Super Bowl LIII

Discussion in 'All Discussions' started by DawnPatrol321, Jan 31, 2019.

  1. headhigh

    headhigh Well-Known Member

    Jul 17, 2009
    I expected it to be disappointing, and I was not disappointed.
     
  2. NJsurfer30

    NJsurfer30 Well-Known Member

    194
    Dec 28, 2016
    As a lifelong niners fan (albeit with varying degrees of passion as previously explained) I feel similarly. And for a stretch of years there I very adamantly rooted against the patriots in the super bowl, because I didn't want Brady to surpass Montana in most peoples' minds. But that ship has pretty much sailed at this point. Yes, there are still arguments to be made for Montana... in addition to never losing a Super Bowl, he never threw an interception in one... QBs took a hell of a lot more abuse on a game by game basis in the 80s vs. now with rule changes etc., which explains the shorter career, which (very slightly) explains the fewer appearance... but it's really only die-hard 49er fans trying to make the arguments at this point (my dad, for example). At some point explanations just become excuses. Even beyond 6 rings vs. 4, when one QB has made it to the super bowl 9 times (with completely different supporting casts over the years, sometimes a good defense, sometimes not so much... sometimes -- like this year -- surrounded by skill-position players comprised mostly of relatively small, not-particularly-fast, white dudes) and the other only 4, it's hard to see it as a close race anymore. I hate having to concede that, but it is what it is.

    As far as being "cheaters," i could give two f***s about spygate or deflategate or whatever else. That's not cheating... that's pushing grey areas in the obscure corners of the rule book while trying to maintain plausible deniability... sometimes you push it a little too far to see what you can or can't get away with. If you're not occasionally testing the limits of what is or isn't legal, you don't want to win that bad. I pretty much side with La_Piedra's definition of cheating here. But if we want to start pointing fingers about cheating, let's start by pointing them at 99% of the entire league, since it's clear as day that damn near every NFL player at this point is on massive amounts of PEDs.
     

  3. NJsurfer30

    NJsurfer30 Well-Known Member

    194
    Dec 28, 2016
    Thought the first half was boring as all hell... decent defense obviously but it wasn't particularly entertaining even as someone who loves a good low-scoring defensive battle. But again, the super bowl is a food holiday, and feasted on plenty of delicious food and beer, so I won the first half. Second half a little more entertaining. Didn't really care either way who won, but not at all surprised the way it turned out. Right before the one touchdown drive of the game started I remember thinking the fact that it's tied this late in the game gives Brady/Belichick a massive advantage over the young coach and QB who've never been there before. Pretty much played out exactly like that (though to be fair I had similar thoughts in the AFC championship game and the chiefs made it very interesting... but the super bowl is a whole different scale of pressure and overwhelmingness).
     
    DawnPatrol321 likes this.
  4. SCOB3YVILLE

    SCOB3YVILLE Well-Known Member

    608
    Nov 16, 2016
    So.. was Adam Levine this gay cheerleader they were talking about all week?

    Opening ceremonies were amazing. The two girls that sang America the beautiful did a great jobbe. Gladys Knight did a great job on the anthem too.

    Commercials were Mostly good.
    I probably missed it, but was there not a Budweiser commercial? I saw a bunch of bud lights..

    Halftime show was horrible
    Game was horrible
     
    headhigh likes this.
  5. La_Piedra

    La_Piedra Well-Known Member

    Oct 9, 2017
    I don't mind low scoring games due to stout defenses, but I don't like low scoring games because of offensive ineptitude. So this was a good game. Belichick's plan to confuse Goff and the Rams offense was brilliant.

    When I was a kid, the Super Bowl commercials and entertainment were average.

    As a teenager, the SB picked up their game. The commercial breaks and halftime show became more interesting.

    As a young adult, the breaks were works of art, and the game attracted a lot of non-fans who only wanted to watch the commercials.

    Sometime in the last 10 years or so, it became dumb. The commercials were long and over the top, as if everyone was trying too hard. The entertainment became boring, as it seemed as if everyone was either trying to make some personal statement, trying to top Janet Jackson's "wardrobe malfunction", or the music was so modern that only the youngest generations could enjoy it.

    This is why I enjoyed this game. Everyone pretty much dropped the nonsense and shenanigans, and the game itself took center stage.

    The way it's supposed to be.
     
  6. ChavezyChavez

    ChavezyChavez Well-Known Member

    Jun 20, 2011
    Good game. It confirms the big dickedness of Nick Foles. Goof looked nervous and confused the whole game. Matt Ryan puckered up when the Pats came back in that game. Foles= legend.
     
  7. NJsurfer30

    NJsurfer30 Well-Known Member

    194
    Dec 28, 2016
    There was at least one budweiser commercial, with "Blowing in the Wind" playing in the background. I know this because I remember saying "back when that song came out, I bet no one would've ever envisioned it being the soundtrack to a budweiser ad during the super bowl."
     
  8. UnfurleD

    UnfurleD Well-Known Member

    878
    Jul 13, 2016
  9. Barry Cuda

    Barry Cuda Well-Known Member

    Nov 19, 2018
    You are correct--it was a hippie anthem "back when".
     
    MrBigglesworth likes this.
  10. headhigh

    headhigh Well-Known Member

    Jul 17, 2009
    How much do you think they paid Jeff Bridges to say "the dude abides"?
     
    MrBigglesworth and DawnPatrol321 like this.
  11. headhigh

    headhigh Well-Known Member

    Jul 17, 2009
    I agree, but also had to ask myself: "are the commercials getting dumber, or am I becoming a cynical old man who can't find joy in anything?"

    Glad someone else thought they were dumb too hah
     
  12. NNYNJ

    NNYNJ Well-Known Member

    928
    Dec 22, 2017
    not enough
     
  13. DosXX

    DosXX Well-Known Member

    Mar 2, 2013
    [​IMG]
     
  14. smitty517

    smitty517 Well-Known Member

    715
    Oct 30, 2008
    The commercials suck because corporate America is bound by the PC culture. When you are more concerned with making sure no one is offended versus creating something to sell your product you get mediocracy. No winners or losers culture equals drab, boring crap. The Budweiser horses are now offensive (cruelty to animals). Using hot chicks in bikinis is sexist (e.g. Doritos).

    Did you catch all the social justice messages? One was about letting girls play. Doesnt matter that no one (other than parents) prevents girls from playing football.

    Who knows. Maybe I am just a grumpy prick.
     
  15. headhigh

    headhigh Well-Known Member

    Jul 17, 2009
    I'm thinking the opposite.

    I imagine he drove a pretty hard bargain to use his signature, career defining soundbite in a commercial. I'll say a half million at least.
     
  16. NNYNJ

    NNYNJ Well-Known Member

    928
    Dec 22, 2017
    Still not enough.
     
    headhigh likes this.
  17. Riley Martin's Disgruntled Neighbor

    Riley Martin's Disgruntled Neighbor Well-Known Member

    Aug 22, 2012
    I'll bet you Saints / Chiefs would have been a better game.
     
    headhigh likes this.
  18. capecodcdog

    capecodcdog Well-Known Member

    Jun 22, 2012
    I'll have to say I liked this one.. well done:


    Behind the scenes info:
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nf...er-bowl-commercial/ar-BBT9NFW?ocid=spartanntp

    As far as the game, I did not have a dog in the fight. I thought it was a hard fought "old school" battle. I think both defenses played great, wreaking havoc the opposing defenses "look" bad. It seemed like every play was contested (i.e., a battle), and yardage was hard to come by. In the end, NE did enough, and wore out LA. NE's experience had a lot to do with it.

    Personally, I don't need scoring for a game to be compelling. Defensive play and other subtleties that are happening (line play, strategies, game w/in the game, etc.) are interesting to me. It also seems that the referees were letting them play (a lot of contact on pass plays, but no flags). Most calls were pre-snap/procedure infractions, with a few holdings called. No long yardage interference calls. Letting them "play" may have given a slight edge to the defenses, which were already solid units.

    Anyways, I hope everyone enjoyed there pulled pork, wings, brews, whatever.

    Maybe we'll get some waves?

    Peace.
     
  19. LBCrew

    LBCrew Well-Known Member

    Aug 12, 2009
    Maybe you are... but that doesn't make you wrong.
     
  20. Kyle

    Kyle Well-Known Member

    Sep 9, 2011
    I don't mind good defenses but that wasn't entirely the case last night imo. Goff missed quite a few open throws and was hesitating in the pocket a ton. Left a lot on the field. I know defense has some to do with it but I think he had a deer in headlights look last night.

    Wish the Saints would have gotten in, I highly doubt Drew Brees would have looked as bad as Goff last night.

    Kudos to the massholes, can't hate on their greatness and longevity.