Blogs > Cliopatria > Super Bowl Preview: Pats v. Iggles in the City of the Midnight Danglers

Feb 5, 2005

Super Bowl Preview: Pats v. Iggles in the City of the Midnight Danglers




I almost went to this Super Bowl. Or, to be more accurate, I almost went to Jacksonville to bask in the ambience of the Super Bowl. Money and timing kept me from even entertaining the idea of attending the last two Pats’ Super Bowls, but this one would have been somewhat viable, and I had my buddy Josh all lined up to do it. Tickets were out of range – all Super Bowl tickets are expensive, but with Eagles fans frothing at the mouth over both the chance to see their Iggs in the Big Game for the first time since the first days of the Reagan Administration (and with the outside chance that they could, I don’t know, cheer an on-field death or something) and the insane Boston sports fans heading down en masse, fahgettaboutit. Ducats were not coming our way. It was not happening.

The plans were pretty much set. I was going to fly into Orlando, which is equidistant from where both of my parents currently are, and rent a car on Thursday. We’d be there through Monday or Tuesday. It would have been great. But a few things had me wary. Jacksonville is huge. It is the second largest city in America in terms of area, there is not the sort of downtown that you expect, and Google searches along the lines of “sports bars Jacksonville Alltel Stadium” did not exactly help. We knew that hotels might be impossible. We knew that the city was a giant sprawl. We saw ourselves spending insane amounts of time and money only to watch the game at a Buffalo Wild Wings ten miles from the stadium. Seemed a bit pricey to me.

I’ve spent a decent amount of time in Jacksonville. Back in college when I was running (well, mostly jumping) track, we’d spend our two-week spring break (yes, you read that right, two weeks!) down South, where we’d train and have some huge meets, and get some sun, and do some of the things that college kids do when you get a coed team of 70 or so athletes on spring break in places like Tampa, Jacksonville, Gainesville, Tallahassee, and Charleston. You know – studying. Lots of studying. Two of the years we spent a week on beach houses in Jacksonville, I believe on what is known as Atlantic Beach. (It was there that the"Delta Vinnie Fun Run” began. There were no frats at Williams, but one year, inevitably besotted with, you know, studying, a group of us guys in one of the houses started"Delta Vinnie." My nickname was Vinnie: I can tell that story some other time. In any case, at the heart of our nightly festivities -- during study breaks, of course – we’d engage in the “Fun Run.” We made up t-shirts and everything. I do not want to get into details, but let’s just put it this way: on the shirts – I still have mine and it may be my most prized possession – we bastardized a line from the Rolling Stones: “Have you heard about the midnight danglers?” and printed it on the back.)

A few years later I was down in Florida and I went up to Jacksonville to see my buddy Ethan (a Williams track teammate as well) play for the Falcons against Jacksonville. That was the game that Morton Anderson missed the field goal and thus got Jacksonville into the playoffs, if I remember correctly. In any case, the night before, E and I went to Pizza Hut and when everyone saw this mammoth of a man, they asked if he played for the Jaguars or Falcons. Ethan said he was a pro wrestler. So my point is, I have good, indeed great, memories of Jacksonville. But knowing its layout, I was wary of attending a Super Bowl there without tickets.

So all of that is my explanation for why I am writing this from Odessa, Texas rather than, say, the beach house that once was Delta Vinnie. I tried to convince HNN Editor Rick Shenkman that he ought to secure me a press pass, since I’ve written articles about the Pats’ place in history (see my article "Super Bowl Patriots: A New Dynasty" after last year’s Super Bowl) and obviously Rebunk has addressed the Pats on more than a few occasions. In his cold, cold heart, he refused to entertain this stroke of brilliance. So here I am.

First off, the Patriots are going to win. They are a better team. They are not just happy to be there. They do not have a third string receiver popping off. They do not have a prima donna wide receiver playing drama queen as to his playing status. No, these Patriots generally shut up and go to work. Yeah, there was some response to Freddie Mitchell’s silliness. But on the whole it was reactive, as opposed to coming from their initiative.

Here is what I expect will happen: Owens will be at about 75%. That might get you through a game against the Dolphins. It will not get you very far against a team with New England’s ability to shut down a team’s strengths. Owens is going to get hit. He will not beat the Pats. End of story. Meanwhile Fred Ex, as Kornheiser and Wilbon have taken to calling him on PTI, is going to have to cross the middle at some point. Welcome to the Super Bowl, son! Expect to see him laid out at some point. If Harrison doesn’t get him, someone like Tedy Bruschi or Willie McGinest or Ted Johnson will. These Patriots look for disrespect and almost always manage to scrape it up, even if that is a ridiculous affectation this week, when everyone has them favored by a touchdown. Why would someone like Mitchell give them the ammo?

One of the questions is how effective Donovan McNabb can be, and if he will add another dimension to the game by his ability to run. The Pats, so the logic goes, have not faced a real running quarterback this year, and therefore they will have trouble. Here is the problem with that – a quarterback is only as serious running threat of his receivers can spread the field, thus opening up space (the Falcons, with their three-headed attack, notwithstanding). Even if theoretically the Pats secondary is a question mark, they limited the almighty Colts’ offense to 3 points. Methinks that they are not quivering about an Eagles team with a gimpy number one receiver and a starting tight end who is out of action. McNabb might gain 50 yards, but it will largely be because he is running for his life. David Akers might be their most productive player on the offensive side of the ball. Akers is the Eagles’ kicker. Enough said.

And that brings us to the Pats on offense. They have two-time Super Bowl MVP Tom Brady. They have Corey Dillon, who might be able to pick apart the Eagles’ relative defensive weakness, their run D. They have innovative play calling. They have no stars in the receiving corps, but they have six or seven guys who can take over a game. The Patriots almost always score early and score first. They will get out to a lead, they will not let up, and they will be ping-ponging poor Freddie Mitchell and company around the field all evening. Oh, and if it is close, we have Adam Vinatieri. The guy has made four of the biggest kicks in postseason history. He has gotten the game winner in two of the last three Super bowls. If the Eagles can keep it close, I’ll take our chances. If Vinatieri is coming out to tie or win, I’d say it is game-set-match.

You do not understand how uncomfortable this makes me. I am a Red Sox fan. Yes, I am also a Pats fan, a Celtics fan, a Bruins fan. But my first sports fan love comes from my almost disturbing passion for the Sox. I am not comfortable rooting for a clear favorite. It is at this point that the sky is supposed to fall. But not this time. Not this team. I know how it works. I am supposed to pick a close game. I am supposed to talk about all of the reasons why the Eagles will keep the score low, will play with more passion and more emotion, why this is a classic upset game. But I cannot. And I cannot tell you that I think the Pats will eke out a close one, 20-17 or something. The Pats have had two of the greatest and closest Super Bowl wins in the four-decade-long history of this cultural landmark. Not this time:

Patriots 35, Eagles 9.

(Postscript: Dillon will have a “better” game, but aware of history, the voters will give the MVP to Brady, who will have his typical workmanlike, nearly flawless outing.)



comments powered by Disqus

More Comments:


Derek Charles Catsam - 2/8/2005

Yup --
I should point out that a few years back, in addition to the chili dogs, a little children's book, the title of which is "That's not my puppy!" might have sealed the win for the Pats, as I read it every time there was a tnse moment. Don, Melissa and all of my other friends in DC kept the "That's Not My Puppy!" mojo going over the course of recent events.
You guys got a good one in Crennel. A very good one. let's hope he brings a lot of that Pats' mindset. I know Tom is hoping so too!
dcat


Don Graves - 2/8/2005

DC,

All I have to say is "That's not my puppy!" and Romeo Crennel.

Don


Derek Charles Catsam - 2/8/2005

David --
Oh, yeah -- the pats not very talented trops drives me nuts. And it drives me nuts largely because it allows folks like Tim Cowlishaw to claim that compared to truly great teams, the pats don't match up. Nonsense. Deion Branch not only won he MVP, but he had 10 catches in last year's game, polacing him third all-time among wide receivers. Brady, Brown, Dillon, and almost the entire defensive side of the ball -- thes eare exceptional football players and atghletes. the fact thay they subsume themselves for the team is what hurts to a degree. And yes, the eagles are comparable, albeit with slightly more visible guys. Of course TO's visibility turned them, in the mind of many in the media, to a more outlandish team than in fact they are.
I think the Bird analogy is apt. It always pissed me off when guys said Bird was not an athlete. As Bob Ryan has often said, if hand eye coordination is not athletic ability, what is?
It seems tough to be a Philly fan, but think of it in these terms -- no team from Clevelend has won anything within a decade of Tom's birth.

dc


David Lion Salmanson - 2/8/2005

I guess I'm asking more of a question about which stories dominate and the way the teams were characterized. On the field and off, there is very little difference in personality between the Eagles and Pats. Yet the Pats were always described as being marginally talented, hardworking, and brainy. You're telling me Corey Dillon is "marginally talented?" or Tom Brady has a weak arm? Meanwhile the Eagles were the supremely talented underachievers (those three losses) with mouths. All we heard about was Donovan running (he didn't and hasn't for a while) Westbrook's quickness etc. Where was the storyline about how Westbrook came from a Division II school to be a star in the show through hardwork and studying the playbook inside and out? Sigh. You think it might have to do with who the public faces of the team are (Brady and Bruschi vs. Owens, McNabb, and Trotter)? It's like the way other NBA players used to get pissed off about the way the media wrote about Bird. I remember one story. After watching Bird leap in the air at a ball as it went out of bounds, catch it, find the open man and throw it before landing out of bounds, Barkley (I believe it was) remarked, "You think that's not God-given talent, but you know some [expletive deleted] sportswriter is gonna say Bird practices that play just in case."


Derek Charles Catsam - 2/7/2005

David --
The main answer to your query comes, I think, in the very structure of the Super Bowl. Two weeks is a long time, and journalists are doing anything they can to create a strory, because two weeks of mere analysis of the game is no good for anyone. This is why everyone who plays in the Super Bowl ought to know to keep his mouth shut. Freddie Mitchell's comments were utterly innocuous. No doubt about that. But ESPN & Co, turned it into a story. They went to the Pats for commentary, and the Pats could play the disrespect card. Had Bethel Johnson gotten up and said something comparable, the dynamic would have been the same, but reversed. mitchell was dumb to let himself become a spectacle. But above all, two weeks is too damned long, and I think the game would have been a better one with only a week's layoff.
It was a great season for the Eagles, and i think they revealed themselves to be the second best team in the NFL. They gave the Pats their best game of the postseason, and I would guess that they'll be back or close to it next year.

dc


David Lion Salmanson - 2/7/2005

Yeah, I was a bit closer in the prediction, although got the wrong victor (grr.) What particularly galls me is that all week we heard the Eagles had to play perfect b/c the Patriots never make mistakes, are so smart etc., Well the Patriots looked very human but the Eagles looked positively awful. All the old enemies resurfaced, clock management, Donovan's incosistencies, Andy's tepid play calling. Blech, blech, blech.

Derek, I wonder if you would be willing to turn your analytic eye to some of the rhetoric surrounding the two teams in the lead up, particularly the way Patriots and Eagles were contrasted. I was surprised the Eagles were portrayed with so much focus on "First Down Freddie, the People's Champ" as the voice of the Eagles when all Philadelphians know he is the clubhouse joker, not the voice of the team. The team is largely built in Reid's image: no-nonsense, quiet, religious (Reid converted to LDS church), studious, boring. The most telling story that reveals the personality of these Eagles: Terrell Owens inviting other players to come pray over his ankle and they came.


Rich Holmes - 2/7/2005

Okay so I went out on a major limb with my prediction, but you have to give me some credit for being an onside kick and last-second touchdown away from it happening, even though there wasn't a snowball's chance that is how the end was going to play out. Kind of a boring game actually, but it was close so I'll take it.

I'll also take entering the Super Bowl random numbered square pool and hitting BOTH 7-7 and 4-4. Awww yeah.


E. Simon - 2/7/2005

Not a bad time, and great indeed, but I was surprised at the number of gaps in the intensity of play they let up to a team with which they were so often tied or behind, all the while with Owens barely recovering from an ACL repair. Good pacing and some intelligent plays by New England eventually won them the day.

But if a complacent win breeds further complacency, let's hope this is the beginning of some very good things for the Eagles, who played very well given everything. It wouldn't be the first time Boston's lost something great to Philly, with Benjamin Franklin's relocation setting the precedent. And we can never be thankful enough for your having taken Noam Chomsky off our hands. As for letting us steal some superbowl wins, let's hope Boston follows in that same fine tradition of letting go of a rising sun that's well-poised to bring its glory a little further south.


Derek Charles Catsam - 2/7/2005

Well, I was wrong on the blowout, right on the result. The Pats never make it easy. The Eagles were damned tough. The Pats enter the ranks of all-time greats. I'll say greatest ever given the nature of the NFL and parity with the salary cap, etc.
Not a bad time to be a Boston sports fan . . .

dc


Derek Charles Catsam - 2/6/2005

Ricardo Retardobalm--
I'll be wearing a Pats hatr (I have several, but I'll be wearing the same black one with the Flying Elvis Patriots logo that I wore the last two playoff games. I'll be wearing a Sox t-shirt as well, and yes, Sam Adams' will be in the hizzy fo shizzy. Also, in keeping with the trend begun with the thunderstick back in the first run of glory in 2001-2002, I'll be grabbing a chili dog for pre game consumption. The Pats have never lost since we began the cjhilki dog tradition. Understand -- we started this traduition with the first win of the regular season streak in 2001, carried it through the win over the Rams, revived it for the playoffs last year, and re-started it this year for the playoffs. Chili dog mojo is powerful mojo.
Go Pats!
dc


Rich Holmes - 2/6/2005

DC-
To answer your questions: Yes, there is lead paint in our house, but no, I haven't been eating the chips. (It's all been confined to one room, the one which incidentally you'll be sleeping in when you come up here if you don't stop posting this nonsense on the Internet.)

We're about 3 hours to gametime as I write this, and I know exactly what you're doing. You're sporting some type of gear for your team (but, I'd be willing to bet, something a bit ambiguous like a Bruins hat to show your allegience is to the Pats - but in a non-conforming kind of way.) Coronas? Sam Adams? Scorpion bowls at the China Diner?

It's going to be a sad day for you tomorrow as well as hundreds of people I have to live with. And basically it's based on one piece of hard evidence: all good things must come to an end, and this good thing the Patriots have been riding for the past year or so is coming to an end a few hours from now. Forget the stats, forget numbers, matchups, and injury reports, the Eagles have metaphor in there corner. (And one of the better ones.)

Tell your friends you heard it first here at Rebunk.


Derek Charles Catsam - 2/6/2005

Crazy talk. I think it is an overstatement to say there is no Pats fan presence in Jacksonville, from all I've reaqd. But yes, I guess that Philly fans are more desperate to make the trip. Bill Simmons wrote something telling on ESPN.com -- Eagles' fans are proudly wearing their NFC Champs gear. They are happy to be there.
As for the eagles' D, once you've sifted it down enough, I'll say it again -- we've pounded the best offense ever, leading into the game anyway, we beat the best defense in football. There is not a single component of the game in which the Eagles ought to eb favored. You're a good fan. You're coming up with reasons why your guy can do it. Unless any of them involve the Patriots' bus getting lost on the way to the Stadium, I think you should start coming up with your lists of why this was still a great season for the Iggs. It was. It ends tomorrow.

dc


David Lion Salmanson - 2/6/2005

Jacksonville is a sea of green, not a Pat fan in sight on any TV station. The town is awash in Eagles cheers. Rumor has it that 35,000 Eagles fans finagled tickets. Only 400 Pats fans bought tour packages. Can you say "complacent"? I knew you could.

Derek, if you had watched the Eagles this season you would know that they have the 2nd best run defense in the league once Trotter started. Throw out the 2 gimmees at the end and I don't know even know what that does to Eagles stats. You neglected to mention the Eagles best player, Westbrook, who will give the Pats fits because he lines up anywhere and can pick apart zones. The Eagles D will force turnovers early and convert. For the first time, the Pats will have to play from behind and further, will not be able to run.

And, oh yeah, I hypnotized Tom Brady 10 years ago to choke when he sees green. (okay, maybe not that last part, he was actually a nice, respectful student who always came to class and did his work. Never talked though).

The Eagles are loose, the Pats are, apparently the Pats are nowhere to be seen. Bunker mentality? Perhaps, coudl be good or could be (gag, gag).

Do the Pats even have a fight song?

My daughter is two, she can sing Fly Eagles Fly and spell E-a-g-l-e-s.

Clam chowder is nice, but cheesesteaks make you stronger, assuming they don't kill you.

Pats 21 Eagles 35


Derek Charles Catsam - 2/5/2005

A Yankees fan talking about fans hooting and hollering is akin to a midget mocking short people. In itself there is an absurd amusement, bu the content of the conversation is difficult to take seriously.

Yes, I see -- we can stop the multiple weapons of the Colts, we can stop the Steelers and their running game, but we are going to be devastated by . . . Brian Westbrook? Is there lead paint in your Burlington house? Have you been eating the chips?

dc


Rich Holmes - 2/4/2005

DC-
You're hallucinating. The Pats are not even going to win, let alone win big. I know it's been a big year for you, with your perennial loser of a team (Boston Red Sox) getting lucky, only to have half the team checkout via free agency, but come on man. You're a sensible guy. Don't let the glow of 2 measley Lombardi trophies skew your well-reasoned analysis of the big game.

Eagles 27, Pats 23

Yeah, you heard me. Like a high school team that runs the Wing-T, we're going to see the Pats be very ineffective in the redzone. We're going to see Brian Westbrook knock Bruschi & Co. on their backs play after play after play. We're going to see Belichick debuting the Manzierre. I say this because I've come to the conclusion that there cannot and never will be another dynasty for any New England sports team. Ever. New England gets to have the Celtic dynasties, but that's it. The Red Sox winning it this year was very nice, but now they are done as well. It all ends this Sunday. The constant gum-flapping and hooting and hollering I've been hearing nonstop from clowns all over these parts is coming to an end. New England will not win this game because the fans have proven they do not know how to act like fans of a championship team, unlike Yankees fans.

All I ask is that when you're at the water cooler on Monday morning, you tell your colleagues you heard it first at Rebunk.


Steven Heise - 2/4/2005

9? You couldn't at least give them a TD and a field goal, you had to go for three field goals, or a TD with a safety? C'mon, at least spot them one point, Fred Ex is worth at TD.

But, I must stick to my earlier predictions, which go against everyhing I ever stand for, (namely being wrong at picking the winners of football games) and declare that the Patriots do not lose. Though I think 28-14 is closer to the line than 35-9.

Steve