That was a 2008 Saints-style Super Bowl

by stujo4 on Feb 2, 2009 9:50 AM CST

The Cardinals played just like the Saints, especially in the second half of 2008. SO many missed opportunities, stupid mistakes and penalties that kept them from making their objectives. Running game pretty much shut down, go to the pass. Defense giving it up but not too much, keeping things within reach. Lots of tension, lots of suspense, complimented by a sense of dread, knowing that you've seen it before and hope hope hoping you're not going to see it again. "Holding.. offense..." GAAAAAA!!!! That was the Saints on the field wearing red! That Gandy kid was Jammal Brown. Put another tight end over there to help him out for God's sake.

I give the Steelers no credit. They played badly too. But I did not get the sense that their offense could take it to the next level if they could just get it together (except on the last drive) and it shouldn't have mattered by then if the Cards had done their work and scored twice more at least. JUST LIKE THE SAINTS in a number of losses in 2008.

In closing, here's a little rotoworld.com:

Kurt Warner completed 31-of-43 passes for 377 yards, three touchdowns, and one pick in his second consecutive Super Bowl loss.

Warner's protection was shaky; James Harrison drew three holding calls against LT Mike Gandy and LaMarr Woodley registered two sacks. Warner also wasn't helped by suspect Todd Haley play calls. Just begging for trouble, the Cards ran a quick slant on first-and-one at the goal line with :18 left in the first half. Harrison picked him, returning it 100 yards for a score -- the longest play in Super Bowl history. Haley also didn't use Tim Hightower on the ground despite Edgerrin James' struggles, and definitely could've given more spread and two-minute looks. Haley is probably gone to KC, but extending Warner now becomes Arizona's No. 1 priority. He's only asking for a two-year, $18 million deal.
Feb. 1 - 11:23 p.m. ET

This FanPost was written by a reader and member of Canal Street Chronicles. It does not necessarily reflect the views of CSC and its staff or editors.

Tweet Comment 13 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

The biggest mistake

Was the very first decision: to defer to the second half if they won the coin toss. As a result, they got off to a slow start and never really got rolling until too late.

And no, I’m not agreeing with Peter King: he agrees with me. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

Oh when the Saints...Start kicking ass...You don't want to be in that number...

by MtnExile on Feb 2, 2009 12:56 PM CST reply actions

HA! Beat me to it.

Change is GOOD.

by stujo4 on Feb 2, 2009 1:37 PM CST up reply actions

Yeah I have to agree- could have just as well been NO out there

SB XLIV- Saints – Browns!! Wouldn´t that be awesome? haha

by shecky on Feb 3, 2009 4:37 AM CST reply actions

"Saints WIN Super Bowl"

THAT would be awesome. I wouldn’t care if they played the Ben Franklin High School marching band, just so long as they hoisted a Lombardi. Problem is, they’d probably lose in the final 20 seconds when the sousaphone player gets behind the secondary.

Oh when the Saints...Start kicking ass...You don't want to be in that number...

by MtnExile on Feb 3, 2009 5:56 AM CST up reply actions

lol yeah those marching bands are pretty badass,,,need to watch out for them

but seriously….the Cards pulled a Saints…..they were in such a rush to get the lead that they gave PIT the ball back with too much time left to win….which they of course did. Had they taken a bit more time to eat up the clock and then score PIT wouldn´t have had enough time for a sucessful last second win. I´ve seen the Saints do this continuously.

by shecky on Feb 3, 2009 6:19 PM CST up reply actions

what do you mean they were in too much of a rush?

Should Fitzgerald have stopped sprinting and just taken a knee on the 20 instead of scoring that long TD? What if he does that and then they fumble on the next play?

The defense shouldn’t have been put into the PREVENT on that last Pittsburgh TD drive. They also should have tackled better on it and played it much closer with less cushion – so, it’s on the D-coordinator and the D-players.

There is SOME wiggle room on a team controlling how quickly they score, but if you start messing with your offensive tempo/play calling too much, then you run the risk of getting out of your game plan that’s working and NOT SCORING AT ALL.

The Detroit Lions are on the clock!

by HansDat on Feb 3, 2009 9:59 PM CST up reply actions

disagree

They had that play in the bank waiting for it.
It was designed and set up by a bunch of plays before it.
They KNEW when they called it that they were going to have a damn good chance to score on it.

If they had eaten a bit more time up THEN called it.

But I also think…
If they had done this, or done that or maybe even this.. they could have won

by MT_always on Feb 4, 2009 7:51 AM CST up reply actions

True, to a point

They did set up that play, and it was meant to be a backbreaker. But you can’t use it just any old time. Another twenty yards closer, for instance, and the Steelers wouldn’t have been playing the same defense. Fitzgerald would have had a safety on him rather than playing back and away (there wouldn’t have been enough “back and away” left).

They used the play at just the point when it would have worked, and it did. I think it was a smart decision, considering how well their defense had been playing. Then they screwed the pooch by letting Holmes do his Larry Fitzgerald act. What goes around, comes around.

Oh when the Saints...Start kicking ass...You don't want to be in that number...

by MtnExile on Feb 4, 2009 10:12 AM CST up reply actions

true, to a point also

but 10 yards? Get a first move a bit closer.. kill 30 seconds
Then unleash it.

by MT_always on Feb 4, 2009 11:20 AM CST up reply actions

Did anybody notice

Fitzgeralds’ path to catching Harrison(100 yd return) was impeaded by a Cardinal teamate well out of bounds, he still managed to catch up,but too late ,TD. One of the upstairs PAN cameras(left of center) had it . Was going to watch the replay on NFL network tonite, but saw it on Youtube today…….

by metryman on Feb 4, 2009 4:35 PM CST reply actions

I did notice that

I wondered if there was any rule against that. I know that on punt coverage, you can come back in if you’re blocked out of bounds, but you have to do so as soon as possible. Don’t know how long Fitzgerald was running out of bounds, OR if he was forced out or went out simply to avoid his own teammate.

Oh when the Saints...Start kicking ass...You don't want to be in that number...

by MtnExile on Feb 4, 2009 8:16 PM CST up reply actions

Think Fitz

got pushed out somewhere after Warner went down, made up a lot of ground only to run into #23 w/o a helmet standing outside the sideline stripe, maybe different rule than PR, this was a turnover,so anything goes?………

by metryman on Feb 5, 2009 4:30 PM CST up reply actions