NFL FanHouse http://nfl.fanhouse.com NFL FanHouse http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/media/feedlogo.gif NFL FanHouse http://nfl.fanhouse.com en-us Copyright 2009 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/Super Bowl XXIII Retrospective: Joe Montana's Fortunate Second Chancehttp://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/29/joe-montanas-super-bowl-xxiii-second/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/29/joe-montanas-super-bowl-xxiii-second/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/29/joe-montanas-super-bowl-xxiii-second/#commentsFiled under: , , ,

Joe MontanaIn anticipation of Cardinals-Steelers, FanHouse takes a look back at some forgotten storylines from past Super Bowls.

The Game: Up until the Giants stunned New England last season, Super Bowl XXIII was arguably the most exciting Super Bowl ever played - some would argue that it still is.

Cincinnati led San Francisco 16-13 in the game's final moments. Everyone knows what happened next: Montana, with the 49ers down to their last chance, led his team 92 yards in 11 plays, then found John Taylor in the end zone with 34 seconds left for a dramatic 20-16 Niners victory.

What Might Have Been: Montana's last drive was the stuff of legends - his team's collective back against the wall, on the game's biggest stage, all the future Hall of Famer did was hit eight-of-nine passes (not counting a completion negated by a SF penalty) in a game-winning drive.

Bengals fans everywhere likely have more nightmares about San Francisco's first fourth-quarter scoring drive, though.

Up until that point, Cincinnati had put the clamps on the Niners and held a 13-6 lead because of it. But Montana hit Jerry Rice for 31 yards on the final play of the third quarter, Roger Craig for 40 on the first play of the fourth, and San Francisco had the ball on the Bengals 14. The next play - and not either of Montana's TD passes - may have been the biggest of the game.



That unlucky Cincinnati soul was Lewis Billups, who jumped Montana's pass to Taylor, then had a potential game-changing interception slip right through his fingers. On the very next snap, Montana and Rice connected on a scoring strike to tie the game at 13. A Bengals field goal eventually made it 16-13 Cincinnati with 3:20, setting the stage for Montana's finest moment.

Still, the game may never have reached that incredible climax if Billups had been able to secure Montana's errant throw. Instead of a 13-13 deadlock, Cincinnati could have regained possession with a seven-point lead still in hand, and just 14 minutes between them and a championship.

The interception-that-wasn't may have changed the reputation of the Bengals forever going forward -- instead of essentially paving the way for the bumbling Cincinnati franchise of present day.

Bigger than that, it might have shifted the way we look at Montana. His legacy is built on what he did in the Super Bowls, as well it should be with a 4-0 record, and this particular clutch march down the field is the representation of his entire career. He's "Joe Cool," he's unflappable down the stretch -- Sports Illustrated even named him the most clutch quarterback in the history of the NFL.

How different would that image be different had a Montana interception set the stage for Cincinnati to stun the Niners in Super Bowl XXIII?

Super Bowl XXIII Retrospective: Joe Montana's Fortunate Second Chance originally appeared on NFL FanHouse on Thu, 29 Jan 2009 11:00:00 EST . Please see our terms for use of feeds.

 

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

]]>Chris BurkeThu, 29 Jan 2009 11:00:00 EST 'House Roundtable: Super Bowl vs. BCShttp://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/26/nfl-fanhouse-roundtable-super-bowl-vs-the-bcs1/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/26/nfl-fanhouse-roundtable-super-bowl-vs-the-bcs1/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/26/nfl-fanhouse-roundtable-super-bowl-vs-the-bcs1/#commentsFiled under: ,

The Arizona Cardinals shocked the NFC by advancing to Super Bowl XLIII. It's an incredible accomplishment for two reasons: 1) They're the Arizona Cardinals, a team that has forever been synonymous with losing and 2) They were a 9-7 team in the regular season, losing four of their final six regular season games, some in embarrassing fashion. And here they are in the biggest game of the season, playing for all the marbles.

The Cardinals' meteoric rise to the spotlight has prompted some discussion as to how fair the NFL's one-and-done playoff system is compared to the BCS, and if the Cardinals are "bad for the NFL" -- including this article by Stewart Mandel of Sports Illustrated. Naturally, the NFL FanHouse crew had some opinions on the matter.

Adam Gretz: Okay, I'll try to get the ball rolling here and I'll start by saying this: I don't think there's any system that is going to give us the best team as a champion every single season. It's just not going to happen. Sometimes the best team (the 2007 Patriots, for example) doesn't win, for whatever reason. That's why they're called upsets. What the playoffs do is at least give us a champion that cannot be disputed in a last man standing, king of the hill, I survived every team's best shot sort of way. Every team knows knows exactly what it takes to get into the postseason and there's absolutely no mystery about it. You know the tie-breakers, you know the seeding structure, you know what you have to do. Beyond that, I think the question "are the Cardinals bad for the NFL" is kind of ridiculous, and the only reason it's being asked is because we've been trained like Pavlov's dogs to associate losing football with the Cardinals. When the Steelers and Giants went on their Super Bowl runs as No. 6 seeds nobody was asking if they were "bad for football". Nobody was asking if the Baltimore Ravens (a No. 6 seed one game from a Super Bowl berth this season) were bad for football. Quite the opposite, actually.

Will Brinson: Exactly -- when the Ravens went on a tear as a six seed, people said "Holy ____, they might be the best team in football." And they didn't mean "finished with the best regular season record" because that's not the best team in football. The best team in football is the one that doesn't lose a playoff game. And I love that people try and shrug off the Cardinals as having a horrible regular season; they looked horrible down the stretch but as late November, everyone was fine with their performance as a team. (Note that I'm not calling out MDS, obviously, just that the Cards were 7-3 and there wasn't much question as to their legitimacy. Then I read something like the Titans' 13-3 record "earned them ... bupkis" and, well, pardon me for being blunt, but that's just stupid. What it did earn them was the number one seed in the AFC and the theoretically easiest route to the playoffs. That's the advantage that playing well in the regular season gets you. Not a good excuse to bias a bunch of people who vote without watching enough football.

Bruce Ciskie: Our colleague Brian Grummell offered up a bit of a pro-BCS rant. In the comments, another colleague, Ray Holloman, presents my least favorite pro-BCS argument.
Besides, not all sports crown their champions with playoffs. The champion of the English Premier League is awarded to the team with the most regular season points and the English seem to care more about that than the UEFA Cup. Of course, I can't say I watch much EPL as I have more interesting things to do, like sock maintenance or cataloging different species of mountain goat.
I'll leave the insult alone, because it doesn't dignify a remark. You don't like soccer? That's fine. You can avoid looking like an unoriginal buffoon by just not lobbing a dumb insult at the sport. But the argument doesn't hold any water. The champion of the English Premier League is certainly not decided by a playoff. Instead, it's decided after each team in the league has played the other 19 teams, home and away. It's a grueling 38-game schedule, and it matters because it's balanced. The day that college football goes with a balanced schedule so everyone plays everyone at least once, we can talk about not having a playoff to determine the champion. Until then, I refuse to apologize for thinking that neither a computer nor a human being has any business trying to decide if Florida is better than Utah or Texas or USC when we can just arrange to have them play each other in an actual tournament. There's a reason that only one major team sport in the United States refuses to use a playoff to determine its champion. It's that the people who run major college football are ostriches. The notion that the Arizona Cardinals are bad for the NFL is preposterous. Everyone in the NFC had an equal shot at getting to this point, and only the Cardinals played well enough and were coached well enough to earn it. Anyone whining over this is simply, well, whining.

Brinson: Agreed on the whining part too ... if the Cardinals aren't your team and you think they represent all that is evil and wrong about this insane "playoff system", then tell your team not to lose. Then maybe they'd have their shot at a title.

Matt Snyder: Champion doesn't mean "best regular season team." Period. Were the Pittsburgh Steelers better than the Colts last time they won the Super Bowl? Probably not, but they beat them in the playoffs, when it matters most, so they got to take home the title: Champion. Playoffs are good for sports because they add intrigue. On college football, I haven't watched a game in years because I just can't take the system. People want to argue that they already have a playoff, and it's called the regular season. Well, how did that "playoff" work out for Utah? That's not a playoff, it's an elitist scheme where only the "major players" are allowed to have a shot. Not to mention the system lets computers decide who the final two teams are. I'd be a lot more on board if there were always a clear-cut top two teams, but that's rarely -- if ever -- going to be the case. It's really an argument of convenience. I'm a fan of a maligned sport, so let's jump on the opportunity to say why our system is better, all at the expense of the Arizona Cardinals. The thing is, this Cardinals run is exactly why the playoffs are better. We've watched the Cards grow from a 9-7 teams into one that probably would win 12 or so if they got to play their schedule over. They aren't the same team as the one who was trampled by the Eagles and the Patriots. As for the Titans, if you want to head to the Super Bowl, maybe you shouldn't turn the ball over routinely in the red-zone. There are no do-overs.

Gretz: What about the idea that a team like the Cardinals (or the Steelers and Giants) invalidates the regular season? I couldn't disagree with this more. Touching on what Snyder brought up about the college football argument being "the regular season is our playoff," am I the only one that finds the college football regular season to be incredibly boring? I mean, I just can't find myself to get interested in those epic Ohio State - Youngstown State tilts. I know a couple of Penn State fans that, going into their yearly games with Temple and Florida Atlantic, talk about how they'll be leaving at halftime with the decision already in hand. This is exciting? Seriously?

Ciskie: I'm sure that all those 88,000 or so were thrilled to pay full admission price to watch Florida stomp on The Citadel. I wrote a piece last summer where I proposed a rule that would ban any team from BCS consideration if they scheduled more than two I-AA opponents over a rolling six-year period. These schools don't care who the opponent is, as long as they can sell out their stadium with lemmings who will pay anything to hear their stupid fight song after every one of those eight first-half touchdowns.

Josh Alper: No, it isn't exciting to watch big conference teams refuse to play teams that might beat them just so they can stay on track for the trough of money at the end of the season. Florida played the Citadel, for heavens sakes, and we're supposed to roll over in admiration of them at the end of the season because they only had one loss playing in the SEC? Super. Play a real schedule filled with real teams and maybe there will be a leg for the BCS to stand on. I'm with Bruce. Play a balanced schedule and stop beating up on FCS and weak-sister conference opponents if you want to say that the regular season is your playoffs. It would be nice for all of the BCS apologists to just admit the real reason why it is the preferred system. The money is too good for the big conference schools to give up for a system that is both fairer and more definitive.

Thought I'd throw this in too, since it doesn't look like there will much anti-playoffs sentiment. If college doesn't want to have playoffs, they should have never changed the system that they had before. Pre-BCS there was a chance that you'd have a ton of bowl games that meant something because whatever voting went on wasn't done until after all of the games were played. Sure, you might have multiple champions but since you aren't getting it done on the field, what's the difference. Now you wait more than a month for a game that settles nothing while they play a slew of games that don't mean anything unless you root for one of the schools.

Snyder: I wholeheartedly agree. The old bowl system had much more intrigue. Even the "other" BCS games are meaningless. You are playing for third place at best.

Brinson: I agree with the notion that big time schools cop out on the scheduling; what would be nice is some sort of requirement to play an upper echelon mid major (or what have you) every year. Look at Carolina -- they had a cake schedule this year and a good team, so they backed out of playing Appalachian State (the quintessential giant killer) in favor of McNeese St or some such cupcake. On the same note, and just at the expense of playing devil's advocate, it's not like the Cardinals had a tough scheduling run with the NFC West. But that's also part of the whole parity thing in the NFL; Seattle, St. Louis and San Francisco have all been good-->great at one point over the past 15-20 years. Why? Because the NFL isn't already structured to feed the best players to the teams with the highest winning percentage, the most national cache and the most money to spend. It's an already unbalanced system becoming more unbalanced because the smaller fish don't have the chance to compete in recruiting. And why would any high end recruits want to come? They know just as well as everyone else that the system shuts them out of a shot at winning a national title.

Stephanie Stradley: Who is stupid enough to say that the Cardinals are bad for football? They play an extremely entertaining brand of football and have made it this far because their defense figured things out down the stretch. I have little use for college football. It's all about a couple meaningful games, playing directional schools and not losing. Only a few teams have a real shot. And if you look at the history of teams getting to the playoffs in the NFL, it has a ton of teams that had a relatively easy schedule that year. In a parity league, that can make a huge difference. The Steelers are an impressive SB participant because of the brutality of their schedule this year.

Ryan Wilson: Why is the unexpected a bad thing? I mean, isn't that why we have cliches like "the games aren't played on paper" and "any given Sunday"? Since 2000, at least six teams that no one expected to be playing in January (much less February) made it to the Super Bowl: '00 Ravens, '01 Patriots, '03 Panthers, '05 Steelers, '07 Giants and now the '08 Cardinals. When's the last time college football could make that claim? And, shockingly, the NFL has survived through it all. In fact, they're the most popular sport on the planet, despite these insane notions of "parity" and "leveling the playing field." Just because a few schools part of the BCS monolith like the status quo (and they'd be stupid not to), doesn't mean it's a great deal for the other Division I schools. By the way, not one NFL fan is making the "hey, we need a sort of bowl system to determine winners; playoffs are patently biased and unfair!" argument. Fans like parity. Just ask all the Patriots haters who grew bored with Bill Belichick and Tom Brady running roughshod over the rest of the league earlier this decade. As for those who question if the NFL regular season has been rendered moot because any team qualifying for the playoffs has an equal chance to win the whole thing, here's my advice: you might want to tweak your model. Models, after all, are simple representations of very complex events. And since football is a complex game with thousands of variables, it seems reasonable that the model -- not Kurt Warner or Larry Fitzgerald -- is where the problem lies. Or you can just throw up your hands and call the Cardinals' remarkable late-season run "bad for the league." Either way works, really.

'House Roundtable: Super Bowl vs. BCS originally appeared on NFL FanHouse on Mon, 26 Jan 2009 11:00:00 EST . Please see our terms for use of feeds.

 

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

]]>Adam GretzMon, 26 Jan 2009 11:00:00 EST Back From the Edge: Renewed Trust in James Fueling Arizona's Offensehttp://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/25/back-from-the-edge-renewed-trust-in-james-fueling-arizonas-off/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/25/back-from-the-edge-renewed-trust-in-james-fueling-arizonas-off/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/25/back-from-the-edge-renewed-trust-in-james-fueling-arizonas-off/#commentsFiled under: , , , ,

Edgerrin JamesFred Jackson, Ernest Graham, Fred Taylor, Joseph Addai and Dominic Rhodes. Those are the five running backs that finished No. 37-41 in rushing yards during the NFL's regular season - all ahead of the league's 42nd-leading rusher, Arizona's Edgerrin James.

Here's the list of guys with more postseason rushing yards than James: No one.

James has an NFL-leading 203 yards in the playoffs, 10 more than Pittsburgh's Willie Parker. Granted, James has played three postseason games - one more than Parker, and a number matched at the running back spot only by Baltimore's Willis McGahee and Le'Ron McClain and James' teammate Tim Hightower.

The fact that James has 71 more yards and 18 more carries than Hightower -- who the Cards replaced James with in the starting lineup early in the season -- is noteworthy in itself, though.

To put James' playoff numbers in perspective, one must appreciate his regular-season trials. From Week 4 through Week 16, the Cardinals' once-and-current king totaled 166 yards rushing. Twelve weeks, 166 yards. Over that stretch, James ran the ball just 57 times - and, had it not been for a 21-carry, 57-yard performance in a Week 5 win over Buffalo, those numbers would have bottomed out even further.

James now has 52 rushing attempts in Arizona's Super Bowl run. These numbers are too skewed to be coincidental: the Cardinals are winning because James is getting the ball.

And to beat Pittsburgh, they'll need to continue employing that strategy.

"You throw the ball 50 times and you run it nine of 10 times, you are most likely not going to have a good rushing game," James told the Associated Press.

"I've always played the game a certain way. ... I'm no scatback. I never tried to be."



Hightower fits that profile better, which is why he's proven a valuable weapon in Arizona's attack. Still, you cannot ignore the stability that a between-the-tackles runner like James can bring to the table. Heck, the guy rushed for more than 1,200 yards last season alone.

Maybe this is part of why Arizona surprised everyone this postseason. What the Cardinals are doing, how they are meshing the run and pass, well, they haven't really done that since adding James in 2006.

James hit 100 yards on the nose twice this season (never eclipsed it) -- in Week 1 against San Francisco, and in Week 17 against Seattle. Hightower, after he took over the starting duties, broke the century mark just once, piling up 109 yards in a Week 9 shellacking of lowly St. Louis.

But now, Arizona is truly committing to James as its top back and Hightower as its change-of-pace guy -- and the Cardinals have eclipsed 100 rushing yards in their past two playoff wins.

How loyal Arizona stays to the successful strategy in the Super Bowl may make or break this thing. If a team, any team, cannot put a balanced offensive attack on the field against the Steelers defense, that team cannot win. Baltimore was able to run a bit on Pittsburgh, but couldn't pass. San Diego threw the ball well, but couldn't run.

Arizona will meet a fate like that of the Chargers if they put forth a similar effort. It doesn't matter that Kurt Warner's playing well and Larry Fitzgerald is making defenders look like Pop Warner players; you could line up Johnny Unitas in the shotgun with Jerry Rice, Steve Largeant and Lynn Swann lined up at wide receiver, and this Steelers defense would make it hard to move the ball.

Pittsburgh's defensive line is very solid, and the Steelers may be the best team in the league at punishing the quarterback with blitzes. It's common belief that the best way to slow a blitzing team is to find the gaps - then blow through them with a hard-charging running back.

After a full regular season, the Cardinals seem to have realized that they have a guy that fits that bill.

It is no surprise that Warner is receiving so much attention for defibrillating his career, but his is not the only tale of revival in Arizona.

How James' return to prominence concludes might well be the key factor for the Cardinals' Super Bowl hopes.

Back From the Edge: Renewed Trust in James Fueling Arizona's Offense originally appeared on NFL FanHouse on Sun, 25 Jan 2009 19:15:00 EST . Please see our terms for use of feeds.

 

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

]]>Chris BurkeSun, 25 Jan 2009 19:15:00 EST Steelers Could (Should?) Surpass Patriots as NFL's Best Teamhttp://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/25/steelers-could-should-surpass-patriots-as-nfls-best-team/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/25/steelers-could-should-surpass-patriots-as-nfls-best-team/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/25/steelers-could-should-surpass-patriots-as-nfls-best-team/#commentsFiled under: , , , , ,


(photos courtesy of Getty Images)

Whatever happens Sunday, the Patriots will undoubtedly be the team to beat come September -- at least according to the predictably sycophantic media who assume that, as long as Bill Belichick is breathing and Tom Brady is walking, New England is winning.

There are still concerns about Brady's reconstructed left knee, but if he's fully operational by training camp, the prognosticating bobbleheads should take great comfort in anointing the Patriots as favorites to win their fourth Super Bowl this decade. It's the same banal "analysis" that fans have been beaten about the head with since New England won its last championship four years ago.

In that time, the Steelers, Colts, and Giants have also earned rings. And if Pittsburgh defeats Arizona seven days from now, it will have two titles since 2005, a span in which New England has been shutout. It's a key footnote often overlooked when talking up the Patriots at the expense of everybody else, but it shouldn't diminish what the Steelers have accomplished -- or that they're arguably the best team in the league's over the last five years.

The Patriots have come close to adding to their championship trophy collection, but have fallen short each time since 2004. And although most agree that the Steelers are one of the NFL's most consistent teams, they're never mentioned in the same breath as the Patriots. Certainly, New England's three Super Bowl victories in four years to start the decade has virtually everything to do with that. But the playing field has, for various reasons, been leveled recently.

From 2000-04, both Pittsburgh and New England averaged 10.6 wins per season; the Steelers never made it out of the conference championship (losing twice), while the Patriots won three titles. In the last four years, however, the Pats have averaged 12.25 wins a season; the Steelers: 10.25.

There are several explanations for the win-total discrepancy since 2005. First, Brady has evolved into one of the best quarterbacks to ever play, and when you put him in an offense with Randy Moss and Wes Welker scoring records are getting broken. More than that, though, Brady has benefited from sound game plans and great offensive coordinators. (Because, really, New England had no business winning 12 games in 2006 with the likes of Jabar Gaffney and Reche Caldwell catching the bulk of Brady's passes.)



To a lesser degree, Ben Roethlisberger helmetlessly head-butting cement can also be attributed to the win-total difference between the two teams. The then-second year quarterback was coming off a remarkable postseason (save the forgettable Super Bowl appearance) and was primed to take more control of the offense. Instead, his face was rearranged and his brains were scrambled on a Pittsburgh street, and he subsequently struggled through an 8-8 campaign.

(Patriots fans could just as easily point to Brady going down in September as evidence that the 2008 club could've been even better than the '07 version. Fair point, especially when you consider that Cassel, who last started a football game in high school, led New England to an 11-5 record.)

There's also this: the Steelers' brutal schedule and Spygate. Frankly, neither makes a compelling case for why New England won more often than Pittsburgh the last four years, chiefly because both teams played similarly tough schedules over that period, and because it's still not clear that the Patriots were doing anything other teams weren't also doing. They just got caught. (Either way, in the spirit of completeness, I've included it here.)

Then there's the great equalizer: luck. Good luck, some might say, got the Patriots to their first Super Bowl this century. Bad luck, in various manifestations, have kept them from hoisting the Lombardi Trophy since 2004. Last September, Brady's injury immediately changed the playoff landscape in the AFC. (Later losing Adalius Thomas and Laurence Maroney didn't help, either.)

Going back, Super Bowl parade preparations were scrapped after a controversial call on a Champ Bailey pick-six in the '05 playoffs. A year later, a rare late-game Brady miscue sealed New England's fate in Indy. Then Super Bowl XLII happened. At some point, great teams lose to good ones. For the Patriots, it's suddenly happening with some frequency.

Regular season win totals are nice, but ultimately, the idea is to stock the trophy case with championships. And if Pittsburgh can win their second title in four years (and their sixth in franchise history), they would be the most successful team in the league over the last half-decade. Even if that fact is obscured by all the Patriots obsequiousness we'll invariably be subjected to in the run up to the 2009 season.

Steelers Could (Should?) Surpass Patriots as NFL's Best Team originally appeared on NFL FanHouse on Sun, 25 Jan 2009 16:00:00 EST . Please see our terms for use of feeds.

 

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

]]>Adalius ThomasAdaliusThomasBen RoethlisbererBenRoethlisbererBill BelichickBillBelichickBrandon MeriweatherBrandonMeriweatherChamp BaileyChampBaileyJabar GaffneyJabarGaffneyJerod MayoJerodMayoLaurence MaroneyLaurenceMaroneyMatt CasselMattCasselRandy MossRandyMossReche CaldwellRecheCaldwellStephen GostkowskiStephenGostkowskiTom BradyTomBradyWes WelkerWesWelkerRyan WilsonSun, 25 Jan 2009 16:00:00 EST What's Better Than Being a Pittsburgh Steelers Fan?http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/25/whats-better-than-being-a-steelers-fan/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/25/whats-better-than-being-a-steelers-fan/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/25/whats-better-than-being-a-steelers-fan/#commentsFiled under: , ,

As a Steeler fan, I'll be the first to admit that life is good. I'm a child of the 1970s, which means that I watched the Steelers win their first Super Bowl when I was two. They won another the next year and were striving for one for the thumb before I was 10. It took another 25 years for Pittsburgh to get that fifth Super Bowl title, but here we are just four years later and they're working on the other hand.

All of that got me thinking: is there any franchise in U.S. pro sports over the past 20, 30, or 40 years that has been more fun to be a fan of than the Steelers?

If you've been a fan of the Steelers, you've been rooting for a consistent winner (only seven losing seasons in the past 35 years) that has had plenty of highs (five Super Bowl titles, six Super Bowl appearances and 14 AFC Championship game appearances) and very few lows.

Pittsburgh did have a drought in the 1980s, as the Steelers missed the playoffs for four straight years from 1985-1988, but even that, the worst stretch of the modern era, wasn't all that bad. Pittsburgh averaged 6.5 wins a season during that stretch, even though it included a 5-11 year, the worst season Pittsburgh has had since 1971. In comparison, the Bengals have had 11 seasons of four wins or less over that same period of time. So consider those few lean years as a necessary weeding out of bandwagon fans.

In the NFL, fans of the Cowboys (five Super Bowl titles and eight Super Bowl appearances) or the 49ers (a perfect five for five in Super Bowls) can make arguments as to why there team has been more successful, but Cowboys fans had to endure three straight 5-11 seasons recently, suffered through 3-13 and 1-15 in back-to-back seasons in the late 1980s, and are waiting for their first playoff win since 1996.

For the 49ers, as good as the 1980s and early 1990s were, the 49ers were a league laughingstock in the mid and late '70s (back-to-back 2-14 seasons) and they're working on a stretch of seven straight losing seasons right now.

The Yankees are the obvious baseball team that comes to mind as having had consistent success, but in their case, they went through a 13-year drought between playoff appearances from 1982-1994.

At this point, you could argue about whether the NHL really qualifies as a major U.S. pro sport, but if you are counting it, the Red Wings pose a challenge. Detroit has made the playoffs in all but two of the past 25 years, and has won four Stanley Cup titles over that time.

But if you were around before 1983, you saw Detroit fail to make the playoffs in the NHL (which seems to let everyone in) 12 times in a 13-year stretch.

In looking around, I did find one team that can challenge and really trump Steelers fans' claims to perennial happiness. The Lakers have won nine titles since 1971, and have only missed the playoffs four times in that stretch. And, just like Pittsburgh, even bad years for Los Angeles haven't been that bad -- the Lakers have won at least 40 percent of their games in every season since 1976.

So if you're a Lakers fan, you seem to have the bragging rights on everyone, but otherwise, it's hard to compare to the Steelers.

As Steelers fans try to figure out how to afford a flight to Tampa, the cost of a hotel room, and a couple of thousand dollars to buy a Super Bowl ticket at a time when many people are wondering if they're going to be laid off, it's hard not to point out that these are the kind of problems than fans of any team would love to have.

And these are the kind of dilemmas that Steelers fans have faced more than almost anyone over the years.

What's Better Than Being a Pittsburgh Steelers Fan? originally appeared on NFL FanHouse on Sun, 25 Jan 2009 14:40:00 EST . Please see our terms for use of feeds.

 

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

]]>Super BowlSuperBowlJJ CooperSun, 25 Jan 2009 14:40:00 EST There's More to Fitzgerald's Phenomenonhttp://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/23/more-to-fitzgeralds-phenomenon/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/23/more-to-fitzgeralds-phenomenon/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/23/more-to-fitzgeralds-phenomenon/#commentsFiled under: , ,

TEMPE, AZ. - Larry Fitzgerald should lug around a telephone booth, to step in and out of whenever he feels the need to change personalities.

The Arizona Cardinals' incomparable wide receiver moves smoothly from Superman to Renaissance man, depending on the situation. On the field he is fearless, a human marvel who possesses keen eyesight and the ability to leap over double coverage and tall buildings. Off the field, he's a seeker, an adventurer, and, incongruously, a man who would rather walk across hot coals than talk about where he has been or how he got there.

Fitzgerald didn't exactly have to be forced to the podium Friday afternoon, after the Cardinals went through another practice in preparation for Super Bowl XLIII. But it was clear this was perhaps the one place on the planet where he felt uncomfortable, maybe even out of his element.

Put Fitzgerald in the whirl of the Cardinals' vibrant offense and he's the apex around which all the pieces revolve. He amassed 419 yards in three playoff games, surpassing the postseason record previously held by Hall of Famer Jerry Rice. But nudge Fitzgerald into the limelight, a limelight almost every other Cardinal is gleefully soaking up in this extraordinary chapter in Arizona sporting history, and Fitzgerald stutter steps.

Pittsburgh secondary take note: the most dynamic player in all of football has a weak spot, but it's only apparent when he rips off the Cardinal red and goes all Clark Kent.

"If people ask what makes me tick, I would say winning. That definitely gets me excited and makes me happy," Fitzgerald said. "To be in this position is truly a blessing for everybody in this locker room. We've worked a long time, really hard, to be in this position. This is a fabulous opportunity, one that is not guaranteed to ever happen again. I think everybody in the locker room realizes that and is really dedicated to getting it done."

He's too modest to publicly explore an inner core that makes him one of the most fascinating of all professional athletes. At 25, he has already hiked the Inca Trail and climbed Machu Picchu in search of spiritual guidance, and challenged his inner fears by bungee-jumping in New Zealand. Great wealth and occupational downtime allow him luxuries most of us can only imagine, but what really sets Fitzgerald apart from his contemporaries is his old school 'tude.

Watch him after he scores (which is often), and gently flips the ball to an official. It's a humbleness and grace inherited from his mother, Carol, a health-care worker who died in 2003, after a seven-year battle with cancer. When she passed, Fitzgerald said he thought about getting a tattoo in her honor, but instead chose to let his dreadlocks grow so he might be reminded of her every time he looked in the mirror.

Watch him tongue-trip around the word "I" in interviews, deftly changing the subject to "we" and "team." It's a selfless trait he learned as the son of a sportswriter and broadcaster. Larry Fitzgerald, Sr., the longtime columnist for the Minnesota Spokesman-Recorder and host of three sports talk radio shows in Minneapolis, used to take his young son to work, and by grade school Larry was a ball boy for the Vikings. For six seasons, Larry hung around and studied veteran receivers Cris Carter and Randy Moss, building a catalogue of experience before he ever played an NFL down.

Fitzgerald is hardly the fastest or the tallest receiver in the game today. His 40-yard-dash time of 4.83 seconds in the 2004 scouting combine was considered mediocre; his average leaping ability doesn't begin to explain how he accumulated 1,431 receiving yards this season, or became the youngest player ever to record 400 career receptions. Ask Fitzgerald how, despite his athletic limitations, he still manages to pluck passes out of the heavens while being sandwiched by defenders, how he has developed flawless timing and pinpoint positioning that enables him to tip the ball to himself, and he intuitively grimaces. It's easier to evade safeties than escape using the "I" word.

"I wasn't blessed with blazing speed." Fitzgerald said. "I'm not like Santonio Holmes or Nate Washington. I'm not running 4.2 and stuff like that like those guys, so I had to develop other things that were going to be able to help me win down field. My jumping ability is definitely one of those, and my hands, I have strong hands to be able to pull it away from guys. I think those are definitely two of the strengths of my game."

Watch Fitzgerald closely -- or, better, examine a photograph of one of his catches -- and the true genius of his gift comes into focus. On many occasions, he's actually pulling down passes with his eyes closed. It's another skill he learned at a young age, after his grandfather, Robert Johnson, the founder of a Chicago optometry clinic, trained Fitzgerald to do complicated hand-eye drills while balancing on beams and wobbly boards.

Designed to improve the first grader's attention span and grades, the spatial exercises, honed over summer trips to Chicago, helped Fitzgerald achieve what is called "visual dominance" and elite athleticism.

"He used to do vision therapy with me, just a lot of different drills he would do to strengthen my hand-eye coordination," Fitzgerald said. "I think those skills definitely are paying dividends for me. My eyes are good, seeing the ball pretty well, and I think he had a hand in helping me get here."

Pittsburgh's defense led the NFL in pass defense, shutting down most every receiver it has faced this season. Steelers defensive coordinator Dick LeBeau, with two weeks to prepare, is cooking up some schemes Warner and Fitzgerald haven't seen on tape. LeBeau jokes that his safeties are carrying around stepladders, to keep pace in the air with the high-flying Fitzgerald.

"I think it's going to be a little bit of a chess match from the standpoint of rolling coverage to Larry as well as us moving Larry around, trying to put him in positions where he can avoid that." Cardinals coach Ken Whisenhunt said. "Their secondary is playing very well. They've done a nice job in the past games that I've watched on tape. I'm sure that they'll have some different coverages where they'll be doubling Larry or rolling coverages his way. We're going to have to move Larry a bit and see if we can be successful."

There's a reason Arizona quarterback Kurt Warner has been reborn in the desert. He has more options at his fingertips than he did all those years in St. Louis, when he won his first Super Bowl: there are 1,000-yard receivers Anquan Boldin and Steve Breaston, running back Edgerrin James who, now that he's no longer banished to the bench, can mold a zero-yard gain into a couple of yards and, especially, Fitzgerald, Warner's favorite target.

"I know what it takes for Larry to be open. I can put it in certain places where only he can get it or a place where I know he can get it," Warner said. "With that you have the ultimate confidence. If you put it in the right spot, he's going to make a play on the ball. I've seen him do it time and time again. All he has to do is get a step on you and he's so big and strong and athletic that he's going to get it. I understand what it means for different guys to be open and for Larry to be open. We try to take advantage of that."

The other day, someone asked Warner why Fitzgerald had turned down a slew of opportunities that surely would enhance his Q rating, make him the most recognizable athlete in the Valley. Warner's answer was simple, perfect.

"Because Larry doesn't need all that attention," Warner said. "He's very content with the person that he is."

There's More to Fitzgerald's Phenomenon originally appeared on NFL FanHouse on Fri, 23 Jan 2009 22:00:00 EST . Please see our terms for use of feeds.

 

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

]]>kurt warnerKurtWarnerlarry fitzgeraldLarryFitzgeraldLisa OlsonFri, 23 Jan 2009 22:00:00 EST The Super Bowl Prop Bet 13 Step Program: Step Five, God Is Goodhttp://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/23/the-super-bowl-prop-bet-13-step-program-step-five-god-is-good/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/23/the-super-bowl-prop-bet-13-step-program-step-five-god-is-good/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/23/the-super-bowl-prop-bet-13-step-program-step-five-god-is-good/#commentsFiled under: , , , , , ,


Yes, Eli, God is 3:1. Now thank him, please.

Super Bowl Prop Bets are as American as your mother and as addicting as, um, stuff. Will Brinson's got a program for your all-American fix.

Remember when I said we'd have fun prop bet stories? I wasn't lying. But I thought it would behoove everyone if I started the storytelling off first. Last year, I bet on the Patriots and the over. I lost. Badly. (I was debating on the Giants money line for a while, OF COURSE, but you know how that goes. Stupidity and cold feet and whatnot.) But I did win most of my prop bets. Except for one.

That's because I bet on "God." Yes, that's right. The theoretical higher power. And I got him at 3:1 no less. All the Super Bowl MVP had to do was stand up on the podium and say "I'd like to thank God for this victory" first. Didn't seem like that tough of a bet. But wouldn't you know, Eli Manning won, and since his family has obviously struck a deal with Beelzebub, I got screwed out of 30 bucks.

But you know what? I'm not angry. I got a chance to bet on God getting 3:1 odds, man. That doesn't happen often.

And this year, it's not even remotely close.

He's your standard 1:1 favorite, courtesy of BoDogLife.com.
Who will the MVP of the game thank first?
God 1:1
Teammates 2:1
Family 4:1
Coach 7:1
Doesn't thank anyone 3:1
Now obviously, God's kicking it at 1:1 because Kurt Warner drops his name more times at a press conference than my mom (a preacher) does on Sunday. Not only that, but you might also remember that Ben Roethlisberger mentioned him first after the Steelers won the AFC Championship game (which seemed, yes, odd; almost like a jab at Warner). And given the propensity of quarterbacks to win Super Bowl MVP awards, it seems pretty likely that you'll hear the Lord's name first. Still doesn't make 1:1 a bad bet though.

Next up, let's make fun of Matt Millen. That doesn't happen enough.
Will Matt Millen pick the correct team to win the Super Bowl?
Yes -270
No +210
WOW. Now, obviously this means that Millen will be picking the Steelers, or at least everyone thinks he will (he probably will do just that). But there are only four or five hard and fast rules in life. One is "don't rub another man's rhubarb." And while I don't have space to give you all of them, I will key you into the fact that "If you are given the chance to win DOUBLE your money by betting against Matt Millen, you take that chance. Every time." is definitely one of them. Look -- you don't even have to pick a team. Millen will handle the jinx for you. MAX. BET.

In fact, the best possible situation allows you to parlay the two above bets, presume divine intervention (the Big Guy won't let Millen win and not be thanked at the same time) will come raining down in the form of Warner touchdowns, and roll around in your electronic money.

The Super Bowl Prop Bet 13 Step Program: Step Five, God Is Good originally appeared on NFL FanHouse on Fri, 23 Jan 2009 19:00:00 EST . Please see our terms for use of feeds.

 

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

]]>ben roethlisbergerBenRoethlisbergereli manningEliManningKurt WarnerKurtWarnerMatt MillenMattMillenSuperBowlPropBetsWill BrinsonFri, 23 Jan 2009 19:00:00 EST The Super Bowl Prop Bet 13 Step Program: Step Four, Back in Timehttp://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/23/the-super-bowl-prop-bet-13-step-program-step-four-back-in-time/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/23/the-super-bowl-prop-bet-13-step-program-step-four-back-in-time/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/23/the-super-bowl-prop-bet-13-step-program-step-four-back-in-time/#commentsFiled under: , , , , ,

Super Bowl Prop Bets are as American as your mother and as addicting as, um, stuff. Will Brinson's got a program for your all-American fix.

For the remaining few days until the Super Bowl, I'm going to be gathering prop bet stories from around the blogosphere (and you, if you're interested, so e-mail me if you've got a funny one).

Now that we've covered that, obvious apologies are due for the tardiness of this (because we're actually on Day Five -- coming soon also). But you know how life as a blogger is -- wake up, look at your pants lying crumpled on the bed, laugh at them, play some Sega Genesis, laugh at your pants again, get in your desk chair and start cranking out the snark. Tough.

But since I couldn't jump into the Delorean and transport myself back to yesterday, de-pants myself and get this entry in on time, I figured we could do the next best thing: gamble on some historical matchups. No, it's not as easy as finding a sports almanac, but it's awesome fun because it's totally confusing and definitely needs to be written down somewhere so you don't forget.

And for Super Bowl XLIII, historical matchups are especially fun because there's so much SB history with the Steelers and the Cardinals Kurt Warner. Speaking of whom ...
Historical Matchup: Total Passing Yards Warner SB XXXIV (415) v. Warner SB XLIII
Kurt Warner SB XXIV -148.5 yards
Kurt Warner SB XLIII +148.5 yards
Or, put simply, do you think that Warner will throw for 266.5 yards against the Steelers this year. That's actually a pretty great line -- 266.5 seems really, really low for Warner, obviously, but this Steelers team is decent at defense. Personally, I'll take the free 150 yards and just hope that he can get to 275. An early Steelers lead is still good, and do you really want to watch Warner light Pittsburgh up knowing you're throwing money down a toilet? Of course not.

You can also make this bet against Warner's performance in Super Bowl XXXVI, but you only get spotted 99.5 yards because he threw for 365 in that game. And actually, the second one is the way to go, since you get a free yard, apparently (if my math is right; it could very well be horribly wrong).

Ben Roethlisberger gets the same treatment for this game, although his numbers are a little different. You may recall that this "game manager" didn't exactly light up the Seahawks when the Steelers won.
Historical Matchup: Total Passing Yards R-Berger SB XL (123) v. R-Berger SB XLIII
Ben Roethlisberger SB XL +96.5 yards
Ben Roethlisberger SB XLIII -96.5 yards
So, again math majors, what we're looking at is a total of 219.5 yards for "Ben" in the Super Bowl. I like the respect that the Cardinals' pass defense is getting here, but frankly, there's no way I can take the under on a 220-yard passing game. Willie Parker is playing, sure, and Hines Ward is going to be testy, but one long bomb to Santonio Holmes and you don't stand a chance. I think R-Berger gets at least one.

So, there you have it -- a quick lesson in historical viewpoint when it comes to gambling. And remember, whenever you time travel, always take the over.

The Super Bowl Prop Bet 13 Step Program: Step Four, Back in Time originally appeared on NFL FanHouse on Fri, 23 Jan 2009 15:00:00 EST . Please see our terms for use of feeds.

 

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

]]>ben roethlisbergerBenRoethlisbergerkurt warnerKurtWarnersuperbowlpropbetsWill BrinsonFri, 23 Jan 2009 15:00:00 EST NFL Color Guard's Super Bowl Attendance Causing Quite the Stirhttp://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/23/nfl-color-guards-super-bowl-attendence-causing-quite-the-stir/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/23/nfl-color-guards-super-bowl-attendence-causing-quite-the-stir/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/23/nfl-color-guards-super-bowl-attendence-causing-quite-the-stir/#commentsFiled under: , , ,

The military's Color Guard, since 9/11, has been prominent at almost every major sporting event, displaying America's colors during the national anthem. This will be no different during Super Bowl XLIII in Tampa. However, there's been a little media stir today about their attendance during the game.

Witness an email that The Thunder Run claims to have received from a military mother, upset at the fact that her son will present the colors and then be escorted out of the stadium to watch the game remotely.
My youngest Marine called me this morning. In the course of the conversation he made mention of being part of the Color Guard for the ceremonies at the Super Bowl. He has been part of other Color Guards at other games and has been able to enjoy the entire game after presenting the Colors. HOWEVER, this will not be the case this time. The 12 man/women color guard will be presenting the Colors and then will be escorted out of the stadium and therefore not allowed to see the game. Steven and the 11 others are quite upset about this and have asked that I see if I could contact someone and have that changed.
Now, if the NFL has allowed these military personnel to watch the game in year's past, this would seem to be highly problematic and kind of ridiculous. But that appears not to really be the case; Florio contacted the NFL today, following TTR's post and got the following response, posted originally at PFT.
"The members of the Color Guard have always been our guests at a Super Bowl party in a compound on the stadium grounds where they watch the game on big-screen TVs and enjoy food and beverage," NFL spokesman Greg Aiello told us via e-mail. "That is how we have done it every year.

[...]"The military provides an intra-service Color Guard as part of our pre-game tribute to the military that also includes the military fly-over of the stadium," Aiello said. "Then we arrange a place for the Color Guard to watch the game along with other pre-game and halftime show participants (more than 2,000 people)."
Although Aiello likely forgot to include "except Bruce Springsteen ... because he's The Boss," this seems like a pretty fair point from the NFL's perspective. Twelve people; that's doable in terms of providing extra tickets to the most profitable sporting event known to mankind (figures may not be exact). But 2,000? That's a whole lot of cheddar (Florio estimates about approximately $2 million) to be throwing down for free in a stadium with limited size.

And if this was something new that the NFL was doing because of hard economic times, yes, there would be a legitimate beef on behalf of these military moms and soldiers. However, since it's a policy that's been intact for several years, I tend to think there's nothing particularly wrong with the way the NFL is handling this.

NFL Color Guard's Super Bowl Attendance Causing Quite the Stir originally appeared on NFL FanHouse on Fri, 23 Jan 2009 11:15:00 EST . Please see our terms for use of feeds.

 

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

]]>Will BrinsonFri, 23 Jan 2009 11:15:00 EST Barack Obama: 44th President, Steelers Fan (at Least on Super Bowl Sunday)http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/21/barack-obama-44th-president-steelers-fan-at-least-on-super-bo/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/21/barack-obama-44th-president-steelers-fan-at-least-on-super-bo/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/21/barack-obama-44th-president-steelers-fan-at-least-on-super-bo/#commentsFiled under: , , , , ,


Some Cardinals' players might be using the opportunity to meet Barack Obama as motivation for winning the Super Bowl, but the country's 44th president will almost certainly be a Steelers' fan on Feb. 1.

Owner Dan Rooney, a life-long Republican, campaigned heavily for Obama in the months leading up to the election, and on Monday, traveled to Washington to hand-deliver the AFC Championship game ball.

The relationship between the two unlikely allies dates back to Jan. 2008, when Rooney watched Obama thank supporters following his surprising victory at the Iowa caucuses.

"This is the greatest speech I've seen since John Kennedy," Rooney told his son, Jim. "This guy connects with people like no one I've seen since John Kennedy. He convinced me that this is more than just a good politician. I want to stand up and say something for this guy. I want to be involved in this."

Three months later, Obama was in Pittsburgh attending a conference on steel manufacturing, and would spend close to an hour talking to Rooney. And that was that for the Steelers owner.
"The whole time, Obama spoke to my father. I mean meaningful conversations about different things. There was a bond there, and you could see the development of mutual respect. My father really appreciated that. That day, he announced his support."
Rooney told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette that "[Obama]'s a Bears fan first, he admits that ... But he's a Steelers fan. He said it, and all his staff, they're rooting for us [in the Super Bowl]." So there you go. That Cardinals owner Bill Bidwill was a huge John McCain supporter probably didn't hurt, either.

So while Obama's Super Bowl allegiances may come as a disappointment to some Cardinals players, on the upside, they've been dealt the ultimate "no respect" card. So there's that.

Barack Obama: 44th President, Steelers Fan (at Least on Super Bowl Sunday) originally appeared on NFL FanHouse on Wed, 21 Jan 2009 18:30:00 EST . Please see our terms for use of feeds.

 

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

]]>Barack ObamaBarackObamaBill BidwillBillBidwillDan RooneyDanRooneyRyan WilsonWed, 21 Jan 2009 18:30:00 EST For Some, Chance to Visit Obama White House Is Motivation to Win Super Bowlhttp://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/20/for-some-chance-to-visit-obama-white-house-is-motivation-to-win/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/20/for-some-chance-to-visit-obama-white-house-is-motivation-to-win/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/20/for-some-chance-to-visit-obama-white-house-is-motivation-to-win/#commentsFiled under: , , ,

When the Cardinals opened training camp last summer, a few people had them winning the division, but not much else. There are only so many times you can be duped into picking Arizona as "the team to make a deep playoff run this year" before you tire of being mocked, I suppose.

Well, here we are, five months later, and the Cardinals are in the Super Bowl. After defeating the upstart Falcons in the wild card round, improbable wins over the Panthers and Eagles have Arizona headed to Tampa. And should they somehow manage to beat the Steelers, they'll be the first NFL franchise to visit the White House in the Obama administration

Obvious, I know. But unlike last year's Giants, who were spurred more by their 18-0 opponent than a chance to spend an afternoon with the most unpopular president in a half-century, some players from this year's Cardinals team are using the opportunity to stand with Barack Obama on the South Lawn as motivation to win the Super Bowl, according to NFL.com's Adam Schefter.

Such sentiments are as much a repudiation of the previous eight years -- marred by wars, punctuated by recession -- as it is a nod to change, to history, and to hope.

For Some, Chance to Visit Obama White House Is Motivation to Win Super Bowl originally appeared on NFL FanHouse on Tue, 20 Jan 2009 23:15:00 EST . Please see our terms for use of feeds.

 

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

]]>Barack ObamaBarackObamaRyan WilsonTue, 20 Jan 2009 23:15:00 EST That Arizona Fleaflicker Play Has a Name: 'The Philly Special'http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/20/that-arizona-fleaflicker-play-has-a-name-the-philly-special/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/20/that-arizona-fleaflicker-play-has-a-name-the-philly-special/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/20/that-arizona-fleaflicker-play-has-a-name-the-philly-special/#commentsFiled under: ,

Ryan already broke down how the now famous Arizona Cardinal modified fleaflicker that resulted in a 62 yard Larry Fitzgerald touchdown has a history in Ken Wisenhunt's playbook, dating to the Steelers in 2005.

But it turns out, via the esteemed Larry Brown, that there's a little more history behind it as well, particularly with the Philadelphia Eagles. So much so, in fact, that the specific play is actually known as "The Philly Special" because it seeks to take direct advantage of Jim Johnson's aggressive blitz packages.
Three years ago, when [Saints head coach Sean] Payton and Cardinals offensive coordinator Todd Haley were working together in Dallas, Payton introduced Haley to a play called "The Philly Special."

It was a trick play designed specifically to burn the Eagles' aggressive defensive scheme, and Payton had used it successfully against Philadelphia when he was coaching in New York during the Giants' Super Bowl run in 2000-01.
As the Times-Picayune points out as well, Haley never actually used it while he was with Dallas, but obviously knew of the play's potency, because he advised Brian St. Pierre (he is useful!) to be on the lookout for an ideal time to utilize it against the Cardinals.

It's really more than just a fun piece of trivia though; it points to the fact that Haley is a heck of an offensive coordinator and his future as a head coach. Too bad Dallas never had the chance to hold onto him.

That Arizona Fleaflicker Play Has a Name: 'The Philly Special' originally appeared on NFL FanHouse on Tue, 20 Jan 2009 21:45:00 EST . Please see our terms for use of feeds.

 

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

]]>jim johnsonJimJohnsonlarry fitzgeraldLarryFitzgeraldsean paytonSeanPaytontodd haleyToddHaleyWill BrinsonTue, 20 Jan 2009 21:45:00 EST Steelers Players Hated Tomlin at Firsthttp://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/20/steelers-players-hated-tomlin-at-first/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/20/steelers-players-hated-tomlin-at-first/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/20/steelers-players-hated-tomlin-at-first/#commentsFiled under: , ,

With a Super Bowl appearance in his second season, Mike Tomlin has assured himself a long tenure as Steelers coach. And now that he's safely established, some Steelers players are ready to admit that they weren't sold on their new head coach last year.

For Bill Cowher's reputation for jutting out his mammoth chin and letting a spit-filled tirade fly, he was a players coach. And while Tomlin is usually calm and collected on the sideline (if he's not chest bumping a player after a big play), he actually runs a very tight ship.

When Tomlin came in and took a more disciplinarian approach to coaching, the Steelers veterans reacted very skeptically.
"I think guys ... were kind of cursing it at first because we kind of didn't think he was listening to us. But now I think a lot of these guys realize what he has his hands on, and they respect him for it. It's definitely a totally different story now from when he first got here."
According to Washington, Tomlin is not nearly the softy that Cowher was. While Cowher would sometimes make his decisions based on what the players wanted, Tomlin seems more likely to make decisions based on his own gut instinct, whether the players like it or not.

For a team that slept walked through part of Cowher's final season -- failing to make the playoffs a year after going winning the Super Bowl, maybe that's just what the players needed. Two years in, it's hard to argue with the results.


Steelers Players Hated Tomlin at First originally appeared on NFL FanHouse on Tue, 20 Jan 2009 07:06:00 EST . Please see our terms for use of feeds.

 

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

]]>Mike TomlinMikeTomlinSuper BowlSuperBowlJJ CooperTue, 20 Jan 2009 07:06:00 EST Anquan Boldin Dismisses NFC Championship Game Altercationhttp://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/20/anquan-boldin-and-ken-wisenhunt-dismiss-nfc-championship-game-al/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/20/anquan-boldin-and-ken-wisenhunt-dismiss-nfc-championship-game-al/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/20/anquan-boldin-and-ken-wisenhunt-dismiss-nfc-championship-game-al/#commentsFiled under: , , , , ,

Emotions are a part of football. And the higher the stakes, the higher the emotions usually run. So it was somewhat unsurprising that Cardinals wideout Anquan Boldin became upset when he was removed from the field during the NFC Championship Game on Sunday.

However, the altercation, and Boldin's ensuing rapid exit from the stadium, did become a pretty large deal, generating media waves and plenty of questions about Boldin's relationship with offensive coordinator Todd Haley and coach Ken Wisenhunt. On Monday, Boldin popped into ESPN's NFL Live and dismissed the blow-up as a being a real issue.
"I was not given any explanation why I was taken out," Boldin said Monday, during an interview on ESPN's "NFL Live," when asked what led to the sideline confrontation. "Like any competitor I wanted to know why."

Asked if he had any issues with Haley, Boldin said, "Not a problem at all. I'm committed to this team ... one goal in mind ... to win the Super Bowl. That's why I came back early from the facial injury. You don't get this opportunity all the time."
Wisenhunt also described the altercation as a "normal thing that happens", which follows the apparent Arizona company line of: "Hey, man, it's all good. Brah." Or something like that.

The truth of the matter, though, is that Boldin's been unhappy in Arizona all season (he even threw out a "Next question" when asked if the Super Bowl altered his thoughts on re-signing with the Cards) because he's underpaid and whether or not he or Wisenhunt or Haley want it to be, this is going to be the second biggest story of Super Bowl week behind Wisenhunt squaring off against his old team.

Via PFT


Anquan Boldin Dismisses NFC Championship Game Altercation originally appeared on NFL FanHouse on Tue, 20 Jan 2009 01:15:00 EST . Please see our terms for use of feeds.

 

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

]]>anquan boldinAnquanBoldinken wisenhuntKenWisenhunttodd haleyToddHaleyWill BrinsonTue, 20 Jan 2009 01:15:00 EST Donovan McNabb Was a Victim of Vandalism at Home in Arizona Last Weekhttp://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/20/donovan-mcnabb-was-a-victim-of-vandalism-at-home-in-arizona-last/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/20/donovan-mcnabb-was-a-victim-of-vandalism-at-home-in-arizona-last/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/20/donovan-mcnabb-was-a-victim-of-vandalism-at-home-in-arizona-last/#commentsFiled under: , , , ,

Football fans are generally prone to taking things too far. You would normally excuse fans of the Arizona Cardinals for falling squarely in that category. Their team is, after all, headed to the Super Bowl for the first time in franchise history. It's a time to get amped and cheer for the Cardinals.

It is not, however, a time to start burning things into the lawns of your opponent. But that's what a few fans did to Donovan McNabb's house -- the one he owns in Arizona -- before the NFC Championship Game last week.
According to a friend of Mrs. McNabb's, "Go Cards" and other similar messages were burned into the front lawn one night last week. This had to be especially scary to the couple's four-year-old daughter, Alexis, who was staying in the house with Roxie and the couple's six-week-old twins. Apparently one of the culprits was identified after leaving a box at the scene with a mailing label affixed bearing his name and address, so we're obviously not talking about criminal masterminds here. But it's tough to imagine that anyone over the age of eight doesn't understand that burning something on the lawn of a house occupied by African-Americans carries deeper social overtones that are highly disturbing. I'm told Donovan took a photo of the damaged lawn and used it as a motivating force for Sunday's game.
Obviously this is the type of thing that will be, hopefully, prosecuted to the fullest extent. And as Michael Silver noted above, there's really no reason to think the criminals in question won't be caught: clearly it's the actions of some pretty misguided emoed-out Arizona fans.

Of course, the scarier thing might be that this was all before the team won; it's pretty terrifying to think what will happen if the team prevails over Pittsburgh in the Super Bowl.

Donovan McNabb Was a Victim of Vandalism at Home in Arizona Last Week originally appeared on NFL FanHouse on Tue, 20 Jan 2009 00:45:00 EST . Please see our terms for use of feeds.

 

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

]]>donovan mcnabbDonovanMcnabbWill BrinsonTue, 20 Jan 2009 00:45:00 EST The Super Bowl Prop Bet 13 Step Program: Day One, The Basicshttp://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/19/the-super-bowl-prop-bet-13-step-program-day-one-the-basics/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/19/the-super-bowl-prop-bet-13-step-program-day-one-the-basics/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/19/the-super-bowl-prop-bet-13-step-program-day-one-the-basics/#commentsFiled under: , , , , ,

Super Bowl Prop Bets are as American as your mother and as addicting as, um, stuff. Will Brinson's got a program for your all-American fix.

Welcome to day one of the Super Bowl Prop Bet 13 Step Program to Gambling Greatness. Catchy title, no? Well, fine -- if not catchy, at least it's short. Anyway, the point being is that as the countdown to the Super Bowl begins, you, the reader, the degenerate, the gambler, need to be prepared to lay down some crazy bets once that magic Sunday rolls around. That's why I'm here.

(Note: you may be better served simply betting against me, given recent history, but that's your own prerogative.)

And what better way to start off the gambling than with the two most basic wagers of them all: the point spread, and the over/under. Obviously the point spread refers to Pittsburgh -7, meaning (for the really uninitiated) Vegas thinks the Steelers should beat the Cardinals by a touchdown.

Pittsburgh is a very popular franchise and the Steelers are very good and they beat a better set of teams (supposedly) to make it to Tampa, so this shouldn't be surprising. Still, I think I'll be taking the Arizona Cardinals. They have God Kurt Warner on their side. Tough to argue with that.

As for the over/under or "total" as it's often referred to, Vegas believes both teams will score a total of 47. That, to me, seems a touch high. As RJ Bell of Pregame.com astutely noted, it also means that Vegas thinks the Steelers will win 27-20. I think that O/U is actually going to be close to the end total, but at the same time, we're dealing with two pretty stout defenses.

People like to scoff at the notion that the Cardinals won't be able to stop the Steelers, but that seems a bit far fetched considering that they've effectively shut down three very good offensive teams for all but one quarter since the playoffs started. Don't forget that Ken Wisenhunt is the former offensive coordinator in Pittsburgh, so he knows a thing or two about their playbook and personnel.

Given that, and the fact that I think Arizona will do its part to establish some sort of running game, I'm going to take the under. So, there you have it: this is where you should spend your first $2,000 worth of gambling money when it comes to the Super Bowl. Check back tomorrow for more astute gambling advice.

The Super Bowl Prop Bet 13 Step Program: Day One, The Basics originally appeared on NFL FanHouse on Mon, 19 Jan 2009 22:30:00 EST . Please see our terms for use of feeds.

 

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

]]>ken wisenhuntKenWisenhuntkurt warnerKurtWarnerSuperBowlPropBetsWill BrinsonMon, 19 Jan 2009 22:30:00 EST Ryan Clark Will Not Be Fined for Lighting Up Willis McGaheehttp://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/19/ryan-clark-will-not-be-fined-for-lighting-up-willis-mcgahee/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/19/ryan-clark-will-not-be-fined-for-lighting-up-willis-mcgahee/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/19/ryan-clark-will-not-be-fined-for-lighting-up-willis-mcgahee/#commentsFiled under: , , , ,

There are still ongoing internet discussions concerning the legality of Ryan Clark's brutal collision with Willis McGahee in Sunday's AFC Championship game. While some people saw Clark lead with his helmet, others think he led with his shoulder. Fines and suspensions have been discussed by those in the former camp, while those in the latter scoff at the notion of either.

We now know where the NFL stands, as Mike Reiss of the Boston Globe has acquired a statement from a league spokesman.
"[McGahee] had completed the catch and was a runner. Helmet-to-helmet contact is legal in that situation as it is for any ball carrier (running back, quarterback, or receiver). Helmet-to-helmet contact is prohibited against defenseless players (defined as a receiver in the process of making a catch or a quarterback in the act of passing)."
I have to say, that sounded really, really familiar -- albeit a bit more succinct -- didn't it?

The reality of the situation is that McGahee got completely crushed by Clark, but it was legal. Remember, football is a contact sport. I hope once McGahee is able to fully recover and distance himself from the hit, he would echo those sentiments.

Ryan Clark Will Not Be Fined for Lighting Up Willis McGahee originally appeared on NFL FanHouse on Mon, 19 Jan 2009 22:17:00 EST . Please see our terms for use of feeds.

 

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

]]>ryan clarkRyanClarkwillis mcgaheeWillisMcgaheezebra reportZebraReportMatt SnyderMon, 19 Jan 2009 22:17:00 EST Ward Should Play Despite Knee Injuryhttp://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/19/wards-knee-injury-shouldnt-sideline-him/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/19/wards-knee-injury-shouldnt-sideline-him/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/19/wards-knee-injury-shouldnt-sideline-him/#commentsFiled under: , ,

After sitting out most of the AFC Championship game with a knee injury, Hines Ward vowed that he would be back to the Super Bowl, or as Ward put it in a post-game interview: "I don't plan on missing this game."

Barring a unexpectedly bad MRI report, it appears that Ward will be good to his word. The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette is reporting that the initial diagnosis is that Ward has slight MCL strain in his right knee. An MCL strain is about as "good" as a knee injury can get, and it's hard to see how Ward won't figure out a way to be out there in two weeks.
"I don't think there's any question that 86 will be on the field," tight end Heath Miller said. "I don't even know the extent of his injury, but I saw him walking today so I'm pretty sure that two weeks from now he'll be playing."
Considering Ward is the Steelers' best receiver, it's pretty obvious that the Steelers need him to play, but it's even more than that, as while the Steelers have some depth at receiver, but the Steelers other three receivers, Santonio Holmes, Nate Washington and Limas "Hands of Stone" Sweed, are all most comfortable running intermediate and deep routes on the outside, while Ward and tight end Heath Miller are the move the chains men.

Ward Should Play Despite Knee Injury originally appeared on NFL FanHouse on Mon, 19 Jan 2009 21:53:00 EST . Please see our terms for use of feeds.

 

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

]]>Hines WardHinesWardSuper BowlSuperBowlJJ CooperMon, 19 Jan 2009 21:53:00 EST Ryan Clark's Hit on Willis McGahee Was Perfectly Legal and Cleanhttp://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/19/ryan-clarks-hit-on-willis-mcgahee-was-perfectly-legal-and-clean/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/19/ryan-clarks-hit-on-willis-mcgahee-was-perfectly-legal-and-clean/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/19/ryan-clarks-hit-on-willis-mcgahee-was-perfectly-legal-and-clean/#commentsFiled under: , , , ,

The fallout continues from the absolutely crushing hit Ryan Clark delivers to Ravens running back, Willis McGahee. There are people saying Clark should be suspended for the Super Bowl, complaints about the music selection while McGahee and Clark laid on the field, and questions about why "helmet-to-helmet" wasn't called on the play. Click here to watch it, in case you need a refresher.

Now, there are a few things paramount to this discussion that should be set straight.

First of all, it is not illegal for two helmets to touch. It seems like many fans believe when helmets hit against each other, it's an automatic flag. This couldn't be further from the truth. Helmets hit on many, many plays. The situation last night has been recognized much more than most because it was a devastating shot, McGahee laid motionless for a while, and it was an AFC Championship game.

Secondly, illegal helmet-to-helmet contact occurs when a player uses his helmet as a weapon on a defenseless player. Think of a quarterback standing in the pocket, looking downfield. Also, think of a receiver whose eyes are on the football when it's in mid-air. These are situations where you will see a penalty called.

When a ball-carrier has the football in his possession, and is running downfield, he can see the defenders. At this point, an approaching defender has absolutely zero chance of knowing where his opponent's helmet will end up -- especially considering how high-speed a game football is. As you can see in the slow-motion replay, Clark actually leads with his right shoulder. As impact was eminent, McGahee lowered his helmet just a bit. I'm not blaming McGahee, because it's natural to attempt to protect yourself when a potential hit is on the way. What I am saying is that the helmet-to-helmet contact was caused just as much by McGahee's lowering head as it was by Clark. You can't penalize a defender for not being able to predict what the offensive player will do. If the officials start making calls of this nature, it sets up an inherent advantage for the offense.

If Clark gets fined, it won't be a large figure. I, obviously, don't think he should, but the commissioner has been pretty liberal with fines this season. As for a possible suspension? That's just ludicrous. I outlined above why I believe the hit was clean. Even if you disagree and think the hit was illegal or dirty, it most certainly wasn't egregious enough to warrant a suspension.

This is football. It's a vicious contact sport. It sucks that McGahee suffered a concussion, but that doesn't make the play itself illegal. It most certainly doesn't make Ryan Clark a head-hunter or thug or anything of that nature. He's a football player who made a football play. End of story.

Ryan Clark's Hit on Willis McGahee Was Perfectly Legal and Clean originally appeared on NFL FanHouse on Mon, 19 Jan 2009 16:00:00 EST . Please see our terms for use of feeds.

 

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

]]>ryan clarkRyanClarkwillis mcgaheeWillisMcgaheezebra reportZebraReportMatt SnyderMon, 19 Jan 2009 16:00:00 EST Heinz Field Sound Operator Displays Bad Taste During Injury Timeouthttp://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/19/steelers-sound-operator-dropped-the-ball-last-night-with-injury/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/19/steelers-sound-operator-dropped-the-ball-last-night-with-injury/http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/01/19/steelers-sound-operator-dropped-the-ball-last-night-with-injury/#commentsFiled under: , , , ,


Willis McGahee and Ryan Clark were both injured last night; obviously McGahee's injury was worse, as he spent significantly more time on the carpet than Clark and subsequently had to leave on a stretcher. Because he was on the ground so long, the sound operators at Heinz Field chose to fill time with some music, including, oddly, "Down on the Corner" by Creedence Clearwater Revival and "Smooth" by Santana and Rob Thomas. And, according to a "league source" that emailed PFT last night, people aren't too thrilled about it.
"There is a player on the field who may have suffered a life changing injury and the Steelers are playing party music. There are about five teams in the league that would engage in such horrific behavior. All others would cease all entertainment.

"'Down on the corner' . . . uh, there's a man down on the field. About twenty-five to twenty-seven teams would cease all entertainment. Oh, now it's a Santana song. This is beyond offensive. . . . Most teams would fire them on the spot. It's disgusting."
Yeah, I couldn't agree more. Really, the only way that the music could have been more offensive (in message; you can't possibly get more offensive in sound than Rob Thomas) would have been blaring LL Cool J's "Mama Said Knock You Out" as McGahee was strapped onto a stretcher and carted off the field.

Look, it's a tough situation to be in for whoever is running the tunes -- you don't want to let the crowd become completely passive and ruin the celebration of the home team headed to Super Bowl, but at the same time, there's a guy lying on the field and no one's sure if he can even talk or move his fingers. So, for future reference music guys: just do the Paul Simon thing and let silence be the sound.

Heinz Field Sound Operator Displays Bad Taste During Injury Timeout originally appeared on NFL FanHouse on Mon, 19 Jan 2009 14:10:00 EST . Please see our terms for use of feeds.

 

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

]]>Creedence Clearwater RevivalCreedenceClearwaterRevivalLL Cool JLlCoolJpaul simonPaulSimonRob ThomasRobThomasryan clarkRyanClarkSantanawillis mcgaheeWillisMcgaheeWill BrinsonMon, 19 Jan 2009 14:10:00 EST