So yesterday marked the beginning of Lent for all the Catholic folks, along with other religions out there. One of the traditions of the season is to "give something up" between now and Easter. Most people try to give up something like chocolate, alcohol, smoking, or eating meat. So of course it's nice to see the Vikings supporting their local churches by completely giving up on hope that they'll have a proven, dependable quarterback in 2009. Of course they can't make their pledge official until midnight Thursday night, but all signs are pointing to the Vikes picking up their next great backup quarterback, Sage Rosenfels.
I'm half-kidding, but doesn't this acquisition raise more questions than answers? I feel like I'm watching a "Deal or No Deal" episode where the contestant still has a few big amounts left but takes a lowball deal anyways just to be safe. Last week I commented to some people how I thought Jeff Garcia would probably be our best option. Apparently Childress & Co. have a pretty big crush on Sage, because this is the second straight offseason the Vikings have tried to land him, and it looks like they'll succeed this time.
Call me crazy, but wouldn't you rather go after someone that can change the face of your team instead of maybe upgrading you from a D+ to a C- at quarterback? I've said in this space numerous times that I'm big fans of Tarvaris Jackson and Gus Frerotte... as backups. I'm afraid the same will go for "The Guy Named After a Household Herb."
Of course it's not like I have a ton of past work to base this opinion on other than the research I did after this story broke. Although this will be Rosenfels' 8th season in the league, he's played in only 32 games and started a whopping 7. He's played very well in some games and terribly in others. He seems that he can carry a team here and there, but he's also been a big reason for a few losses in his career. It's tough to tell if the success he has enjoyed was because of his talent or the benefit of having one of the best players in the league on his side.
Wait a second... who does this sound like? Lack of experience, streaky, bailed out a lot by a superstar teammate.... that's right....Tarvaris Jackson! That's why this move doesn't make much sense to me. Are the Vikings "set" at quarterback for 2009 now? Do they think Jackson or Rosenfels will start, assuming this move would signal the end of Gus' time in Minnesota? Is the front office OK with these two battling it out for NFL mediocrity? Will the 2009 starter simply be the guy that screws up the least?
So yeah, I'm not exactly thrilled with it, but I don't think it's all bad. I do like the price the Vikings are paying for a potential starting quarterback. Giving up a 4th round pick and paying him around $3 million/year (reportedly) seems reasonable if he produces at all. It also gives the Vikings quite a bit of cap room left to do something big in free agency, whether it's a cornerback, wide receiver, tackle, or another position they need depth in.
I also think Sage probably has more "upside" than T-Jax. From time to time, he's looked like an honest-to-God NFL quarterback that can win games for you. He looked pretty darn good when he came in for Schaub at the Metrodome this past season. Although the Vikings are notorious for making every quarterback in the league look like Hall of Fame material. Even in Tarvaris' best games, he just looked like someone that had only perfected scrambling and the rollout pass.
I really do hope I'm wrong about this, but it just feels like we're about to get more of the same at quarterback next year. So Mr. Rosenfels, if my favorite team does indeed acquire you when free agency starts, please prove me wrong. Make me look as silly as Catholics with the ashes on their foreheads after church last night. Please help us Vikings fans give up mediocrity instead of hope.
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
The Daytona.....400???
The Daytona 500 has been the mecca of auto racing since the 1979 race (the 1st nationally televised NASCAR event). The 500 has been considered THE race of the year, the "Super Bowl" of auto racing. Only the Indy 500 comes close to the stature of the Daytona 500.
So, why can't NASCAR's owner get it together when it comes to the largest event of his sport? Dropping the green flag at 3:51 p.m. EST is incredibly ridiculous. I understand they want to race part of the event at night, but there were still 90 laps to go when the lights came on. This race is supposed to finish, or at least run mostly, during the day.
NASCAR is a sport that prides itself in tradition. Turning the 500 into a night race is a far cry from that idea. Brian France is no stranger, however, to completely ignoring the traditions of the sport; removing the races from Rockingham and continually ignoring the Southeastern fan base that made NASCAR what it is today.
The biggest problem of all is the thought its okay to finish the Daytona 500 under a rain delay. Baseball does not end its World Series for a rain delay, football does not end the Super Bowl for one, and if the ice melted during the Stanley Cup the NHL would have it fixed and picked up again.
Many fans were upset that the Daytona 500 was called so quickly after rain began to fall, just
after 6:30 p.m. EST. There was less than 50 laps remaining at the time, which was well past the required halfway mark to make the race official. Matt Kenseth was declared the winner early, and everyone was sent to the exits without even an attempt to wait it out and dry the track. What's up with that? Didn't the Pepsi 400 located at the same track go until like 2:00 a.m. about a year ago?
Yes, I know it could rain just as easy at 1:00 as it could at 6:00, but with such a late start time, there is little, if any, "wiggle room" in the event schedule to compensate for red flags, rain, or wrecks. However, there is plenty of state of the art weather predictors and NASCAR knew rain was headed towards the track, so how hard is it to maybe cut out some of the pre-race nonsense? Just make an announcement at the track and don't worry about the viewers at home. The coverage was on at 2 pm anyway, and I'm sure I speak for most fans when I say I would rather miss the start of the race then not get to see the 200th lap at all.
What ever happened to earlier start times in NASCAR, like 12:30 or 1:30 p.m.? In the 2009 schedule, only two races start earlier than 2:00 p.m. Those are Talladega, on Nov. 11, at 1:15 p.m., and Martinsville, on Oct. 25, at 1:45 p.m. There only five races which start at 2 p.m.; that leaves 29 races starting later in the afternoon.
The television networks want later starting times to make races an option for the entire country. A 3:30 EST start meant it was 12:30 PST. I guess it also helps with the church crowd, as they can go to service, grab a bite to eat, change clothes, and be back home to watch the race.
Had the Daytona 500 started at 1:30 p.m., the full 500 miles would have been completed before the rain ever arrived. Yes, it would have made it 10:30 a.m. start in California, but I don't think that makes that big of a difference.
Probably also taken into consideration was the fact that FOX had a full lineup of prime-time shows slated to air on Sunday night, including the first HD episode of The Simpsons.
For those that would suggest that FOX shift the race to one of its other networks, that would not be likely. They had spent weeks advertising the "Great American Race" to the nation. They would have looked like they were not giving sufficient priority to such a major sporting event.
Again though, an earlier start time could have been scheduled. Keith Urban can probably sing just as well at 12:30 as he can at 2:30, and Tom Cruise can probably drive the pace car just as well at the earlier time. Besides, we already have a night race at Daytona later in on the season.
Could it be that FOX pushed NASCAR to make a quick decision and “blame it on the rain,” so as not to interrupt The Simpsons? Who really runs NASCAR? Is it FOX, ESPN, or is it NASCAR themselves?
My advice to NASCAR: Listen to the fans before you don't have any. If people paid for 500 miles, give them 500, or at least act like you are trying to. NASCAR can not continue to allow its premiere event to finish early. It is a horrible image to relay to the nation and the sporting world. If Brian France wants to be the visionary his daddy once was... he can start by fixing the mess he has made with the Daytona 500.
So, why can't NASCAR's owner get it together when it comes to the largest event of his sport? Dropping the green flag at 3:51 p.m. EST is incredibly ridiculous. I understand they want to race part of the event at night, but there were still 90 laps to go when the lights came on. This race is supposed to finish, or at least run mostly, during the day.
NASCAR is a sport that prides itself in tradition. Turning the 500 into a night race is a far cry from that idea. Brian France is no stranger, however, to completely ignoring the traditions of the sport; removing the races from Rockingham and continually ignoring the Southeastern fan base that made NASCAR what it is today.
The biggest problem of all is the thought its okay to finish the Daytona 500 under a rain delay. Baseball does not end its World Series for a rain delay, football does not end the Super Bowl for one, and if the ice melted during the Stanley Cup the NHL would have it fixed and picked up again.
Many fans were upset that the Daytona 500 was called so quickly after rain began to fall, just
after 6:30 p.m. EST. There was less than 50 laps remaining at the time, which was well past the required halfway mark to make the race official. Matt Kenseth was declared the winner early, and everyone was sent to the exits without even an attempt to wait it out and dry the track. What's up with that? Didn't the Pepsi 400 located at the same track go until like 2:00 a.m. about a year ago?
Yes, I know it could rain just as easy at 1:00 as it could at 6:00, but with such a late start time, there is little, if any, "wiggle room" in the event schedule to compensate for red flags, rain, or wrecks. However, there is plenty of state of the art weather predictors and NASCAR knew rain was headed towards the track, so how hard is it to maybe cut out some of the pre-race nonsense? Just make an announcement at the track and don't worry about the viewers at home. The coverage was on at 2 pm anyway, and I'm sure I speak for most fans when I say I would rather miss the start of the race then not get to see the 200th lap at all.
What ever happened to earlier start times in NASCAR, like 12:30 or 1:30 p.m.? In the 2009 schedule, only two races start earlier than 2:00 p.m. Those are Talladega, on Nov. 11, at 1:15 p.m., and Martinsville, on Oct. 25, at 1:45 p.m. There only five races which start at 2 p.m.; that leaves 29 races starting later in the afternoon.
The television networks want later starting times to make races an option for the entire country. A 3:30 EST start meant it was 12:30 PST. I guess it also helps with the church crowd, as they can go to service, grab a bite to eat, change clothes, and be back home to watch the race.
Had the Daytona 500 started at 1:30 p.m., the full 500 miles would have been completed before the rain ever arrived. Yes, it would have made it 10:30 a.m. start in California, but I don't think that makes that big of a difference.
Probably also taken into consideration was the fact that FOX had a full lineup of prime-time shows slated to air on Sunday night, including the first HD episode of The Simpsons.
For those that would suggest that FOX shift the race to one of its other networks, that would not be likely. They had spent weeks advertising the "Great American Race" to the nation. They would have looked like they were not giving sufficient priority to such a major sporting event.
Again though, an earlier start time could have been scheduled. Keith Urban can probably sing just as well at 12:30 as he can at 2:30, and Tom Cruise can probably drive the pace car just as well at the earlier time. Besides, we already have a night race at Daytona later in on the season.
Could it be that FOX pushed NASCAR to make a quick decision and “blame it on the rain,” so as not to interrupt The Simpsons? Who really runs NASCAR? Is it FOX, ESPN, or is it NASCAR themselves?
My advice to NASCAR: Listen to the fans before you don't have any. If people paid for 500 miles, give them 500, or at least act like you are trying to. NASCAR can not continue to allow its premiere event to finish early. It is a horrible image to relay to the nation and the sporting world. If Brian France wants to be the visionary his daddy once was... he can start by fixing the mess he has made with the Daytona 500.
Saturday, February 14, 2009
*Heroes
I'm going to make this one short and sweet. Just felt like I should say something on the topic since it wants to take half of my favorite show to be discussed each day. The fact is I DON'T CARE ABOUT STEROIDS IN BASEBALL!!
The players that use performance enhancing drugs are only hurting their own bodies, not mine. And truthfully, if it wasn't for the all the records that started being broken after the baseball strike in 1994, I probably would have never started watching baseball again anyway. The fans expected reasons to come flock to the ballparks after that strike, so the players delivered. The Mark McGwire-Sammy Sosa home run chase "saved" baseball. Do you think I wasn't one of many fans who noticed Barry Bonds went from being a stick figure to the same size of an NFL offensive lineman, seemingly in one off-season? Come on MLB, I knew players were using something...I'm not that naive.
The biggest argument I'm hearing about steroids in baseball is that if one player is using and another isn't, then the player that is using is cheating. Critics also say that all of baseballs records that were broken during the "Steroid Era" should either not count or come equipped with some sort of asterisk to explain that the record in question may or may not have been achieved with the use of a performance enhancing drug. Okay...fine...but wanna know why that still doesn't bother me?
The history of MLB is littered with cheaters and con artists. Just because I'm only 27 years old I know my history of sports. Just ask anyone that dare plays me in a sports related trivia game. So, you don't think I know about Ty Cobb probably fixing games in 1919; Or Mickey Mantle, Pete Rose and many of the ’50’s/’60’s generation who were high on amphetamines; Or Gaylord Perry admitting that he doctored baseballs; Or about Whitey Ford admitting his conspiracy to gouge or wet the baseball; Or my personal favorite story I read about, Tim Raines who would slide headfirst so as to not break the crack vials in his back pocket in the ’80’s. The list goes on and on and on and on. Nobody has a problem with some of those players being in the Hall of Fame, except obviously for Pete Rose since he gambled on baseball, but that's for another discussion. This ‘Golden Age’ in many people’s memories quite simply did not exist.
My point is that Mark McGwire and Barry Bonds should not be harshly penalized for cheating at a game littered with dishonesty and fear of losing one’s job. I quite honestly don’t care that they used steroids, because there is not one single study which has proven that it increases hand/eye coordination, which is much more important than arm strength when you’re talking about homers.
I don’t idolize players like I used to as a kid, but that doesn’t mean I cannot enjoy the games. This preoccupation we have as a society of tearing down celebrities has to stop. So, a player cheats? So? That means he’s just like all of us. I’ve lied. I’ve cheated. I’ve disappointed people. Does this mean I should be banned from work or fined, too? The standard we hold these people to is absolutely unrealistic.
To paraphrase John Kruk: "These ain’t heroes, lady, they’re ballplayers."
The players that use performance enhancing drugs are only hurting their own bodies, not mine. And truthfully, if it wasn't for the all the records that started being broken after the baseball strike in 1994, I probably would have never started watching baseball again anyway. The fans expected reasons to come flock to the ballparks after that strike, so the players delivered. The Mark McGwire-Sammy Sosa home run chase "saved" baseball. Do you think I wasn't one of many fans who noticed Barry Bonds went from being a stick figure to the same size of an NFL offensive lineman, seemingly in one off-season? Come on MLB, I knew players were using something...I'm not that naive.
The biggest argument I'm hearing about steroids in baseball is that if one player is using and another isn't, then the player that is using is cheating. Critics also say that all of baseballs records that were broken during the "Steroid Era" should either not count or come equipped with some sort of asterisk to explain that the record in question may or may not have been achieved with the use of a performance enhancing drug. Okay...fine...but wanna know why that still doesn't bother me?
The history of MLB is littered with cheaters and con artists. Just because I'm only 27 years old I know my history of sports. Just ask anyone that dare plays me in a sports related trivia game. So, you don't think I know about Ty Cobb probably fixing games in 1919; Or Mickey Mantle, Pete Rose and many of the ’50’s/’60’s generation who were high on amphetamines; Or Gaylord Perry admitting that he doctored baseballs; Or about Whitey Ford admitting his conspiracy to gouge or wet the baseball; Or my personal favorite story I read about, Tim Raines who would slide headfirst so as to not break the crack vials in his back pocket in the ’80’s. The list goes on and on and on and on. Nobody has a problem with some of those players being in the Hall of Fame, except obviously for Pete Rose since he gambled on baseball, but that's for another discussion. This ‘Golden Age’ in many people’s memories quite simply did not exist.
My point is that Mark McGwire and Barry Bonds should not be harshly penalized for cheating at a game littered with dishonesty and fear of losing one’s job. I quite honestly don’t care that they used steroids, because there is not one single study which has proven that it increases hand/eye coordination, which is much more important than arm strength when you’re talking about homers.
I don’t idolize players like I used to as a kid, but that doesn’t mean I cannot enjoy the games. This preoccupation we have as a society of tearing down celebrities has to stop. So, a player cheats? So? That means he’s just like all of us. I’ve lied. I’ve cheated. I’ve disappointed people. Does this mean I should be banned from work or fined, too? The standard we hold these people to is absolutely unrealistic.
To paraphrase John Kruk: "These ain’t heroes, lady, they’re ballplayers."
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Hall of Lame
Cris Carter played his last National Football League game a little more than six years ago, a game that many Viking fans will remember. Carter, who was a member of a Miami Dolphins team that was in the driver's seat for the #1 seed in the AFC playoffs, rolled into the Metrodome to take on a Viking team that sat at 3-10 and was simply playing for pride. The defining image of Carter from that game was of him going up and down the Miami sidelines, telling his teammates that Vikings' kicker Gary Anderson "couldn't kick it that far" as he lined up to attempt a 52-yard field goal. Anderson did, indeed, kick it that far, and gave the Vikings a 20-17 win. The loss sent the Dolphins into a tailspin that ultimately found them on the outside looking in at the AFC playoffs.
While that might have been the final image of Carter at the Metrodome, it was far from the most memorable. When Carter retired a couple of weeks later, he had more catches, yards, and touchdown receptions than any player in the history of the National Football League not named Jerry Rice.
Yet, this past Saturday, he was again denied entrance to the Pro Football Hall of Fame. I'm completely confused by this injustice. I'm not sure who the man has angered or whose dog he ran over or whose girlfriend he slept with at some point or what the case is here, but the fact that Cris Carter wasn't a first-ballot Hall of Famer was ludicrous enough. . . the fact that he was denied entry on his second attempt at the Hall is damn near inexplicable.
Here's a list of all the wide receivers that have made it into the Hall of Fame in the "modern era," which according to the Hall of Fame's website (where I pulled this list from) is defined as beginning in 1946:
Lance Alworth
Raymond Berry
Fred Biletnikoff
Tom Fears
Bob Hayes
Elroy Hirsch
Michael Irvin
Charlie Joiner
Steve Largent
Dante Lavelli
James Lofton
Don Maynard
Tommy McDonald
Bobby Mitchell
Art Monk
Pete Phios
John Stallworth
Lynn Swann
Charley Taylor
Paul Warfield
Give me five names on that list that you look at and say, "Yep, that guy is definitely better than Cris Carter, no question about it." Hell, give me three names on that list that meet that criteria.
You won't find them, because they simply aren't there. Jerry Rice played until 2004, so his name will come up for eligibility next year, and he's as close to a mortal lock as it gets for Canton, but he's not on the above list yet. Hell, guys like Lynn Swann were never even the best wide receiver on their own damn team (Swann couldn't carry Stallworth's jock, quite frankly, and never had a single 1,000-yard receiving season), yet they get into the Hall of Fame ahead of one of the five greatest receivers to ever strap on a helmet.
And I don't want to hear the "but Carter never got a ring" argument, either. Because, by that criteria, Dan Marino isn't a Hall of Famer and Brad Johnson and Trent Dilfer are. Super Bowl rings are a team thing. . . the Hall of Fame is a recognition of individual accomplishment. Very few wide receivers have accomplished, individually, what Cris Carter has.
In many cases, the performance of a wide receiver is directly related to consistency and talent at the quarterback position. Guys like Jerry Rice and Marvin Harrison spent (or are spending) their entire career catching passes from guys that are either in the Hall of Fame or will be going there. If you look up and down the leaderboards for wide receivers, you'll find that a lot of the guys up towards the top have had a lot of stability at that position, and/or constantly played with guys that were incredibly talented.
And then there's Cris Carter.
Carter, as a member of the Vikings, had eight consecutive 1,000 yard seasons from 1993 to 2000. Here are the quarterbacks that threw to him during those seasons: Jim McMahon, Warren Moon, Brad Johnson, Randall Cunningham, Jeff George, and Daunte Culpepper.
In those eight 1,000-yard seasons, the man played with six different primary quarterbacks. There's one Hall of Famer on that list in Warren Moon, a guy that Carter played with towards the tail end of Moon's career. None of the other guys on that list are going to the Hall, and frankly none of them are close.
I simply don't understand how this guy has been locked out of the Hall to this point. Yes, it's only been two years. Cris Carter deserved to be a first-ballot Hall of Famer, not a guy that's still searching for his spot in Canton on his third try after becoming eligible. Not to mention Jerry Rice and Emmitt Smith are both eligible next year so there's two more spots that are already taken. I don't know what sort of message the Hall of Fame voters are attempting to send here, but quite frankly, either you're a Hall of Famer or you're not. And if Cris Carter isn't, I truly have no idea who is.
Some critics are even saying he was only a "possession receiver"....okay...well then he was the best "possession receiver" in the history of the NFL...put him in the Hall!! The man is the greatest non-Jerry Rice wide receiver in the history of the National Football League, he possessed what might have been the greatest set of hands in the history of the league (and I'll include Rice in that category, too), and he did it without having a truly great quarterback to work with during his time in the NFL. I was actually looking forward to seeing the first two Viking players that I could say I "grew up watching" get inducted this year, but sadly I won't.
Congrats to Randall McDaniel on his induction though, and here's to hoping that Carter doesn't have to wait so long that his induction becomes some sort of "charity" case.
While that might have been the final image of Carter at the Metrodome, it was far from the most memorable. When Carter retired a couple of weeks later, he had more catches, yards, and touchdown receptions than any player in the history of the National Football League not named Jerry Rice.
Yet, this past Saturday, he was again denied entrance to the Pro Football Hall of Fame. I'm completely confused by this injustice. I'm not sure who the man has angered or whose dog he ran over or whose girlfriend he slept with at some point or what the case is here, but the fact that Cris Carter wasn't a first-ballot Hall of Famer was ludicrous enough. . . the fact that he was denied entry on his second attempt at the Hall is damn near inexplicable.
Here's a list of all the wide receivers that have made it into the Hall of Fame in the "modern era," which according to the Hall of Fame's website (where I pulled this list from) is defined as beginning in 1946:
Lance Alworth
Raymond Berry
Fred Biletnikoff
Tom Fears
Bob Hayes
Elroy Hirsch
Michael Irvin
Charlie Joiner
Steve Largent
Dante Lavelli
James Lofton
Don Maynard
Tommy McDonald
Bobby Mitchell
Art Monk
Pete Phios
John Stallworth
Lynn Swann
Charley Taylor
Paul Warfield
Give me five names on that list that you look at and say, "Yep, that guy is definitely better than Cris Carter, no question about it." Hell, give me three names on that list that meet that criteria.
You won't find them, because they simply aren't there. Jerry Rice played until 2004, so his name will come up for eligibility next year, and he's as close to a mortal lock as it gets for Canton, but he's not on the above list yet. Hell, guys like Lynn Swann were never even the best wide receiver on their own damn team (Swann couldn't carry Stallworth's jock, quite frankly, and never had a single 1,000-yard receiving season), yet they get into the Hall of Fame ahead of one of the five greatest receivers to ever strap on a helmet.
And I don't want to hear the "but Carter never got a ring" argument, either. Because, by that criteria, Dan Marino isn't a Hall of Famer and Brad Johnson and Trent Dilfer are. Super Bowl rings are a team thing. . . the Hall of Fame is a recognition of individual accomplishment. Very few wide receivers have accomplished, individually, what Cris Carter has.
In many cases, the performance of a wide receiver is directly related to consistency and talent at the quarterback position. Guys like Jerry Rice and Marvin Harrison spent (or are spending) their entire career catching passes from guys that are either in the Hall of Fame or will be going there. If you look up and down the leaderboards for wide receivers, you'll find that a lot of the guys up towards the top have had a lot of stability at that position, and/or constantly played with guys that were incredibly talented.
And then there's Cris Carter.
Carter, as a member of the Vikings, had eight consecutive 1,000 yard seasons from 1993 to 2000. Here are the quarterbacks that threw to him during those seasons: Jim McMahon, Warren Moon, Brad Johnson, Randall Cunningham, Jeff George, and Daunte Culpepper.
In those eight 1,000-yard seasons, the man played with six different primary quarterbacks. There's one Hall of Famer on that list in Warren Moon, a guy that Carter played with towards the tail end of Moon's career. None of the other guys on that list are going to the Hall, and frankly none of them are close.
I simply don't understand how this guy has been locked out of the Hall to this point. Yes, it's only been two years. Cris Carter deserved to be a first-ballot Hall of Famer, not a guy that's still searching for his spot in Canton on his third try after becoming eligible. Not to mention Jerry Rice and Emmitt Smith are both eligible next year so there's two more spots that are already taken. I don't know what sort of message the Hall of Fame voters are attempting to send here, but quite frankly, either you're a Hall of Famer or you're not. And if Cris Carter isn't, I truly have no idea who is.
Some critics are even saying he was only a "possession receiver"....okay...well then he was the best "possession receiver" in the history of the NFL...put him in the Hall!! The man is the greatest non-Jerry Rice wide receiver in the history of the National Football League, he possessed what might have been the greatest set of hands in the history of the league (and I'll include Rice in that category, too), and he did it without having a truly great quarterback to work with during his time in the NFL. I was actually looking forward to seeing the first two Viking players that I could say I "grew up watching" get inducted this year, but sadly I won't.
Congrats to Randall McDaniel on his induction though, and here's to hoping that Carter doesn't have to wait so long that his induction becomes some sort of "charity" case.
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Blow the Whistle?
This blog is about the Super Bowl...yup...yet another Super Bowl without my Beloved Purple involved. So, what can be worse than that? How bout living an hour north of the Super Bowl Champions....yeah..that's the icing on the cake right there. So I know some people are just anxious to know what I REALLY felt about Super Bowl XLIII. Well...let's begin shall we?
In any given game, any player, coach, media member, or fan can point to a handful of plays that decided the game one way or another. Likewise, these same people can, and sometimes do, point to a few bad calls by the officiating crew that "cost their team the game." Blaming the refs after a heart-breaking loss has become an American tradition, one that everyone has been guilty of at least once in their lifetime, including myself on more than one occasion.
In many ways, this is just human nature. It might be a cop-out, but it is easier than admitting that your team lost...and it was "their" fault. As a player, you do not want to admit that you were outplayed. As a coach, you do not want to admit that your game plan wasn't good enough.
As a media member, you want to create a good story that will help build your legacy as a writer or broadcaster. And as a fan, you just don't want to admit that your team might not have been the better team.
As can be expected, officiating controversy has come into play regarding Super Bowl XLIII between the Arizona Cardinals and Pittsburgh Steelers. Now, I personally did not have a dog in this fight obviously, but I did have a team I was rooting for. I have no problem coming out and saying that I was pulling for the Cardinals, and I was pulling for them passionately.
It had nothing to do with Larry Fitzgerald, although I think he is a magnificent talent, a seemingly good dude, and one of the great young superstars in the league. It also had nothing to do with the feel-good Kurt Warner story, although I certainly respect what he has done this season and admire the fact that he has come up from a nobody to a superstar...twice!
No, it had everything to do with flat out hating the Pittsburgh Steelers. Root for a team that has never won a Super Bowl then live in the hometown of a Six-time Super Bowl champion...you'll understand. I can't believe that when I came to work the day after the AFC Championship and the Super Bowl and heard people bitching about the calls that went AGAINST the Steelers. You just won the f*%kin Super Bowl!! Can't Steeler fans be happy for two seconds about that?!? Nope, I even had to hear on the Mark Madden show on the way to the Pitt game about how Big Ben is a terrible quarterback that gets lucky he doesn't get sacked every play. Again...he's won the f*%kin Super Bowl for you.....TWICE!!
All that being said, there is no need to fear. You are not about to be subjected to a breakdown of every missed holding call, TD or No TD, and bogus roughing the passer calls. I won't do that because, quite honestly, the majority of the game was pretty evenly called. Yes, there were bad calls, but they went both ways, and some of the more costly bad calls were corrected by coach's challenges. Some people are complaining that there was a hold or a block in the back on the 100-yard interception return by Harrison. I never saw it, and I am not going to look for it because it will further piss me off.
The way I see it, it was not the refs that made Warner throw the interception and they certainly did not prevent the Cardinals players from letting James Harrison lumber 100 freakin' yards for a touchdown! Holding happens on almost every play of every game. The majority of them don't get called. A supposed holding call on that one play was not the difference in the game. Others will point to yet another Harrison play—the unnecessary roughness penalty. Should he have been ejected? Absolutely. Did it change the outcome of the game? Nope.
Late in the game, the Steelers' offense was the difference, not their defense. The presence of Harrison on the field did not stop Larry Fitzgerald from parting the sea on his way to a go-ahead touchdown in the final minutes of the game, and he certainly didn't help Big Ben and Co. march down the field for the game-winning touchdown. While that cheap shot of Harrison's was a disgusting show of poor sportsmanship and class that certainly merits a fine and suspension, the fact that he was not ejected had no baring on the final outcome of the game.
I even complained that Santonio Holmes was not penalized for his celebration after the game-winning touchdown where he used the ball as a prop. Yes, it is true that by the letter of the law, that should have been a 15-yard penalty that would be assessed on the kickoff, and that could have made a huge impact on the game. Part of me sympathizes with the Cardinals fans who believe that should have been called. The other part of me is glad that it wasn't, and I hope and pray that "penalties" like that one will never be called again. But the more I thought about it who wants to win a game based on another team getting called for a bogus celebration penalty that 99 percent of the fan base will argue is ridiculous at best? There are many reasons that people call this league the No Fun League, and the "ball as a prop" rule is one of them.
The only thing that irked me about the no-call is that I know that if that had been the Cowboys' receiver Terrell Owens, the flags would have been flying instantly. Still, that was a no-call that I am fine with.
So up until the last minute of the football game, I had no beef at all with the officiating. I was witnessing a great football game between two talented teams that were both giving everything they had. What more can you ask for, right?
Then came what is now the infamous "fumble" by Kurt Warner.
It was, for all intents and purposes, the last play of the game, and the officiating crew decided that it was not worth taking a good, long, hard look at. Apparently it was so obvious that it did not even merit an official review. Except it wasn't obvious at all. In fact, one view clearly shows (I believe) that Warner's arm was coming forward before he was even touched by the defender. By rule, that is an incomplete pass, not a fumble.
Now, many will think this is just sour grapes. I am just mad because the Minnesota Vikings have never won a Super Bowl, right? Well, yes, but it is more than that.
I think the refusal to at least take a second look at this robbed the Arizona Cardinals of a chance to win this game. If this call were to be reviewed and overturned, the Cardinals would have had about eight seconds left to score a touchdown from the 29-yard line (after the 15-yard unsportsmanlike conduct penalty).
Is it very likely to see a touchdown toss of 30 yards with less than 10 seconds to go? Of course not, but the Cardinals also have Larry Fitzgerald. If any team in the league is going to make that play it is the Arizona Cardinals, and they should have at least had the chance.
Now before all my friends who are Steeler fans start calling for my head let me say something...I think this non-review also robbed the Steelers.
Think about it. The team just won their sixth Lombardi Trophy. They should be able to celebrate like rock stars as the undisputed kings of the NFL. Except they can't. Critics of this team will look at this play and say the Steelers didn't earn it. Considering the way the Steelers came back, I do not think this is fair, but it is also reality. Big Ben and the Steelers offense marched down the field in a heroic effort to take the lead in the final seconds of the game, only to have that accomplishment cheapened by yet another unfortunate NFL officiating blunder.
After the Steelers won Super Bowl XL from the second worst officiated game in sports history (Behind game 7 of the Lakers-Kings Western Conference Final back in 2000) why not at least assure that the call was correct, and then, if it wasn't, let the Steelers vaunted No. 1 defense shut the Cardinals down for one more play? If that had happened, the outcome almost assuredly would have been the same, but without all the drama of speculation and conspiracy theorists.
Perhaps more than anything, however, this non-review cheated the NFL fans. This was one of the most exciting Super Bowls in recent history (and some will argue ever). The fourth quarter could not have been scripted any better. Then, with eight seconds left, the officiating crew elected to turn their back on what very well could have been a game-changing play. They robbed the NFL fans of one more exciting, heart-wrenching, jaw-dropping play. Instead of getting to watch eight more seconds of what-ifs, the NFL fans were subjected to a measly kneel-down.
Most people will agree that the Steelers got many lucky breaks in this Super Bowl win. Many more people will agree that the Steelers got these same lucky breaks in their 2005 Super Bowl win. Even more people will agree that those two games that I just mentioned were the two worst officiated games they had ever seen.
And the Steelers are the most popular team in the NFL.
But do I think it was planned? No. Does it suck? Yes.
In conclusion I just wanna add that most Steelers fan I talked to predicted a big blowout win. I would just like one Steelers fan to admit that he was wrong about this game. No, the Steelers didn't lose. But after a week of celebration or however long you celebrate when you win the Super Bowl (how would I know?), I think Steelers fans will realize they needed an unbelievable finish to beat what I still will call the worst Super Bowl team of all time (after beating an 8-8 team at home, and a rookie quarterback and coach at home during the playoffs). Congrats on your Super Bowl win....but here's to hoping it doesn't happen again soon!! Ha ha...
In any given game, any player, coach, media member, or fan can point to a handful of plays that decided the game one way or another. Likewise, these same people can, and sometimes do, point to a few bad calls by the officiating crew that "cost their team the game." Blaming the refs after a heart-breaking loss has become an American tradition, one that everyone has been guilty of at least once in their lifetime, including myself on more than one occasion.
In many ways, this is just human nature. It might be a cop-out, but it is easier than admitting that your team lost...and it was "their" fault. As a player, you do not want to admit that you were outplayed. As a coach, you do not want to admit that your game plan wasn't good enough.
As a media member, you want to create a good story that will help build your legacy as a writer or broadcaster. And as a fan, you just don't want to admit that your team might not have been the better team.
As can be expected, officiating controversy has come into play regarding Super Bowl XLIII between the Arizona Cardinals and Pittsburgh Steelers. Now, I personally did not have a dog in this fight obviously, but I did have a team I was rooting for. I have no problem coming out and saying that I was pulling for the Cardinals, and I was pulling for them passionately.
It had nothing to do with Larry Fitzgerald, although I think he is a magnificent talent, a seemingly good dude, and one of the great young superstars in the league. It also had nothing to do with the feel-good Kurt Warner story, although I certainly respect what he has done this season and admire the fact that he has come up from a nobody to a superstar...twice!
No, it had everything to do with flat out hating the Pittsburgh Steelers. Root for a team that has never won a Super Bowl then live in the hometown of a Six-time Super Bowl champion...you'll understand. I can't believe that when I came to work the day after the AFC Championship and the Super Bowl and heard people bitching about the calls that went AGAINST the Steelers. You just won the f*%kin Super Bowl!! Can't Steeler fans be happy for two seconds about that?!? Nope, I even had to hear on the Mark Madden show on the way to the Pitt game about how Big Ben is a terrible quarterback that gets lucky he doesn't get sacked every play. Again...he's won the f*%kin Super Bowl for you.....TWICE!!
All that being said, there is no need to fear. You are not about to be subjected to a breakdown of every missed holding call, TD or No TD, and bogus roughing the passer calls. I won't do that because, quite honestly, the majority of the game was pretty evenly called. Yes, there were bad calls, but they went both ways, and some of the more costly bad calls were corrected by coach's challenges. Some people are complaining that there was a hold or a block in the back on the 100-yard interception return by Harrison. I never saw it, and I am not going to look for it because it will further piss me off.
The way I see it, it was not the refs that made Warner throw the interception and they certainly did not prevent the Cardinals players from letting James Harrison lumber 100 freakin' yards for a touchdown! Holding happens on almost every play of every game. The majority of them don't get called. A supposed holding call on that one play was not the difference in the game. Others will point to yet another Harrison play—the unnecessary roughness penalty. Should he have been ejected? Absolutely. Did it change the outcome of the game? Nope.
Late in the game, the Steelers' offense was the difference, not their defense. The presence of Harrison on the field did not stop Larry Fitzgerald from parting the sea on his way to a go-ahead touchdown in the final minutes of the game, and he certainly didn't help Big Ben and Co. march down the field for the game-winning touchdown. While that cheap shot of Harrison's was a disgusting show of poor sportsmanship and class that certainly merits a fine and suspension, the fact that he was not ejected had no baring on the final outcome of the game.
I even complained that Santonio Holmes was not penalized for his celebration after the game-winning touchdown where he used the ball as a prop. Yes, it is true that by the letter of the law, that should have been a 15-yard penalty that would be assessed on the kickoff, and that could have made a huge impact on the game. Part of me sympathizes with the Cardinals fans who believe that should have been called. The other part of me is glad that it wasn't, and I hope and pray that "penalties" like that one will never be called again. But the more I thought about it who wants to win a game based on another team getting called for a bogus celebration penalty that 99 percent of the fan base will argue is ridiculous at best? There are many reasons that people call this league the No Fun League, and the "ball as a prop" rule is one of them.
The only thing that irked me about the no-call is that I know that if that had been the Cowboys' receiver Terrell Owens, the flags would have been flying instantly. Still, that was a no-call that I am fine with.
So up until the last minute of the football game, I had no beef at all with the officiating. I was witnessing a great football game between two talented teams that were both giving everything they had. What more can you ask for, right?
Then came what is now the infamous "fumble" by Kurt Warner.
It was, for all intents and purposes, the last play of the game, and the officiating crew decided that it was not worth taking a good, long, hard look at. Apparently it was so obvious that it did not even merit an official review. Except it wasn't obvious at all. In fact, one view clearly shows (I believe) that Warner's arm was coming forward before he was even touched by the defender. By rule, that is an incomplete pass, not a fumble.
Now, many will think this is just sour grapes. I am just mad because the Minnesota Vikings have never won a Super Bowl, right? Well, yes, but it is more than that.
I think the refusal to at least take a second look at this robbed the Arizona Cardinals of a chance to win this game. If this call were to be reviewed and overturned, the Cardinals would have had about eight seconds left to score a touchdown from the 29-yard line (after the 15-yard unsportsmanlike conduct penalty).
Is it very likely to see a touchdown toss of 30 yards with less than 10 seconds to go? Of course not, but the Cardinals also have Larry Fitzgerald. If any team in the league is going to make that play it is the Arizona Cardinals, and they should have at least had the chance.
Now before all my friends who are Steeler fans start calling for my head let me say something...I think this non-review also robbed the Steelers.
Think about it. The team just won their sixth Lombardi Trophy. They should be able to celebrate like rock stars as the undisputed kings of the NFL. Except they can't. Critics of this team will look at this play and say the Steelers didn't earn it. Considering the way the Steelers came back, I do not think this is fair, but it is also reality. Big Ben and the Steelers offense marched down the field in a heroic effort to take the lead in the final seconds of the game, only to have that accomplishment cheapened by yet another unfortunate NFL officiating blunder.
After the Steelers won Super Bowl XL from the second worst officiated game in sports history (Behind game 7 of the Lakers-Kings Western Conference Final back in 2000) why not at least assure that the call was correct, and then, if it wasn't, let the Steelers vaunted No. 1 defense shut the Cardinals down for one more play? If that had happened, the outcome almost assuredly would have been the same, but without all the drama of speculation and conspiracy theorists.
Perhaps more than anything, however, this non-review cheated the NFL fans. This was one of the most exciting Super Bowls in recent history (and some will argue ever). The fourth quarter could not have been scripted any better. Then, with eight seconds left, the officiating crew elected to turn their back on what very well could have been a game-changing play. They robbed the NFL fans of one more exciting, heart-wrenching, jaw-dropping play. Instead of getting to watch eight more seconds of what-ifs, the NFL fans were subjected to a measly kneel-down.
Most people will agree that the Steelers got many lucky breaks in this Super Bowl win. Many more people will agree that the Steelers got these same lucky breaks in their 2005 Super Bowl win. Even more people will agree that those two games that I just mentioned were the two worst officiated games they had ever seen.
And the Steelers are the most popular team in the NFL.
But do I think it was planned? No. Does it suck? Yes.
In conclusion I just wanna add that most Steelers fan I talked to predicted a big blowout win. I would just like one Steelers fan to admit that he was wrong about this game. No, the Steelers didn't lose. But after a week of celebration or however long you celebrate when you win the Super Bowl (how would I know?), I think Steelers fans will realize they needed an unbelievable finish to beat what I still will call the worst Super Bowl team of all time (after beating an 8-8 team at home, and a rookie quarterback and coach at home during the playoffs). Congrats on your Super Bowl win....but here's to hoping it doesn't happen again soon!! Ha ha...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
