Ad blocker interference detected!
Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers
Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.
I've been trying to get a Super Bowl column out for a few days now, but it just wasn't coming. Perhaps this is because I'm tired of hearing the storylines, so tired I stopped reading anything coming out of Tampa the day after both conference championships. Perhaps because it doesn't really matter to me how and why Kurtis met Brenda; that Larry Fitzgerald has a sportswriter dad; that the Cardinals are the underrated team of the year or whatever.
I just honestly haven't been paying attention. So, with that, here's my Super Bowl piece.
Going In Without Really Looking
Without really looking at any number or stats or any real prep work, I like the Steelers. I think their defence should be able to handle anything Arizona can throw at them - or to Fitzgerald - and while I don't know how well Roethlisberger will play, I kind of think it's secondary.
If I was going to make a paraell of this one to another, I'd say it's like the XXV, between the Giants and the Bills. Not in the sense that they're closely matched, or in a storyline way or anything. But in a great defence against a great offense and not much else. That was a game won the Giants not because of a missed FG, but because the Giants offense was able to keep the Bills offense were only on the field for eight minutes in the second half.
I can see that happening again. So much has been said of the Steelers defence and almost as much has been said of the Cardinals offense. But really, I think those two might cancel each other out. This could be a game won because of much time the Steelers offence can burn up.
A Cursory Glance at the Numbers
My favourite stat - by a mile - is the point differential; the number of points scored by a team minus the points they allow. My reasoning for looking at it is that I think the bigger it is, the better the team is. This season it was +124 for the Steelers; +1 for the Cards.
That's exceptionally low for a playoff team, let alone one in the Super Bowl. I think it kind of explains why the Cards were just a 9-7 team this season. But that's just the season, not the playoffs.
For just these playoffs, it's suddenly the opposite: +20 for the Steelers, +33 for the Cardinals. The Cards are starting to look a lot better. Keep in mind though, that the lion's share of that difference is from their demolishing of the Panthers in the Divisional round; combined, the other games were won by just 13. I still think these two teams match up better then either of those suggest.
Let's move to something a little more tangible: Kurt Warner vs the Steelers defence. If the Cards are going to win this game, it will be thanks to Warner's arm. In all three of their playoff games, their running game has been effective, but not dominating. But Warner has had three great games in a row. Larry Fitzgerald has exploded in the recent past, including a three major day against the Eagles. And it's interesting that Warner's worst game (220 yards, 2 TD on 21 of 32 passing) was during their biggest win.
But Carolina was middle of the road against the pass; 16th in the NFL. The Eagles were third overall, allowing just over 180 passing yards a game; Warner picked them apart with a 279 yard, 4 TD on 21 of 28 day. He knows how to pick his spots.
At the same time though, Warner picked up the bulk of those in the first half of the game, when the Cards took a 24-6 lead to the locker room. In the second half, Warner was 8 of 12 for 76 yards. I think it's worth noting more then a few of those were short passes that led to big YAC numbers, but I don't have specific information handy.
Other side of the ball. Pittsburgh is the number one-ranked defence against the pass. They're allowing about 157 passing yards a game; the number two defence allowed nearly 180. They're allowing about 14 points per game, again the best in the league. They could pose trouble.
A Look at the Effects of Hype
Every year, it seems to happen: one team gets an inordinate amount of hype. The Rams used to get it - they were the Greatest Show on Turf (pity they only scored 23 points in their Super Bowl win). For a while the Patriots got it. I vaguely remember the Steelers getting a lot, but Drive for Five or One for the Thumb kind of roll of the tongue, so it's kind of justified.
But this year, nobody wants to be surprised. I think so many people were taken aback by the Giants upsetting the Patriots, they want to call it again. I know I'd like to; I picked the Patriots to win that game and I'd do it again. It's an impressive thing, being able to call an upset before it happens. It's trendy. It's like telling your friends that Slumdog Millionare is going to get a best picture nomination before any of them had heard of it.
I think that's whats happening this year. So many people are picking the Cardinals to win; maybe because it's a trendy pick. Maybe people are choosing it because other people are. Because they want to be right if an upset happens.
A quick look at who's taking who's taking the Cardinals
King Kaufman, Salon.com, Gregg Esterbrook, ESPN, Michael Silver, Yahoo.com, Will Litech, Dan Shanoff
Who's taking the Steelers
John Clayton, ESPN, Tony Kornheiser (I think), Peter King, Sports Illustrated, Most of the writers at SI, ESPN, CBS Sports, and most of what I'd call the sports writing establishment
So what does this mean? Ultimately nothing; people known for their outside the box take on sports are tending to fly towards the Cardinals while people who are established are taking the favourite. I don't mean to sound like I'm hating on anybody here, but it seems this bowl might be hinging on the gap between the two groups; that bloggers are willing to take a bigger risk and pick the Cards almost as if they can't agree with the establishment.
Or maybe I'm wrong. Maybe the establishment doesn't want to go out on a limb; they're reactionary as opposed to proactive. I don't know. But I do think the Cardinals have been dangerously exposed to the effects of hype.
Because Chuck D Has Never Let Me Down
The Cardinals are a good story. Kurt Warner is a good story. So it the one about Fitzgerald's dad. They're fun, they're the underdog and I get why so many people like them.
But they are hyped. They may be the buzzsaw, to use Litech's term, but that doesn't make the Steelers a piece of pine. I don't like hype. Whenever I have bought into the hype and gone against my gut, it never seemed to end well - when I bought into Reggie Bush and took USC over Texas; when I decided that the Rockies were a team of destiny a couple years ago. So I'll go with my gut.
Why? My problem with the Cards is their defence. They are allowing more and more yards each game. 250 against the Falcons, 269 against the Panthers and over 450 against the Eagles. If I were a Cardinals fan, this would worry me.
Pittsburgh isn't a offensively dominant team in any way, really, but they're about as capable as any of those teams. If they can put up 23 points against the Ravens, they can put up at least that many against the Cards, I'm sure.
So, I don't care that the cool kids are choosing the Cardinals. It's cool that a dad gets to cover his son in the Super Bowl, but it doesn't mean he'll play any better; his dad has been writing about him for a long while, apparently. I'm going to take Chuck D's advice here and not believe the hype.
I'm taking the Steelers.