The 17th game and the bad football in Championship games and Super Bowl

[BADOLBILZ]

2 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

There have been a LOT of bad SBs. They've been better in recent decades (partly because the Pats seemed constitutionally incapable of blowing anyone out or getting blown out in their 9 appearances with Brady), but for a very long time they were generally blowouts. And there have been blowouts in recent years too. Seattle/Denver, anyone??  http://www.espn.com/nfl/superbowl/history/winners

 

 

There have been plenty of uncontested SB's...........we certainly know that..........but usually ONE team looks like they actually deserve the Lombardi. 

 

What this game reminded me of was SB XL.......the Pittsburgh/Seattle game..........where both teams played poorly but one of them had to win.

 

 

[dave mcbride]

2 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

There have been plenty of uncontested SB's...........we certainly know that..........but usually ONE team looks like they actually deserve the Lombardi. 

 

What this game reminded me of was SB XL.......the Pittsburgh/Seattle game..........where both teams played poorly but one of them had to win.

 

 

I'd say Pitt/GB and Pitt/AZ too. Those were all mistake-plagued games.  I felt this one was more cleanly played than all of those, and as for that Pitt/Seattle game, this one was at least close to the end and the teams played better. 

Edited February 14, 2022 by dave mcbride

[sullim4]

8 minutes ago, RoyBatty is alive said:

Agree with it all except the half time show which I didn't bother to watch.  Matt Stafford play was terrible yet somehow won.

 

This was the tell tale sign to me... anytime the QB of the winning team doesn't win the MVP, one of two things happened.  Either someone else completely stole the spotlight, or he was terrible and thus someone else won it because somebody had to.

 

So our MVP this year was a receiver who had 8 catches (none of them particularly spectacular, say like Tyree's catch or Santonio Holmes' for the Steelers), 92 yards and 2 TD receptions.  It's hard for me to get excited about a game like that.

 

At least with a 49ers and Bengals super bowl, you had some history to play for.  Rams and Bengals has zero compelling story line for neutral fans.

[GoBills808]

44 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

I thought it was a pretty good game. In my opinion it's the best SB since the Atlanta/NE game. The Philly/NE game had zero defense, and the SF/KC game was more "blah" than this one. Last year's SB and the NE/Rams one were bad. The stars all showed up last night and played well, and in my view a 23-20 score is pretty much the perfect number--it indicates that both offenses and defenses made plays. I worry less about a SB team being not as dominant as one might like; the game should be judged on its own terms. At the end of the day, it was a see-saw, hard fought battle with a lot of important individual plays. The fact that the teams are flawed is meaningless to me.  The Bills are flawed too. 

Hard disagree. KC/Niners was a good game

 

last night was just boring. Could have been a regular season game.

[Ethan in Cleveland]

42 minutes ago, Success said:

It was a great Super Bowl. I'm not sure what people are talking about when they say it was sub-par. It was a really hard-fought game that came down to the last minute.

 

It was a good final 10 minutes. Up to that it was boring.  I'm fine with low scoring games where the defense is making plays.  But for the most part in the first three quarters it was just bad offense from both teams.  

[SirAndrew]

53 minutes ago, Coach Tuesday said:

Last night’s product was terrible.  Anodyne watered-down 90s revival crap, from the commercials to the announcers (Al Michaels sounded like he had died three years ago) - and I actually even liked the halftime show for once.  It was so boring that at one point they literally did a history of people named Joe in the Super Bowl.  Just a bland, joyless affair and I’m sure tired players played a role in that.  Unfortunately the Super Bowl isn’t really for “real football fans”, I’m not the target audience.

Amen to the retro 90’s stuff. I grew up in the 90’s, it stunk back then, and it still stinks. It was the beginning of pop culture purging itself of all quality. It also boasted some of the dorkiest styles for “cool” people of all time. 

[Coach Tuesday]

3 minutes ago, Ethan in Portland said:

It was a good final 10 minutes. Up to that it was boring.  I'm fine with low scoring games where the defense is making plays.  But for the most part in the first three quarters it was just bad offense from both teams.  

The first couple scripted drives were good, and then the last seven minutes or so when everyone was squeezing every last ounce of effort out in order to win - but in between it was a snore-fest.

[TheFunPolice]

I usually roll my eyes a bit at "star power" but this game lacked it. The biggest star QBs in the league (Allen, Rodgers, Brady, Mahomes, Jackson, Wilson) were watching and not one of them was in this game.

 

Stafford is a nice story and I'm glad he won, and Burrow is a nice story but neither is really on the level of the guys mentioned above. 

 

That hurt the "feel" of the game to me. Even in a blowout, there's usually that one star QB to carry the show. Often 2. 

 

Think of the SB possibilities when the playoffs began:

 

Allen V Brady

Allen V Rodgers

Mahomes v Rodgers

Mahomes V Brady

 

Even Allen or Mahomes V Stafford and the Rams would have been so much better. 

 

It seems like a rip in the fabric of the matrix happened and suddenly the Bengals were there. It was not supposed to happen. They don't even have a real practice facility! 

 

Part of me wondered if their owner was like "Crap! How much is this team going to cost me now?" 

 

Edited February 14, 2022 by TheFunPolice

[Jerry Jabber]

1 hour ago, Coach Tuesday said:

Last night’s product was terrible.  Anodyne watered-down 90s revival crap, from the commercials to the announcers (Al Michaels sounded like he had died three years ago) - and I actually even liked the halftime show for once.  It was so boring that at one point they literally did a history of people named Joe in the Super Bowl.  Just a bland, joyless affair and I’m sure tired players played a role in that.  Unfortunately the Super Bowl isn’t really for “real football fans”, I’m not the target audience.

It felt like a TNF game in the regular season than a championship game.

 

Wasn’t a huge fan of the halftime show. While I liked the stage and thought that was very creative, IMO, there was a lot of bad lip syncing. Had no clue who the guy was with the dancers in the “Dre Day” boxes. 

[TheFunPolice]

Even the end of the game felt half-speed and muted...

 

Kroenke sounded like he was giving a eulogy at a funeral. 

[SoCal Deek]

I have no idea what some of you are looking to see. The game was close and came down to the last possession. Is the Super Bowl going to be your definition of perfect? Probably not every year, but neither is any regular season slate. There’s so much pressure on these guys I’m amazed they can play at the level we saw last night. 

[JakeFrommStateFarm]

28 minutes ago, RoyBatty is alive said:

Agree with it all except the half time show which I didn't bother to watch.  Matt Stafford play was terrible yet somehow won.

Stafford didn't have to be as good because he has that amazing DLine backing him up.

[TheFunPolice]

Just now, SoCal Deek said:

I have no idea what some of you are looking to see. The game was close and came down to the last possession. Is the Super Bowl going to be your definition of perfect? Probably not every year, but neither is any regular season slate. There’s so much pressure on these guys I’m amazed they can play at the level we saw last night. 

 

I get that feeling, but I think it's just because the biggest names weren't in the game. Of course, the "big name" guys weren't always big name guys either. Back when Brady won his first SB he and the Patriots were like the Bengals. A team that "didn't seem to belong" so who knows

[JoPoy88]

6 minutes ago, TheFunPolice said:

I usually roll my eyes a bit at "star power" but this game lacked it. The biggest star QBs in the league (Allen, Rodgers, Brady, Mahomes, Jackson, Wilson) were watching and not one of them was in this game.

 

Stafford is a nice story and I'm glad he won, and Burrow is a nice story but neither is really on the level of the guys mentioned above. 

 

That hurt the "feel" of the game to me. Even in a blowout, there's usually that one star QB to carry the show. Often 2. 

 

Think of the SB possibilities when the playoffs began:

 

Allen V Brady

Allen V Rodgers

Mahomes v Rodgers

Mahomes V Brady

 

Even Allen or Mahomes V Stafford and the Rams would have been so much better. 

 

It seems like a rip in the fabric of the matrix happened and suddenly the Bengals were there. It was not supposed to happen. They don't even have a real practice facility! 

 

Part of me wondered if their owner was like "Crap! How much is this team going to cost me now?" 

 

generally agree but I’d argue Kupp is a star, or at least he should be. Donald is perhaps the greatest DT to ever play. Granted, those guys aren’t QBs so they only move the needle so much.

Edited February 14, 2022 by JoPoy88

[SoCal Deek]

1 minute ago, TheFunPolice said:

 

I get that feeling, but I think it's just because the biggest names weren't in the game. Of course, the "big name" guys weren't always big name guys either. Back when Brady won his first SB he and the Patriots were like the Bengals. A team that "didn't seem to belong" so who knows

Stafford 

Donald

Miller

Kupp

Burrow

Chase

 

Those are some pretty big names….no? 

[Aussie Joe]

It was a very rare SB without at least 1 season dominating team making it through  ..

 

I will just put it down to one of those years … rather than the extra game 

[TheFunPolice]

Just now, SoCal Deek said:

Stafford 

Donald

Miller

Kupp

Burrow

Chase

 

Those are some pretty big names….no? 

 

Rams are loaded with star players, but the Bengals are all brand new. Burrow has become more of a name in the past few weeks, but the game feels totally different if it were KC/Rams, with both teams loaded with star players and KC being in their 3rd straight SB. 

 

[dave mcbride]

23 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

Hard disagree. KC/Niners was a good game

 

last night was just boring. Could have been a regular season game.

I though Mahomes played like crap most of that game and that SF, instead of making a stop late (after the Jimmy G miss to Sanders) and giving themselves one more shot, collapsed like a house of cards on KC’s final possession. It was a fine game, and better than the average SB. But it was hardly great. Last night’s game certainly had more drama and probably better qb play overall.

7 minutes ago, JakeFrommStateFarm said:

Stafford didn't have to be as good because he has that amazing DLine backing him up.

Losing OBJ really affected his play. They were decimated at the receiver position. Skowronek is not good.

[SoCal Deek]

1 minute ago, TheFunPolice said:

 

Rams are loaded with star players, but the Bengals are all brand new. Burrow has become more of a name in the past few weeks, but the game feels totally different if it were KC/Rams, with both teams loaded with star players and KC being in their 3rd straight SB. 

 

That’s where we differ. I REALLY hope I never have to watch Brady in another Super Bowl…..and Mahomes is right behind him. I love seeing new teams in the big game. I thought both the Stafford and Burrow story lines were intriguing. And ….the Stadium looked amazing! 

[RoyBatty is alive]

7 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Stafford 

Donald

Miller

Kupp

Burrow

Chase

 

Those are some pretty big names….no? 

Odell B Jr and Burrow as well..plenty of "star" power