Super Bowl XLIII Running Thread

The 1985 Pats were a team without a quarterback, but it's worth remembering that the Bears humiliated their other playoff opponents just about as thoroughly as they did the Pats.

 

Because the Bears were an all-time team. Doesn't mean the Pats weren't especially weak.

 

In the Pats' (mild) defense. They were the first NFL team to ever win three straight road playoff games. So they had to be capable of doing SOMETHING right. They could run, and they lived off turnovers.
Nobody could even get back to the line of scrimmage running against those Bears. So that was that.
It didn't help that one half of the offense, led by John Hannah, were vocally sure they had no chance with Tony Eason at quarterback, or that Eason told friends the week before the game that the game plan left them with no chance.
A little more unity, they might only have lost 36-10.
But as someone who covered most of the historic Super routs, I'd have to say that the '85 Pats, '89 Broncos, and those Chargers were the three games where NOBODY thought the underdog had a chance. It wasn't even discussed as a longshot possibility. They are our leaders in the "Shouldn't have been there" clubhouse.

 

Night game probably helped . . . and Delhomme coming through as the Cardinal MVP.

 

That Giant team wasn't great, but that terrible callback of the kick-return touchdown cooked their goose, early.

 

The one where he slapped Warner's on the helmet, which should have been flagged and negated Ty Law's interception return for a touchdown.

That said, Warner's not as nimble as he used to be these days. The Steelers won't all-out blitz like the Eagles did, but they will try to keep the Cardinals guessing which linebacker's going to come each time.

 

From CNNSI on predictions.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/football/nfl/super-bowl/01/29/predictions/index.html?eref=T1

No one laying the number on Pittsburgh. All are taking Arizona +7 or calling for a push.

Not sure how to read that.

 

If I liked Pitt, I'd be thrilled.

 

In many places the number has dropped to 6.5.

 

A host on ESPN Radio put it perfectly.
People have had 2 weeks to devise scenarios in which Arizona wins and they are convincing themselves that they're right.

 

Think there are propositions which are much better speculations than the game itself.

 

The '85 Patriots had a stellar offensive line and put everything together at the right time for a good run. They were a physical team and deserved to go.

The '89 Broncos got to the game on the strength of a weak schedule, homefield advantage, an unusually strong running game and little else. The 2002 Bucs were in danger of being a low seed before winning a game in Chicago to end the regular season.