Super Bowl XXXVI: What's in a Name?
And I don't think I'm alone in Super Bowl lack of interest. Most years, the Super Bowl seems to be a blowout and decided long before the fourth quarter begins. If it weren't for the commercials, the NFL could rename the game the Super Boring.
And speaking of blowouts, Super Bowl XXXVI features the likes of the New England Patriots and the St. Louis Rams. To steal a joke from, I believe, Monty Python, this game sounds like a telephone: bor-RING! The Rams have a historic offense and a great defense. The Patriots have an average offense and an average defense. The media portrays this game as being closer than you'd think. We'll see.
The Patriots have played in two Super Bowls. Both times they played at the Superdome. Both times they lost. This year's Super Bowl will again be played at the Superdome.
With statistics and history against them, the Patriots must be wondering if "Super" is the correct adjective for the game and the stadium. Look for them to petition the NFL into replacing the "Super" with "Actually Pretty Doggone Disappointing, If You Ask Me."
Actually, the Patriots would have little to complain about. You know how you go to the video store to look for a movie? As you're scanning the new releases for a movie to watch, you notice that there are some pretty old movies in the "new" release section. Sometimes, the movie has been there so long that the movie's SEQUEL is right next to it. Someone's using a pretty loose definition of "new."
My point? Well, New England, it's been a couple hundred years. You can drop the "new" part. It's named after England, right? Make it a sequel. England II: the Search for Identity. Whatever the change, "New" England is bogus.
As we all (especially the Raiders fans among us) know by now, the Patriots play football outdoors on natural turf. The Rams play on artificial turf (which is the name they give to carpet when applied to a stadium floor) and are put together as a team that excels on artificial turf. Not since the St. Louis baseball Cardinals had an outfield of Willie McGee, Vince Coleman, and Andy Van Slyke has a team been so geared toward its playing surface. The Superdome has an artificial turf playing surface. Another point in St. Louis' favor.
However, the Patriots do have two things going for them.
First, the St. Louis baseball Cardinals lost the World Series that year. That doesn't bode well for the Rams.
Second, I want them to lose. So far during these playoffs, the team I wanted to lose has won 70 percent of the time. Over the past two seasons' playoffs, the team I wanted to lose has won 73 percent of the time. In that angle, the Patriots have an extraordinary chance of winning. If you look at strictly the Super Bowls over the last 17 years (since the Raiders last won) the teams I like less have won 76 percent of the time (Thank you, Buffalo and Denver!) That gives the Patriots an even greater chance.
So, the question becomes do you want to base your football bet on which is the better team or do you want to base your bet on whether or not the football gods are out to get me?
My prediction: Better team 45 -- football gods hate me 6
Once again the team from England II loses the Actually-Pretty-Doggone-Disappointing-If-You-Ask-Me Boring in the ActuallyPrettyDoggoneDisappointingIfYouAskMedome.
As always, I name 'em as I see 'em.
return to Commentary index
The opinions expressed here are solely those of the writer and do not neccessarily reflect those of the rest of the family.
© 2002, Mark Wentz