Go Back   Sports Central Message Boards > Professional Sports Discussion > National Football League

View Poll Results: Where does this years Super Bowl rank?
Best ever? 0 0%
In the top 3? 2 22.22%
Top 10? 5 55.56%
Other 2 22.22%
Voters: 9. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-02-2004, 01:45 AM   #1
Pimpbot
U.K. Expat
 
Pimpbot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona
Posts: 1,402
Pimpbot is on a distinguished road
Question Where does this Super Bowl rank?

Best ever?
__________________
My Teams Washington Redskins, Arizona Diamondbacks, Phoenix Coyotes, Phoenix Suns all things Notre Dame And ENGLAND RUGBY WORLD CUP CHAMPIONS!
Pimpbot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2004, 01:48 AM   #2
Pimpbot
U.K. Expat
 
Pimpbot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona
Posts: 1,402
Pimpbot is on a distinguished road
Default

Great game along with the Tennesee vs St Louis, San Fran vs Bengals and St Louis vs New England.
__________________
My Teams Washington Redskins, Arizona Diamondbacks, Phoenix Coyotes, Phoenix Suns all things Notre Dame And ENGLAND RUGBY WORLD CUP CHAMPIONS!
Pimpbot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2004, 03:20 AM   #3
Brad O.
1,549
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 792
Brad O. will become famous soon enough
Thumbs down poll options

Where's the "Not in the Top 10" option?

I'll go with Top 10 myself, but I definitely won't go best ever. If crappy pass defense and ugly special teams gets your pants wet, that's your prerogative, but I get a little tired of hearing every Super Bowl called "the best ever".

This was a good game. I really liked the first quarter, and obviously the end was exciting. But this game didn't really have "it", and the defensive play in the second half was kind of disappointing.

I'll take Super Bowl XXXVI (Pats over Rams) as my choice for best ever, but some other favorites include: III (Jets shock Colts), X (Steelers-Cowboys I), XIII (Steelers-Cowboys II), and XVI (49ers over Bengals). Not too far behind are XVII (Riggins' run beats Dolphins), XXXII (Elway's first Super Bowl), and XXXVIII (this year). I guess that puts it between 6th and 8th on my list.

The finish, though, was clearly one of the very best ever in my mind. I'd put Rams-Titans first (XXXIV), then -- about equally -- Pats/Rams (XXXVI), 49ers/Bengals (XXIII), and this year's (XXXVIII), plus maybe Giants/Bills (XXV). I've never seen Super Bowl V (Colts/Cowboys).

Last edited by Brad O.; 02-02-2004 at 03:28 AM.
Brad O. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2004, 10:09 AM   #4
Ego_Maniac
All-Star Player
 
Ego_Maniac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: New Kensington, PA
Posts: 212
Ego_Maniac is on a distinguished road
Default

In the top 10? Ya gotta be kidding!

Sure, the "game" was a nice spectacle and I did enjoy it, but the game on the field didn't resolve anything for me.

There were alot of elements that appeared suspicious ... the Patriots' kicker kicking ANOTHER game-winning field goal? KASAY's kickoff going out of bounds? Brady getting intercepted in the end-zone? Some (many) others ....

The offense in this game, on both sides, reminded me of a training camp exercise.

RETROSPECT is 20/20! and retrospect suggests a scripted reality!
Ego_Maniac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2004, 10:12 AM   #5
jnmhayes
Grizzled Veteran
 
jnmhayes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: NJ
Posts: 125
jnmhayes is on a distinguished road
Default

When the game is overshadowed by the halftime peep show, sorry, not a top ten.
jnmhayes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2004, 10:51 AM   #6
Spikedmace
All-Star Player
 
Spikedmace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NY
Posts: 455
Spikedmace is on a distinguished road
Default

I don't know about the best Super Bowl ever, only time will tell. But Tom Brady is so clutch. The Patriots really just dominated this whole NFL Season quietly.
Spikedmace is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2004, 11:25 AM   #7
poptart
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Houston, Tx
Posts: 770
poptart is on a distinguished road
Default

Competetive game, yes.

Great Super Bowl, hardly.


Sure, the NFL got over again because of the simpleton nature of Mr Fan.

If these two incomplete football teams are the best that the league has to offer then the league is off track.

The socialist parity agenda has sliced the balls off of NFL greatness.

"Great" game..??

I'm no fool, no sir reeeeeeeeeeeee........


Piss on it.......
poptart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2004, 06:46 PM   #8
MountaineerDave
Where am I?
 
MountaineerDave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 5,661
MountaineerDave is on a distinguished road
Default

Oh, poptart, you're still sore that the Pats have proved finally that your 2001 Raiders were a big buncha losers, as proved by their SB performance last year...

I think Belichick summed it up just right: "It made for good television, I'm sure."

One of the "great" games?

I don't know. I think so, but I liked the outcome, and that unfortunately colors my view of the matter.

Brad notes "bad" pass defense, and sure, there was some, but I think you get pass defense when you're utilizing two guys who only play special teams WHEN THEY PLAY. Wilson had two bad plays. I can think of one bad play by Poole, and a missed tackle by the same. Akins came in for Wilson, and was unspectacular. Meier (who the hell is that?) came in for Harrison. At least he made a tackle.

I think the pass defense's weakness, at least on the Pats side (I'm assuming everyone understands that at best, the Cats' pass D came in mediocre, regardless of Manning, Jr's beliefs about himself), was a coaching move as much as bad execution. The Pats corners started playing off the receivers just before the end of the half, and never got their edge back. Up to that point, the Cats' passing game had been as incredibly stifled as their rushing game had been throughout.

But, of course, Brad, you realize it was all "scripted," so the corners were required to play off their men, so as to create some sort of spectacle, like the WWE. (Whatever, Maniac...)

Dave
__________________
mountaineerdave on twitter
mountaineerdavem on AIM
MountaineerDave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2004, 07:19 PM   #9
jnmhayes
Grizzled Veteran
 
jnmhayes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: NJ
Posts: 125
jnmhayes is on a distinguished road
Default

What happened to the dominating defenses? Both of them were shot after 25 minutes. Total net yards, 868! So there were over 750 yards of offense in the final 35 minutes. That's got to rank near the top of offensive Superbowls.
jnmhayes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2004, 07:30 PM   #10
MountaineerDave
Where am I?
 
MountaineerDave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 5,661
MountaineerDave is on a distinguished road
Default

But that was some 25 minutes, wasn't it, jnm?

I think it wasn't until the Cats' TD drive near the end of the half that the Cats even had positive passing yardage.

I noted above that the Pats pass D softened near the end of the half. I'm not sure that it didn't soften a little before that, but Delhomme was so rattled that he couldn't take advantage. I think the Pats pass D gameplan was to sock 'em until the refs called it. Law got called for a hold (which I thought was dubious, but I'm not behind admitting some bias) and the passing lanes really opened up. Delhomme took a good deal longer to find them, but they were there once the Pats corners opted against playing "their" game.

Dave
__________________
mountaineerdave on twitter
mountaineerdavem on AIM
MountaineerDave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2004, 08:06 PM   #11
FSUViking
ESPN 8...The Ocho!
 
FSUViking's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 880
FSUViking is on a distinguished road
Default

If the whole game was like the 4th Q, then yes.

I put it in the top 10, but I'm surprised that nobody has made mention of the Bills/Giants yet.

That was my #1. Being 26 years old, most of the Super Bowls in my lifetime were blowouts, until the last 7 or 8.

Rams/Titans.....Rams/Pats........Bills/Giants.........
__________________
Minnesota Vikings....Daunte's team.
FSU: #3 recruiting class in the nation.
FSUViking is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2004, 08:31 PM   #12
poptart
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Houston, Tx
Posts: 770
poptart is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by MountaineerDave
Oh, poptart, you're still sore that the Pats have proved finally that your 2001 Raiders were a big buncha losers, as proved by their SB performance last year...
How many players on the '03 Pats were members of the '01 Pats?

Not a lot.

Same organization, but hardly the same team.
poptart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2004, 08:33 PM   #13
franky
Lost and Confused
 
franky's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: California
Posts: 1,483
franky is on a distinguished road
Default

I think that this is one of those questions that you have to let sit in your mind for awhile and then answer later on. But, I will give an answer... My initial response is that this is probably in the top 5 of superbowls I've watched. I think that my two favorites were the Ny Giants/Buffalo Superbowl and St.Louis/New England one from 2 years ago, where New England went in 14 point underdogs and shut down the Rams offense.
franky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2004, 08:53 PM   #14
MountaineerDave
Where am I?
 
MountaineerDave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 5,661
MountaineerDave is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by poptart
How many players on the '03 Pats were members of the '01 Pats?

Not a lot.

Same organization, but hardly the same team.
The number is 26, pt.

The core was essentially the same:
Brady, Brown, Smith, Faulk, Light on offense (with Patten, Compton, Woody, and Klemm all on the payroll, but on IR, so replacements taking their spots)

On defense, the differences were most significant in the DBs, where Milloy, Jones, and Smith are no longer with the team and only Law (and substitute Harris) remained from '01. The linebackers were ALL the same. Vrabel, Phifer, Johnson, Bruschi, Izzo, Chatham. D line was sort of different, with Seymour and Hamilton and McGinest all back, but playing different numbers of downs.

Kicker and punter both the same.

In fact, pt, MANY of the significant players from '01 still played for the '03 Pats. Some played more than others, but a whole team's worth was still around for '03.

Is that more than the average turnover for an NFL team? I'm honestly not sure, but I'll be looking about momentarily.

The '03 Cats aren't much like the '01 Cats. Not much of a [/i]team[/i] there, either, I guess.

If the '03 Raiders are proof of anything, it's that a little player turnover is NOT a bad thing... Oh, and Bill Callahan has ZERO man management skills.

Dave
MountaineerDave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2004, 01:04 AM   #15
poptart
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Houston, Tx
Posts: 770
poptart is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by MountaineerDave
If the '03 Raiders are proof of anything, it's that a little player turnover is NOT a bad thing... Oh, and Bill Callahan has ZERO man management skills.
Not sure why you felt like bringing the '03 Raiduhs into this.

Wierd........

At any rate, I agree on Callahan.
poptart is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:24 PM.