Last weekend, Tom Brady joined the most elite of NFL quarterback groups, the QBs who won four Super Bowls in their careers. Brady was the third to achieve that feat.
The other two are Terry Bradshaw and Joe Montana.
There were plenty of times in the last decade when Brady must have wondered if he would ever win his fourth Super Bowl ring. In fact, he did get a couple of opportunities in the last 10 years, but the Patriots lost both to the New York Giants.
Brady has now played in six Super Bowls, more than any other quarterback. But the gap between his most recent victory and his triumph last Sunday was almost exactly 10 years.
Ten years ago today, the Patriots took on the Philadelphia Eagles in Super Bowl XXXIX in Alltel Stadium in Jacksonville, Florida. It was New England's third appearance in four years.
The Eagles were playing in a Super Bowl for the first time in a quarter of a century. The Patriots were back after being absent from the big game the year before.
Brady had a good game, completing 23 of 33 passes for 236 yards and two touchdowns, but he wasn't named the MVP. That went to receiver Deion Branch, who caught 11 of those passes for 133 yards.
It may have been the most consistently close Super Bowl ever played. Neither team scored in the first quarter, and both teams managed to score a touchdown in the second and third quarters. Heading into the fourth quarter, it was 14–14.
The fourth quarter began with the Patriots marching downfield. The drive began at their own 34 with 3:35 left in the third quarter and concluded at the 13:49 mark of the fourth quarter with Corey Dillon scoring a touchdown from two yards out. Dillon was in his first season with the Patriots after seven fruitless years in Cincinnati, and he led all rushers in this, his only Super Bowl appearance, on this day 10 years ago.
New England padded the lead a few minutes later with Adam Vinatieri's 22–yard field goal. Nearly midway through the final period, one of the teams finally had a two–score lead, but it wouldn't last. Eagles quarterback Donovan McNabb led Philadelphia downfield for a touchdown with just under two minutes to play, and the Eagles were within a field goal of tying the game and sending it to overtime.
But New England recovered the onside kick and went on to claim its third Super Bowl title.
Dillon was on the winning side, and that is almost always where you'll find the Super Bowl MVPs. (Chuck Howley of the Dallas Cowboys took home the MVP in spite of losing Super Bowl V to the Baltimore Colts, but he is the only exception to the rule.)
That being the case, it is only natural to wonder who would have been the MVP if the Eagles had won.
McNabb is as likely a candidate as any. He completed almost as many passes as Brady did (30 of 51) for 357 yards and three touchdowns. But he also threw three interceptions, two of which came on New England's side of the field.
Try as he might, McNabb just couldn't lift the Eagles past the Patriots. They lost by three points — just as the Rams and Panthers did before them. By comparison, last Sunday's four–point win over the Seahawks was a breeze.
Actually, in the Tom Brady era, the Patriots have played in six Super Bowls, and each was decided by less than a touchdown. New England's two losses to the New York Giants were by four points or less.
Sometimes, I have been paid to write. Other times, I have been paid to help others write better. Most of the time, I guess, my writing has been for my personal benefit.
It's my passion, though. It is what has always given meaning to my existence — whether I have been paid for it or not — and it is why I have gravitated to blogging. In blogs, I can devote my passion for writing to my passion for other things.
My readers know that I also write blogs on other subjects — but, even with three blogs, I don't always write of the things about which I am truly passionate.
For instance ...
I am a football fan, and I have been a Green Bay Packers fan since I was a child. You would have thought that I would write post after post about the Packers last season. They did win the Super Bowl, after all, and it was played about 25 miles from where I sit writing this.
But if you go back and look at my posts in this blog, you won't see an excess of Packer postings.
I'm also a graduate of the University of Arkansas — but I was a Razorback fan long before I walked into my first class in Fayetteville. I didn't need to enroll in college there to be a Razorback fan. When you're brought up in Arkansas, it goes with the territory.
Sure, there have been times when I have written about the Razorbacks or the Packers, but I never wanted this blog to be solely about the Razorbacks or the Packers. I wanted it to be a little more open than that.
It's kind of the same way with my entertainment blog, although I freely admit that I do tend to use that one to write about the music, the movies, the books that have meant something to me. For example, I'm a Beatles fan, and I have been known to write about the Beatles — as a group or as individuals — from time to time.
But I do strive for some variety.
However ...
I am a football fan. And, by late July, I'm really anticipating the start of the football season. I don't think it would matter what else was happening in the world of sports — but that's sort of like trying to prove a negative, isn't it?
Let's just say that nothing so far — not the Summer Olympics nor anything else — has stolen my attention from the approach of the football season.
Right now, I suppose, it is still up for grabs whether the NFL season will be played or if it will be delayed — the team owners unanimously approved an agreement and, if the players don't do so as well, they will be seen as the obstructionists by the fans.
Never fear. Sources apparently are telling ESPN that a deal has been reached.
Now, as a Packer fan, I will always be interested in what happens to Brett Favre, and I'll always be grateful to him for what he did for the Packers. It sure was a lot more fun to watch Packer games after he came along than it was before.
But Favre is 41 now, and the most recent word from him, after an injury–plagued 2010 season in Minnesota, was that he was retiring from pro football. Now, however, comes word from The Sporting News that he might sign with Philadelphia to serve as Michael Vick's backup.
Will the drama never end?
With the season approaching, I much prefer the drama coming from the keyboard of Kevin Scarbinsky of the Birmingham (Ala.) News, who suggests that Arkansas (currently picked to finish third in the SEC West) could well be "the next Auburn."
The Razorbacks, he writes, are "a team that can leap from something like 8–5 to something like 14–0 in a single bound." That is definitely the kind of thing I like to hear.
It might have been appropriate if the New York Jets had won the AFC championship on Sunday.
Why? Well, because it was 30 years ago today that a wild card team first won a Super Bowl.
If the Jets had beaten the Steelers on Sunday, the Super Bowl would have been played between two wild–card teams. I don't think that has ever happened before.
Four other wild–card teams have won Super Bowls since the Raiders did it 30 years ago, and three of them have done so since the dawn of the 21st century.
But, even in 1980, wild cards weren't new to pro football. They had been part of the playoff landscape for a decade by the time the Oakland Raiders defeated the Philadelphia Eagles in New Orleans on Jan. 25, 1981. And a wild card made it to the Super Bowl for the first time five years later.
But until this day 30 years ago, no wild card team had ever won a Super Bowl. The Dallas Cowboys came close back in Super Bowl X (which was also played in New Orleans), but they eventually lost to the Pittsburgh Steelers.
What seemed to surprise people the most about the Super Bowl that was played 30 years ago today was not necessarily the fact that the wild card won it — although that was surprising.
It was the relative ease with which the Raiders cruised to a 14–0 lead at the end of the first quarter — and ultimately prevailed, 27–10. When you consider who they were playing, that was positively stunning.
The Eagles had been one of the NFL's elite teams in the 1980 season, racing to an 11–1 start. Ron Jaworski was the top–ranked quarterback in the NFC. The Eagle defense kept all its opponents from scoring more than 24 points (and held most of their foes under 20) until Dallas scored 35 against Philly on the final day of the regular season.
The Raiders, on the other hand, caught just about everyone by surprise. They had made a lot of changes during the offseason, and I think most observers just wanted to wait and see how all the new parts would function together. They got off to kind of a sluggish start (2–3) and had to deal with the loss of their starting quarterback to a broken leg, but then Jim Plunkett came in, the Raiders won six in a row, and Oakland actually finished tied with San Diego atop their division.
But San Diego was awarded the division crown on a tiebreaker — which meant that, when the teams played for the AFC title, the game was played in San Diego. When they played there in the second week of the season, the Raiders lost in overtime. When the AFC title was on the line, however, Oakland surged to a 21–7 lead in the first quarter and never looked back.
It was more of the same two weeks later when the Raiders and Eagles faced each other in the Super Bowl.
The Eagles came into the game favored by three points. That surprised me because I really felt that most people believed the Eagles would win by a wider margin.
But that, of course, was not what happened.
When the game was over, everyone praised the Raiders' performance — and the Raiders did deserve that praise — but I recall less attention being given to what may well have been Jaworski's worst performance as a pro.
It was certainly his worst performance on a postseason stage. He completed fewer than half of his passes and was intercepted three times.
And by the time he threw his only touchdown pass in a Super Bowl, the Raiders had built a 24–3 fourth–quarter lead.
It was the greatest defeat, I have no doubt, of Jaworski's career.
But the flip side was that it must have been the pinnacles of the careers of the many castoffs whose careers were revived by Al Davis. The Raiders' bombastic owner picked up guys like Plunkett, Kenny King, John Matuszak and many others who asked only to be given a chance to prove that they could still contribute.
Plunkett threw three touchdown passes — two to Cliff Branch and one to King that covered 80 yards, a record that still stands. He was named the game's MVP.
What became of the team that cut Plunkett earlier in 1980? Well, I guess you could say they did all right.
That would be the San Francisco 49ers, An up–and–coming quarterback named Joe Montana emerged as their quarterback in 1980 and wound up taking San Francisco to — and winning — four Super Bowls in the '80s — starting the next year.
It is ironic, I suppose, that the Green Bay Packers and Philadelphia Eagles will meet in the first round of the playoffs this afternoon.
Those with little appreciation for NFL history may only realize that it is a rematch of the season opener, but, as Gary D'Amato of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel writes, neither team is really the same as it was back in September.
It was also a little more than 50 years ago — on Dec. 26, 1960 — that the two teams played for the NFL championship. Sports Illustrated called that game one of the greatest moments in Philadelphia history.
It was also the only championship game Vince Lombardi ever lost.
If a football fan from 2011 could be transported back to that time, he might find little about the game that he would recognize. It is safe to say that things were different half a century ago.
That game was played in the same city — Philadelphia — as today's game will be, but it won't be played in the same stadium.
The place where the 1960 title game was played — Franklin Field — still stands, as it has for more than 100 years. The University of Pennsylvania plays its football games there, as it did then, but no professional football team has called Franklin Field home since the 1970s.
The teams that met on Franklin Field in 1960 looked very different than the teams that will face each other on Lincoln Financial Field today. Their recent histories are different, too. The Eagles and Packers of 1960 were making their first postseason appearances in more than a decade while their counterparts in 2010–11 are fixtures in the playoffs.
In 1960, of course, the nation was on the brink of political and societal upheaval that no one could anticipate. For that matter, the NFL was about to embark on a decade of change that would bring serious competition from the upstart American Football League and lead, ultimately, to first the expansion of the NFL's playoff field followed by the establishment of a Super Bowl to crown an overall champion and, eventually, the merging of the leagues.
That was still in the future in 1960, though. In 1960, things were still being done the way they had almost always been done in the NFL. The two conference winners in the NFL, the Packers and the Eagles, advanced to face each other in the championship game.
The Sunday on which the game would have been played was Christmas Day, and the NFL did not want to play a game on Christmas Day so it was played instead on Monday, Dec. 26.
Franklin Field did not have lights in those days so the game began at high noon Philadelphia time. Television wasn't as prevalent as it has become, and the phenomenon of night games was still years away. For that matter, Monday Night Football didn't come along for another decade.
The underdog Eagles trailed, 6–0, thanks to two Don Chandler field goals, then took the lead at halftime on a Norm Van Brocklin–to–Tommy MacDonald touchdown pass and a Bobby Walston field goal.
The Packers retook the lead on a Bart Starr–to–Max McGee touchdown pass in the fourth quarter, then the Eagles took the lead for good on a touchdown run by Ted Dean.
The Packers, who outgained the Eagles by more than 100 yards, weren't done. With time running out, Philly's Chuck Bednarik tackled Green Bay's Jim Taylor just short of the goal line to preserve a 17–13 win.
The Eagles have been to a couple of Super Bowls in the half century that has passed, but they have never finished a football season as undisputed champions since that day.
This will only be the second time the Eagles and Packers have faced each other in the playoffs. The teams did not meet in the postseason again until January 2004, when Philadelphia beat Green Bay, 20–17 in the divisional playoffs. That game, too, was played in Philadelphia.
History suggests it will be a close game, but I'm inclined to think it may be high scoring. This afternoon, I have no doubt that Green Bay's Aaron Rodgers and Philadelphia's Michael Vick, who are probably the best two quarterbacks still standing in the NFC, will combine for more than the 30 points that the Eagles and Packers put on the board back in 1960 — or the 37 points they produced seven years ago.
As I have mentioned here before, I admire the writing of Sports Illustrated's Peter King. He writes very insightful articles about pro football, and he asked an intriguing question in his preview of this weekend's wild–card games:
"When's the last time you recall all four wild–card games being so competitive you wouldn't be surprised to see the road team win any one?" He then proceeds to pick the road teams in two of this weekend's games. I'm with King on that one. In fact, as you will soon see, I have picked three of the four road teams to win this weekend.
Personally, I have often felt that home field was overrated, and King kind of affirms that in his piece. "Two roadies won last year," he writes, "and three won in 2005. This year, I don't care what Vegas says. It's even–steven across the board entering the weekend."
The New York Giants won the Super Bowl two years ago after beating Tampa Bay, Dallas and Green Bay on the road in the NFC playoffs. In 2005, the Pittsburgh Steelers became the first team in two decades to win three road games en route to the Super Bowl (which they also won).
In fact, I have wondered if the practice of giving a first–round bye to the big winners during the regular season hasn't been a detriment, not a benefit. Consider the recent teams that have advanced to the Super Bowl (whether they won or lost) in spite of having to play in the first round: Arizona had to play on wild–card weekend last year. As mentioned previously, the Giants were a wild card two years ago and won it all. So did the Indianapolis Colts, who were not a wild card but had to play one in January 2007. I mentioned the 2005 Steelers. Carolina played in the wild–card weekend following the 2003 season. The 2001 Ravens had to play in the first round. So did the 1999 Tennessee Titans.
Seven of the last 10 Super Bowls have featured a team that did not get a first–round bye. Four of those seven were won by the team that didn't get the bye week. When you consider that four teams get a first–round bye every season, and they get that bye because they are one of the top two winningest teams in the conference, it logically follows that they probably went into the playoffs among the favorites to at least play in the Super Bowl, if not win it all.
That means that, in the last 10 years alone, at least 16 teams that probably were considered one of the favorites to win a Super Bowl did not, and at least 28 teams that were favored to at least play in a Super Bowl did not.
Why do I believe having to play in a wild–card game is not the kiss of death that many seem to think it is? Because I believe a bye week at this stage of the season is useful only if a team is banged up and needs a little extra time to get over its bumps and bruises.
If the team is in fairly good health, my thinking has been that a bye takes a team out of its rhythm. It retards a team's momentum. And I believe New Orleans and Indianapolis, who rested their starters when there was nothing left to play for, may pay a price for doing the smart thing and protecting their top producers.
But that's a subject to be addressed as we go deeper into the playoffs.
TODAY
New York Jets (9–7) at Cincinnati (10–6) — Of the three playoff games that are rematches of games played last week, this one seems to be the most likely to produce a duplicate result. By the time last Sunday's game between the Jets and the Bengals began, the results of all the other games were known, and the Bengals had nothing to play for. The Jets did, and it showed in the final score — a 37–0 triumph. The game provides an intriguing contrast. When the season began, the Bengals had the hot hand, winning seven of their first 10 games. But, at season's end, the Jets were the hot team, winning five of their last six. Since Thanksgiving, Cincinnati lost to three playoff teams and only managed wins over Detroit and Kansas City. The last time the teams played in Cincinnati was on Oct. 21, 2007. The Bengals prevailed, 38–31, but the Jets have won two in a row at home against the Bengals since then. Can they win at Cincinnati for the first time since September 1997? I think they will.
Philadelphia (11–5) at Dallas (11–5) — As members of the same division, these two teams are familiar foes. They play each other twice a year, and they just played at Cowboys Stadium last Sunday. In that game, Dallas won, 24–0, giving the Cowboys two victories over the Eagles during the regular season. Now they must try to make it three victories, which is a difficult task. And the Cowboys need look no further than their own postseason experience for examples of just how hard it can be. Two years ago — the last time Dallas was in the playoffs — the Cowboys faced the New York Giants in the playoffs after beating them twice during the regular season. The Giants won, 21–17, and went on to the Super Bowl, where they upset the previously unbeaten New England Patriots. And, in 1998, the Cowboys beat the Arizona Cardinals (who were in their division at the time) twice during the regular season, then lost to the Cardinals in the playoffs, 20–7. Until this season, there was considerable talk about the Cowboys' "December jinx," although that talk seems to have been dispelled by Dallas' 3–2 record last month (including a victory over previously unbeaten New Orleans). Nevertheless, some folks in Dallas will remind you that the Cowboys haven't won a playoff game in more than 10 years. I predict the Eagles, who had won six in a row before tumbling against Dallas last Sunday, will bounce back and win the game.
SUNDAY
Baltimore (9–7) at New England (10–6) — The way I see it, there are three things to keep in mind in this game. First: Location, location, location. The Patriots have been absolutely awful on the road, which is where they will have to play next week if they beat Baltimore. But, against the Ravens, New England is playing at home, where the Pats are 8–0. Baltimore, meanwhile, is 3–5 on the road, and the Ravens lost at New England earlier in the season, 27–21. So, on the basis of location, the Pats should be favored. Second: Statistics. The Patriots are third in the NFL in total offense (the Ravens are 13th) and pass offense (the Ravens are 18th). Baltimore does have the advantage in rushing offense, ranking fifth in the NFL while the Patriots are 12th. Baltimore has the edge in team defense (third in the NFL, compared to 11th for New England), passing defense (eighth in the NFL while New England is 12th) and rushing defense (fifth in the NFL; Patriots are 13th). New England's margin on offense is more pronounced than Baltimore's is on defense — although, if Baltimore has the lead late in the game and needs to run the ball to control the clock, the Ravens seem to be in a better position to do so than the Patriots. That doesn't seem likely to me, though, so I'll give the edge to New England. Third: Postseason experience. It can be argued that today's Ravens have more recent postseason experience than the Patriots. New England, after all, did not qualify for the playoffs last year while Baltimore, in spite of being the sixth seed, defeated Miami and Tennessee on the road and stayed within striking distance of Pittsburgh in the first half of the AFC title game. Will the weather be a factor? Well, it's expected to be cold (predicted high of 24°) and windy (the wind chill could be as low as -1°) but sunny. That's a little colder than it is expected to be in Baltimore tomorrow (28°, sunny, not as windy). The Ravens may notice the weather, but I doubt they will be affected by it. I think they are more likely to be affected by the atmosphere. History has shown that it is very tough for the visiting team to win at New England, especially in the playoffs, and I'll give the home team the edge in this one.
Green Bay (11–5) at Arizona (10–6) — Pat Kirwan of NFL.com says the key to this game is the ability to get to the quarterback, and he may have a point. Green Bay QB Aaron Rodgers did get sacked 50 times this season, and he was sacked more than twice as often in games the Packers lost. But bear in mind that Green Bay's defense appears to be better than Arizona's. The Packers have the best team defense in the NFC and the best run defense in the NFL. And, while the Green Bay pass defense is ranked second in the NFC, Arizona's is ranked 11th. Add to that the fact that Green Bay has beaten Arizona severely twice this year — once was in the third week of the preseason, so it didn't count in the standings, and the other was last weekend. This is the playoffs, and the Cardinals may have Anquan Boldin back from injury — although NFL.com suggests that it is unlikely he will play. Apparently, he's still hobbling around, but he's a factor whenever he is in the lineup. I think the game will be closer this time, but I'll stick with the Packers, who are probably the hottest team on the NFC side of the playoffs.
So, if my predictions are correct, next week's playoffs will be:
In the NFC, Green Bay will play Minnesota for the third time this season, and Philadelphia will travel to New Orleans in a rematch of their Week 2 meeting.
In the AFC, the top–seeded Indianapolis Colts will play host to the New York Jets, who handed them their first loss of the season a couple of weeks ago, and San Diego will play host to New England in what would be the first postseason game that is not a rematch of a regular–season contest.
You might say the Eagles have been down this road before. After he discredited himself in San Francisco, Terrell Owens was given a second chance by the Eagles. He helped Philadelphia finally get to a Super Bowl, but he turned out to be the same clubhouse poison he had been with the 49ers and he moved on to Dallas, where the pattern was repeated and he now finds himself playing for the Buffalo Bills.
Vick, who spent nearly two years in prison after his conviction on felony dogfighting charges, doesn't seem to be the same sort of person that Owens was. He doesn't strike me as a cancerous influence on the team, but it remains to be seen if two years away from the game have robbed him of the talents that impressed pro football fans.
Like Owens, Vick was the beneficiary of the generosity of quarterback Donovan McNabb. And, in many ways, it seems to me McNabb is being even more generous this time. Owens stabbed him in the back when he left the Eagles as his "thank you" — a pattern he repeated when he left Dallas.
McNabb could hardly be blamed for being hesitant to go out on another limb, but he isn't that sort of guy.
For that matter, Vick isn't the same kind of guy as Owens.
Vick seems more humble and, even though he plays the same position as McNabb, he says that "I fully understand that playing football in the NFL is a privilege, not a right, and I am truly thankful for [the] opportunity I have been given."
He won't be allowed to play in regular season games until October. but he says he isn't concerned about playing time right now. And that is probably just fine with McNabb, who, at 32, presumably realizes that age and recent injuries are catching up to him and his career in pro football is finite. Vick, 29, is not that much younger than McNabb, but if his skills are not diminished and he demonstrates that he truly wants to make the most of his second chance, he will be positioned to take over when McNabb's days with the Eagles are finished.
But Tucker's colleague, SI's Peter King, feels Vick and the Eagles are a near–perfect match, but not everyone in Philadelphia is sold.
"Philadelphia is a city of dog lovers and, most particularly, pit bull lovers," Susan Cosby, the Pennsylvania Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals' chief executive officer, said. "To root for someone who participated in the hanging, drowning, electrocution and shooting of dogs will be impossible for many, no matter how much we would all like to see the Eagles go all the way."
If Vick is wise, he will use the first month of the regular season to work to win over those who see him not as a talented football player but as an animal abuser.
Well, persuading the doubters always was going to be a significant part of his rehabilitation no matter where he went.
This was the play that won last year's Super Bowl.
On Sunday, we will find out which two teams will be playing in this year's Super Bowl.
One thing we know for sure is the survivors of the conference championship games will not be the teams who met in last year's Super Bowl. The New England Patriots did not qualify for the playoffs, and the New York Giants lost to Philadelphia last weekend.
With the frigid, snowy weather the northern portion of the United States has been experiencing, it's only natural for fans to wonder what kind of impact the weather will have on the games.
The weather should not be a problem in Arizona, where the current forecasts call for sunny conditions and temperatures in the mid-70s Sunday afternoon. But the NFL might wish it had reversed its schedule and permitted the Steelers and Ravens to play in the afternoon instead of the evening. Snow is a 50% possibility in Pittsburgh on Sunday afternoon and evening, but, obviously, it will be warmer during the day (predicted high near 27°) than it will be after the sun goes down (the predicted low for Sunday night is 14°).
NFC Championship Philadelphia (9-6-1) at Arizona (9-7-0) 3 p.m. (EST), FOX
They say defense wins championships. If that is so, the Eagles may emerge from the showdown with Arizona as the NFC's representative in the Super Bowl.
But first, let's take a brief look at the offenses.
The offensive statistics appear pretty even. However, the Cardinals have a statistical advantage at quarterback. Arizona's Kurt Warner led the NFC in QB rating (96.9) while Philadelphia's Donovan McNabb was 10th in the NFC in that category (86.4). Warner also led the NFC in completion percentage (67.1%) while McNabb was ninth (60.4%).
McNabb managed to finish fourth in the league in passing yards (3,916), although he still trailed Warner (4,583). And Warner accounted for more passing TDs than McNabb did, 30-23. It's worth pointing out, though, that McNabb's longest pass completion (90 yards) exceeded Warner's longest (79).
But, when you think about it, it probably isn't too difficult for Warner to excel when he has receivers like Larry Fitzgerald (NFC's leader in receiving yardage with 1,431, tied for first in receiving TDs with 12, league leader in receptions with 96), Anquan Boldin (ninth in the NFC in receiving yardage with 1,038, third in receiving TDs with 11, second in receptions with 89) and Steve Breaston (11th in the NFC in receiving yardage with 1,006, 12th in receptions with 77) as targets.
As far as interceptions were concerned, the two were fairly even. Warner threw 14, McNabb threw 11.
Sixteen running backs in the NFL ran for at least 1,000 yards this season, but none played for the Cardinals or the Eagles. In fact, no 1,000-yard rusher remains in the playoffs following the elimination last weekend of the Giants, Panthers, Chargers and Titans, all of whom did have running backs who cracked the 1,000-yard barrier. Of the running backs who are still playing, Brian Westbrook of the Eagles came the closest to 1,000, with 936 yards. Arizona's top rusher was Edgerrin James with 514 yards.
Turning our attention to defense, the Eagles may be one of the few teams in the NFL that can travel to Arizona with the confidence to shut down the Cardinals' passing game.
During the regular season, Philadelphia held opposing QBs to a 54.1% completion rate while restricting those signal-callers to a 72.9 passer rating — and the Eagles had to face Eli Manning and Tony Romo twice, not to mention a game against Pittsburgh's Ben Roethlisberger.
The Eagles routinely held teams under 200 yards passing, giving up an average of about 182 yards/game. And the Eagles' foes averaged about 18 points per game, while the Cardinals gave up nearly 27 points per game.
Clark Judge of CBS Sports observes that the Eagles are on the brink of a trip to the Super Bowl for the fifth time in eight years and suggests that this time "it's more satisfying," given the obstacles he's had to overcome.
When the Eagles faced the Cardinals on Thanksgiving night, Philadelphia picked off Warner three times en route to a 48-20 victory.
I don't think it will be that high scoring again, but I think the same team will prevail.
My prediction: Philadelphia 21, Arizona 17.
AFC Championship Baltimore (11-5-0) at Pittsburgh (12-4-0) 6:30 p.m. (EST), CBS
This may seem almost sacrilegious to Pittsburgh fans, but, at the quarterback position, I see almost no daylight between Roethlisberger and Baltimore's first-year phenom from Delaware, Joe Flacco.
Flacco was 10th in the AFC in QB rating (80.3) while Roethlisberger was 12th (80.1). Roethlisberger did outgain Flacco through the air, 3,301 yards to 2,971, and passed for more TDs, 17 to 14.
Flacco's completion percentage was slightly better than Roethlisberger's, 60.0% to 59.9%, and Flacco did a slightly better job of avoiding interceptions, throwing 12 picks to Big Ben's 15.
But Roethlisberger may have more potent weapons for receivers in Hines Ward (seventh in the AFC with 1,043 yards, tied for sixth in TDs with seven, ninth in receptions with 81) and Santonio Holmes (821 receiving yards, tied for 15th in TDs with five). Flacco's top receiver was Derrick Mason (eighth in the AFC in receiving yards with 1,037, tied for 15th in TDs with five, 10th in receptions with 80).
Like their NFC counterparts, the Steelers and Ravens do not bring 1,000-yard rushers into the AFC championship game, but the Ravens' Le'Ron McClain was eighth in the league in rushing with 902 yards and Willis McGahee contributed 671 yards. Pittsburgh's top rusher was Willie Parker with 791 yards and Mewelde Moore chipped in 588.
The Ravens did a slightly better job of scoring than the Steelers did this season, averaging 24.1 points per game to 21.7 points per game, but that edge appears to be offset by Pittsburgh's performance on defense. The Steelers yielded only 13.9 points per game while the Ravens allowed 15.3.
Both quarterbacks may be able to throw the ball efficiently, provided the weather doesn't play a significant role. Baltimore allowed opposing QBs to complete 60.6% of their passes while the Steelers permitted a 63.4% completion rate. And the Ravens picked off 26 passes while the Steelers intercepted 20. Neither team allowed opposing QBs to throw for over 300 yards at any time this season. But the Steelers only permitted 156.9 passing yards per game while the Ravens allowed 179.7.
And both defenses kept opponents from gaining four yards per carry or better. Baltimore gave up 3.6 yards per carry while Pittsburgh allowed 3.3.
Jamison Hensley of the Baltimore Sun says "Bring on the Steelers," but I say, be careful what you wish for. During the regular season, Pittsburgh edged Baltimore in Pittsburgh, 23-20, then won the rematch in Baltimore, 13-9. I think the Steelers will make it a three-game sweep.
No matter which teams you were pulling for in the NFL playoffs yesterday and today, it was truly an astonishing weekend.
Things got started yesterday with the Baltimore Ravens' hard-fought 13-10 win over the Tennessee Titans and continued with the Arizona Cardinals' comparatively easy 33-13 triumph over the Carolina Panthers.
Then, today, the Philadelphia Eagles eliminated the defending Super Bowl champion New York Giants, 23-11, and the Pittsburgh Steelers outlasted the San Diego Chargers, 35-24.
So, next Sunday, Baltimore will travel to Pittsburgh and Philadelphia will travel to Arizona. The winners of those games will meet in Super Bowl XLIII three weeks from today.
All four of this weekend's games were rematches from the regular season. That hasn't happened in nearly 40 years.
And the AFC and NFC title games also will be rematches from the regular season.
Baltimore and Pittsburgh compete in the same division, so naturally they have faced each other during the regular season. The Steelers beat the Ravens in Pittsburgh back on Sept. 29, 23-20, and then won the game in Baltimore on Dec. 14, 13-9, so the Steelers will be trying to pull off a three-game sweep. As the scores of the earlier games indicate, it won't be easy.
The Eagles and Cardinals played each other in Philadelphia on Thanksgiving night, and the Eagles won, 48-20. There was a time when the Eagles and Cardinals were in the same division, but that was back when the Cardinals called St. Louis their home. Now, the Cardinals play their home games in Arizona and they compete in a different division. But, as the division winners (whereas the Eagles are a wild-card team), the Cardinals will get the home field advantage.
Much will be said about these matchups in the coming week.
My initial thought, however, was this: This must seem like redemption to Donovan McNabb, who endured booing by the fans and benching by his coach only to come back and lead the Eagles to a fifth NFC championship game. Whether he goes to the Super Bowl or not, he has the satisfaction of knowing that he made the clutch plays while the Giants' quarterback, Eli Manning, did not.
Peter King of Sports Illustrated — a sportswriter for whom I have a great deal of respect — points out that this weekend's playoff games are all rematches of regular-season encounters.
And each one was a "barnburner," King says.
"Philadelphia beat New York by six, New York beat Philly by five, Carolina beat Arizona by four, Tennessee beat Baltimore by three, Pittsburgh beat San Diego by one," he observes. "Wow. You can't make this stuff up."
No, you can't.
Only the outcome of one of the four playoff games is guaranteed to be a reversal of a regular-season game — the Philadelphia-New York game. Those teams play in the same division, which means they face each other twice during the regular season.
As King notes in his column, the Giants and Eagles split their games during the season. So what is to be gleaned from that? Well, the visiting team was the winner in both instances. If that trend continues, that means the Eagles will prevail over the defending Super Bowl champions.
That may turn out to be the relevant factor. The Eagles were very hot at the end of the season, going 4-1 in their last five games. And one of those wins was a 20-14 victory over the Giants at the Meadowlands.
The Giants, meanwhile, sort of staggered to the finish line, going 2-3 in the same stretch.
The Giants still won the NFC East, with a 12-4 record. The Eagles took a wild-card spot with an 8-7-1 record, including a much-maligned tie with Cincinnati that many observers believed would keep them out of the playoffs.
Nevertheless, the Eagles made it to the playoffs, beat the Minnesota Vikings, and should be very confident when they take the field Sunday against the Giants, having won five of their last six games.
Do the statistics support the suggestion that the Eagles will advance to the NFC title game and face either Carolina or Arizona?
Well, neither team seems to have an advantage at quarterback. Philadelphia's Donovan McNabb and New York's Eli Manning both have ratings of 86.4.
McNabb threw for 3,916 yards and 23 touchdowns during the regular season. In his 10-year career, that's the highest yardage total he has compiled and his third-highest TD total. He threw for 300 yards or more four times this season, but came up just short of 200 yards in each of the games with New York.
Manning's NFL career has been half as long as McNabb's, and neither his yardage total (3,238) nor TD total (21) represented his best efforts. But Manning threw only 10 interceptions (his lowest total since his rookie year, when he only played in nine games). He failed to throw for more than 200 yards in either of his previous encounters with the Eagles.
Both teams appear to have spread the ball around in the passing game. Rookie DeSean Jackson led the Eagles with 912 yards on 62 receptions and scored two TDs. Brian Westbrook led the team in receiving TDs with five — one came at New York on Dec. 7.
For the Giants, second-year receiver Kevin Boss led the team in receiving TDs with six, one of which came against Philly on Nov. 9. He had 33 catches during the season for 384 yards. Steve Smith led the team in receptions with 57, accounting for 574 yards and one TD.
The Giants seem to have the edge in the ground game. Both Brandon Jacobs and Derrick Ward ran for more than 1,000 yards, while the Eagles' leading rusher, Westbrook, accounted for 936 yards. However, when you combine his rushing and receiving yards, Westbrook accounted for 1,000 yards for the fifth consecutive season.
Jacobs was third in the NFC in rushing TDs (15), and he got two of them at Philadelphia in November, but Ward got into the end zone twice. Westbrook, meanwhile, scored nine TDs, one of them at New York on Dec. 7. For both Jacobs and Westbrook, those are career high TD totals.
But Jacobs has been hobbled by injury in recent weeks. The Giants have to hope that having some time off since the last regular-season game will help him get back to normal.
On defense, things look fairly even in the sack department. Justin Tuck (12.0) and Mathias Kiwanuka (8.5) were New York's top producers in that category; Darren Howard (10.0) and Trent Cole (9.0) set the pace for Philadelphia.
Putting additional pressure on the quarterbacks are Eagles cornerback Asante Samuel, who picked off four passes this season, and safety Quintin Mikell, who intercepted three passes. Giants safety James Butler, second-year cornerback Aaron Ross and cornerback Corey Webster had three interceptions each.
Second-year linebacker Stewart Bradley led the Eagles in tackles with 108. Antonio Pierce was the best tackler for the Giants with 94.
The Giants-Eagles game may well be the best playoff matchup of the weekend, although, as King observed, all four games are rematches so they should all be reasonably familiar with each other.
Bob Glauber of Newsday says the Eagles look like last year's Giants team that, as a wild-card team, won three straight road games and then beat the previously unbeaten New England Patriots in the Super Bowl.
But Gary Myers of the New York Daily News is adamant that the Eagles will not beat the Giants on Sunday.
The Giants "take the Birds seriously," Myers writes. But, he insists, "The Eagles come flying into Giants Stadium but will pack up their season and leave by bus."
A "tomato can" is a fighter who is believed to be past his prime and an "easy" or "guaranteed" win for an up-and-coming fighter who wants to pad his record.
Sometimes, though, the "tomato can" doesn't cooperate. For example, in 1990, undefeated heavyweight champion Mike Tyson lost the title to a 42-to-1 underdog named Buster Douglas.
Another heavyweight champion, Muhammad Ali, almost lost his title to lightly regarded Chuck Wepner in 1975. Wepner nearly went the distance against Ali and inspired the original "Rocky" movie.
I got my bachelor's degree in journalism from the University of Arkansas, and I got my master's degree in journalism from the University of North Texas. Most of my adult life has been dedicated to writing and editing in one form or another. Most recently I have taught writing (news and developmental) as an adjunct journalism professor at Richland College, where I advise the student newspaper staff. Go, Thunderducks!
