... Dan Fouts?

[Brett Favre 0]

I wouldn't be able to handle witnessing Chad lose 4 Super Bowls.

[The Czech Republic 0]

I <3 Skip Bayless

 

:wub:

 

I feel dirty

[therealworldschampion 0]

Randall Cunningham=Donovan McNabb (fitting)

 

I disagree. Michael Vick remids me way more of Randall. Whereas Randall was impatient and would take off running, Donovan has a lot more patience in the pocket now than he used to.

[Vern Gagne 0]

McNabb's probably more like Steve Young.

[2GOLD 0]

McNabb's probably more like Steve Young.

 

I'd agree with that one.

 

Vick is still Randall until he develops his raw skills into something more. Being Randall isn't exactly horrible, he got the Eagles to a few playoff games iirc.

[Vern Gagne 0]

The Leftwhich=Favre comparision is a tad premature as well.

[The Man in Blak 0]

I disagree with Skip Bayless. He was especially reaching on the Belichick argument, going back to Bill's years in Cleveland. Other than his time with the Giants, has Parcells really been THAT great of a coach? I think he's terribly overhyped. It must be the nickname.

Or the fact that he's made the playoffs with four different teams and led three of those teams to the Super Bowl. There's not really anybody else that has that kind of resume in the NFL, you know?

 

The Brady argument is a little closer, but NE hasn't always had the offensive line chemistry it doers today, and I'd still make an argument that they're on the lower end of a top 10 list in football, if that.

 

Tom Brady was sacked 25 times this year, the fifth best total in the league. Dillon was able to pile up 1635 yards behind them. Somehow, I can't see them being off a top 5 list, let alone a top 10.

 

Not to mention Brady was forced to throw a lot until this year when they got Corey Dillon to balance the offense a bit more, but is his receiving corps really all that impressive? Brady's lone 1000 yard receiver was Troy Brown in 2001. For a team that's reported to be as deep and speedy as NE's, they sure don't seem to have one standout guy that you can look to to make plays.  I wonder how good Deion Branch would fare with the Dolphins? Wonder if Troy Brown will be setting career highs with the Falcons?

 

The way I see it, the Patriots have a bunch of "B grade" receivers. There's no clear cut No. 1 receiver and that works to New England's advantage. Sure, Branch, Givens, and Patten aren't as good as, say, Randy Moss individually, but they collectively outclass Randy Moss, Nate Burleson, and Marcus Robinson by a fairly substantial margin. And, when you have a bunch of capable receivers like that, it makes it difficult to plot a defensive gameplan around them.

 

Criticizing the receiving corps for not having a 1000 yard season is a little inaccurate, though. As you admit in a later comment...

 

Brady makes them look good because he spreads the ball around...

 

...the system doesn't really allow for each one of them to individually shine, but they're not stiffs. New England receivers averaged 12.8 yards per catch, which was fourth best in the league. Better than the Rams and their "speed merchants." Better than Minnesota, with Randy Moss and the "home run" offense. They may not have 1000 yards each, but they make plays at an obscene rate.

 

 

On a side note, I really enjoyed the Bayless article. He's an absolutely idiot 99% of the time and the opening to the article is more mindless ranting, but he does a pretty mean hit on the New England "dynasty."

[Guest Vitamin X]

I disagree with Skip Bayless. He was especially reaching on the Belichick argument, going back to Bill's years in Cleveland. Other than his time with the Giants, has Parcells really been THAT great of a coach? I think he's terribly overhyped. It must be the nickname.

Or the fact that he's made the playoffs with four different teams and led three of those teams to the Super Bowl. There's not really anybody else that has that kind of resume in the NFL, you know?

Correction: Parcells coached the Giants, Patriots, Jets, and Cowboys. The only two of those teams to make the Super Bowl were the Giants and Patriots, only one of which won the big game (albeit twice...due to his defense...coached by who?). The Jets made it to the AFC Championship, and made a hell of a turnaround with him as head coach in just a couple seasons, but followed through with their AFC Championship appearance by going 8-8 and missing the playoffs the following year. Outside of his 1986 and 1990 Giants teams, none of his teams were really too impressive. You could make an argument that even Andy Reid has proved to be a more impressive coach in his relatively short time.

 

The Brady argument is a little closer, but NE hasn't always had the offensive line chemistry it doers today, and I'd still make an argument that they're on the lower end of a top 10 list in football, if that.

 

Tom Brady was sacked 25 times this year, the fifth best total in the league. Dillon was able to pile up 1635 yards behind them. Somehow, I can't see them being off a top 5 list, let alone a top 10.

 

In the games I've seen against the Patriots, teams are usually able to get pressure on Brady or collapse the pocket, but Brady is somehow still able to remain cool under the pressure and complete passes. He does it all the time. Maybe I was being a bit too harsh on the Pats' line, though.

 

I can see your point about the Pats' receivers, and yes them being all above-average rather than one outstanding receiver and a bunch of horribly average targets (hello Philly!) works well for them, but I don't see any other quarterback having the same kind of success in that system that Brady does, because Brady is especially adept at reading coverage quickly and delivering the ball when he sees it.

 

The Leftwhich=Favre comparision is a tad premature as well.

So far from what I've seen, Leftwich is tough as nails and is able to will a team to win with inferior talent. And this is coming from someone who loves watching Favre, naturally.

 

I also agree with McNabb being compared to Young.. except for the fact Young was much more accurate, but comparable nonetheless.

[Guest Vitamin X]

Oh, and Freddie Mitchell continues to mouth off..

 

News

Eagles' wide receiver Freddie Mitchell riled up Patriots' defensive players by saying during a television interview that he "has something" for safety Rodney Harrison. Mitchell added that he only knows the numbers, not the names, of the Patriots' cornerbacks. "You have so many young guys nowadays, so many young guys that don't have respect for the game," Harrison responded in an interview with the Associated Press. "Some people are just immature. Some people really haven't experienced certain things." Mitchell finished the regular season with 22 receptions for 377 yards and two scores.

 

Views

Mitchell sure does a lot of talking for a player who was primarily used as a No. 3 receiver behind Terrell Owens and Todd Pinkston. There's no shame in being listed lower than T.O. on the depth chart, but being bumped from the starting lineup by Pinkston is pretty sad when you consider that Mitchell recently thanked his hands for being great and labeled himself a special player.

Source: fanball.com

[HarleyQuinn 0]

Also what makes the Patriots receivers so dangerous is that any one of them can step up and have a 100+ yard game. While they may not do it often, they still offer the chance to do so(as shown by Deion Branch in last year's Super Bowl).

 

2002-2004 Seasons

David Givens: 4 games

David Patten: 4 games

Deion Branch: 3 games

Troy Brown: 3 games

[Guest The Shadow Behind You]

Freddie Mitchell is trying too damn hard to be the showcase "star" of the media hype blitz.

[Guest Vitamin X]

Also, I have a bit of a random question:

 

What's the deal with the waiting two weeks one year and then going to the big game right after the NFC-AFC Championships alternately? How was this decided and is this done every other year or what, and why?

[USC Wuz Robbed! 0]

I think usually you have a week's break between the conference title game and the Super Bowl. This was decided likely based on when the Super Bowl was and when the regular season concludes, and then planning the playoff schedule accordingly. That's what I think anyways.

[KingPK 0]

It's been a two week break for a long time now. There was only a one-week break in 2002 because the season was delayed a week due to 9/11 and, if I remember, the NFL couldn't postpone the game because someone else was going to use the Superdome the week after the scheduled SB date.

[Guest Vitamin X]

I remember it was also a one-week thing for the 2000 season Super Bowl (you know, the Ravens championship that apparently everyone forgot about). I got this from watching NFL network and the commentators had been talking about the difference between getting a bye for the big game or not, and Rod Woodson was talking about being on both sides of it, so I thought that this was an alternating thing or something.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

I thought Ravens/Giants had the break, and that it was literally the Super Bowl in 2000, ie the Titans/Rams one that didn't have the bye. Because I remember after Patriots/Rams everybody was talking about how they should dump the bye week, because when they do the game tends to be closer. That doesn't describe Ravens/Giants very well.

[KingPK 0]

So they had some frivolous "send-off" for the Pats in the Gillette parking lot this morning, with a stage and the mayor of Boston and the govenors of the New England states there (at least they didn't have John Kerry there, who would have called the QB "Tom Bruschi" or something). Save that stuff for the parade AFTER the game, guys.

[The Czech Republic 0]

It's been a two week break for a long time now. There was only a one-week break in 2002 because the season was delayed a week due to 9/11 and, if I remember, the NFL couldn't postpone the game because someone else was going to use the Superdome the week after the scheduled SB date.

I seem to remember Tampa Bay-Oakland being the next week but I might be wrong. Maybe I'm thinking they took a week off whereas the Rams and Patriots didn't. I forget.

[Guest The Shadow Behind You]

Tampa/Oakland was two weeks of the annoying Keyshawn Johnson bitching about the media and yet appearing on every goddamn media outlet.

[USC Wuz Robbed! 0]

Patriots win 24-17. I see Philly able to pull off 2 TDs and maybe a FG, nothing more. Patriots will only score 1 TD more than Philly.