That Was a Boneheaded Call

---

---

Sunday's Super Bowl had no real attraction for me — which is ironic, I suppose, since the overnight numbers indicate that it was the highest–rated Super Bowl ever. Obviously, it had an attraction for some people.

But I was a disinterested observer, watching only because there really was nothing else to watch. That is one of the things I remember from my days on the sports copy desk. Super Bowl Sunday was all about the Super Bowl. There might be a few basketball games earlier in the day, but they were just to fill the time. Once the Super Bowl began, nothing else was happening.

I also discovered that nothing competes with the Super Bowl on TV, either. Maybe there was a time in the last 50 years when the networks tried to compete with whichever one had the broadcast rights, but they must have learned quickly that was pointless. People throw parties on Super Bowl Sunday. You can't compete with that.

Once video recorders became a part of American households, it was possible to have quality options. Before that, though, it was the Super Bowl or nothing. On the sports desk, ever mindful of our deadlines, we kept one eye on the game and the other eye on the clock.

I stopped working on sports desks several years ago, and Super Bowl Sunday means something entirely different to me now. Sometimes the Super Bowl has had great meaning for me — like when the Green Bay Packers are playing in it. Most of the time, though, to borrow an expression I heard often when I was growing up, I haven't had a dog in that hunt.

That was the situation in which I found myself Sunday. I didn't really care for either team so I was able to watch with a complete sense of detachment. Being a Packer fan, my attitude would have been entirely different if the Packers had beaten the Seahawks in the NFC championship game. But they didn't so I was free to be just a football fan. That was kind of nice. It meant I could second–guess strategy — which I guess I can do anyway, but it is different when the Packers are playing. I always feel like I am being disloyal if I second–guess the coach's strategy. After all, he works with the players every day. He knows their strengths and weaknesses better than I do — even though I like to tell myself that I know those things, too.

When I have no emotional stake in the outcome, it is easier in some ways to watch the game and more difficult in others.

But I don't have a problem with calling 'em the way I see 'em — and that was a boneheaded call by Seattle's Pete Carroll.

One yard from the end zone. Seattle needed a touchdown to win the game. Carroll has, perhaps, the most punishing running back in the NFL today on his roster, a man who is certainly capable of picking up a single yard. And if he doesn't get it, you've still got time and a timeout to use. You can try again.

Sure, it's playing the odds. Sure, it's predictable. It's even boring — except that it probably would have worked. The Seahawks had the top–rated rushing game in the NFL this season. New England had the ninth–best run defense in the entire NFL — good but not great. How can it be great when the New York Jets were rated ahead of the Patriots in run defense?

Fact is, the Patriots were worse against the pass than they were against the run. They ranked 17th in the NFL. But when you're talking about the passing game, New England's pass defense has the edge against Seattle's pass offense, which ranked 27th in the entire NFL.

"You dance with who brung you," Darrell Royal used to say. The Seahawks relinquished their NFL title because they forgot to dance with who brung 'em.

Lombardi's Centennial

---

---

Today is a special day for Green Bay Packers fans like myself.

It would have been the 100th birthday of Vince Lombardi.

I barely remember watching Lombardi coach the Packers to victory in Super Bowl II. My family had just gotten its first TV set a few months earlier — black and white (color TV was way out of my parents' budget in those days) — and my mind still houses memories of seeing the Packers play on TV in those days.

Granted, those memories are kind of like those scratchy black–and–white newsreels that you see from time to time on documentaries, but that's where my lifelong support for the Packers was born.

My father was a college professor when I was growing up, and sometimes he spent the summers taking advanced education courses at other schools. One year — probably a year or two after Lombardi left the Packers' sideline — Dad spent about six weeks in Wisconsin. When he came home, he brought back a copy of the Packers' yearbook for that season for me. It was my most cherished possession for the next couple of years — until it literally fell apart.

Lombardi is an iconic figure for lots of people. In Green Bay, they call him St. Vince, the only Packer coach (so far) to win back–to–back Super Bowls. One other coach did take the Packers to consecutive Super Bowls, but he didn't win both.

I suppose when (if) another coach duplicates Lombardi's achievement, he will be elevated to sainthood in Green Bay. Until that happens, though, Lombardi stands alone.

I have vague memories of watching Lombardi in his one and only season of coaching the Washington Redskins in 1969, but the Redskins hadn't been good for a long time, and they didn't get too much TV coverage in those days (as I recall). Lombardi's presence raised the interest level, though, and he did wind up coaching the Redskins to a winning season.

He probably would have accomplished even greater things in the years ahead, but he was diagnosed with cancer in the summer of 1970 and died before the next season began.

---

---

I remember when he died in September 1970. The memory is linked to a childhood memory.

My father had been away at another advanced education course (at Northwestern, as I recall), and he was due to return by air on a Wednesday so Mom, my brother, some friends of the family and I piled into the family car and drove to Little Rock to pick him up.

As we drove to the airport, we had the car radio on. On the newscast, I heard reports that Lombardi was near death.

When we arrived at the airport, we were told that Dad had been delayed several hours. I don't remember why. Perhaps there were problems with the plane. Maybe he missed his flight and had to take a later one.

Whatever the reason was, my mother consulted with the family friends and decided to go home, have dinner and drive back to the airport when Dad's flight was due to arrive. That's what we did.

As we drove back to the airport that night, I remember staring out the windows of the car at a relatively starry sky and hearing another radio report that said Lombardi was likely to die within hours.

We greeted Dad's plane and drove home. I don't remember hearing the radio on the return trip. The adults were too busy talking, and the radio would have interfered.

But the next morning, when I got up, I remember going into the living room where my father was having his breakfast in front of the TV, which was reporting that Lombardi had died a few minutes earlier. I felt a depth of loss that I have rarely felt in my life. He was 57 years old.

And today he would have been 100. Most people don't live to 100; even fewer of Lombardi's generation have done so, and I sincerely doubt that, had cancer not ended his life, he would still be alive today.

But the 100th anniversary of his birth is a good occasion for reflecting on his life and times.

Bubba Smith Dies

---

---

Hearing the news today that Bubba Smith is dead brought back a childhood memory.

And it isn't a memory of his role in the "Police Academy" movies — which, actually, came along after I graduated from college.

The Associated Press quoted authorities as saying the death did not appear to be suspicious, but the cause is not yet known. Smith was 66.

When I was a child, Smith may have been the most feared defensive player in football. At 6'7" and 265 pounds, he was often the example that was cited whenever someone wanted to make the most extreme comparison someone could make regarding size (i.e., "He's as big as Bubba Smith").

Those are impressive numbers today, but even a casual football fan could probably name, off the top of his head, several current players who are both taller and heavier. Size and talent do not always go hand in hand, and not all of them would be All–Pro players, but Smith was.

Don't get me wrong. Size has always been important in football, but before Smith came along, teams actively sought more of a balance between athleticism and size in their linemen.

Smith played in something of a transitional period. He was a blend of immovable object and irresistible force when more and more linemen — on both sides of the ball — were content simply to be immovable objects.

My childhood memory is of something of an offhand joke that my father made when I was in my football card collector period. One afternoon, I had purchased a couple of packs of football cards (I guess I would have been about 9 or 10).

I opened them in the car on the way home, and a card of Bubba Smith was in one of them. I told my father.

"I got Bubba Smith!" I exclaimed (or something similar).

"Do you get two cards for him?" my father asked and chuckled at his own joke.

You had to be crafty to play the line in those days. You couldn't just get away with being big. You had to be clever. And you had to have a lot of confidence in yourself.

I was reminded today of a great story about Smith from back in the days when the college all–stars played the defending Super Bowl champs in the game that kicked off the NFL's preseason schedule.

As an All–American at Michigan State, Smith played against Bart Starr and the Green Bay Packers in that exhibition game on Aug. 4, 1967. Early in the game, he burst through the line and tackled Starr in the backfield (I'm not sure if they were calling that a "sack" yet).

When the play was over, Smith said to Starr, "All night long, old man, all night long. Big Bubba's gonna be right here on top of you all night long."

Actually, Green Bay offensive lineman Jerry Kramer recalled in his account of the 1967 NFL season, Smith never got to Starr again. Kramer wrote that he was impressed with Smith's quickness but said he had trouble using his hands and, once Kramer adjusted, Smith posed no problems for him.

Smith was just a college player at the time, though, and it wasn't long before, as a member of an astonishingly talented Baltimore Colts team, he played in the Super Bowl himself, losing to Joe Namath and the New York Jets.

Two years later, he was a member of the Colts' only Super Bowl–winning team in the 20th century, but he refused to wear the ring he received for participating in Super Bowl V. The game was so sloppy (nearly a dozen turnovers) that he felt embarrassed to wear it.

(It is ironic, I suppose, that, on the 40th anniversary of that game last January, I wondered on this blog if Smith's survivors would put the ring on his finger before he was buried. Maybe the only way we will know is if the ring surfaces on Ebay or something like that.)

Smith is enshrined in the College Football Hall of Fame, but he is not in Pro Football's Hall of Fame. Perhaps one day he will be.

One of his teammates on those Baltimore Colts teams, tight end John Mackey, was inducted into the Hall of Fame nearly 20 years ago and, ironically, died just last month.

There aren't many tight ends in the Hall of Fame, but one, Shannon Sharpe, will be inducted this weekend.

In all, seven individuals will be inducted into the Hall of Fame. Some of them, like Sharpe, will be quite familiar to modern fans; others (Les Richter and Chris Hanburger) are remembered by few. At least one (filmmaker Ed Sabol) never played the game.

Bubba Smith will not be one of the inductees — but, if there is any justice, one day (perhaps one day soon) he will be.

He just won't be around to see it.

The Promised Land?

---

---

Here in Dallas, Texas, there is a sense of inevitability settling in after last night's astonishing come–from–behind triumph over Oklahoma City in the NBA Western Conference finals.

The Christian Science Monitor called it "one of the most jaw–dropping comebacks in NBA history."

That may be true. I've seen some pretty amazing comebacks in my life, but nothing to compare with what happened about 200 miles north of here last night.

I'm not an NBA fan, but I will admit that I have been watching more lately. However, I had given the game up for lost. I left my TV on and went about some other things in my apartment. I could monitor the game, but, having conceded defeat, I didn't feel I needed to sit and watch it.

I changed my mind a few minutes later.

Down by 15 points with about five minutes to play, the Mavericks doggedly chipped away at the upstarts from OKC, forced the game into overtime and, as Eddie Sefko writes in the Dallas Morning News, never trailed in overtime (after never leading during regulation).

When the Mavericks returned to Dallas early this morning, a couple hundred people were on hand to meet them.

Today the giddiness and disbelief from last night seems to be morphing into supreme confidence, even cockiness. Sure, I heard one man say, there have been teams that have come back from a 3–1 deficit but not many.

Not many, but some. To pull that one off, it seems to me that a team has to be loaded with playoff veterans with the discipline and the concentration to remain focused on the task at hand.

I have my doubts that Oklahoma City can do that.

But as my friend who used to cover horse racing during our mutual Arkansas Gazette days like to say, there is no such thing as a sure thing.

It could happen. It isn't likely, but it could happen.

However, I will assume that the Mavericks — who would have to lose at home not once but twice for the Thunder to leapfrog them into the NBA Finals — will face either Miami or Chicago for the NBA title.

That would mean that the Dallas area will have hosted

• the World Series


• the Super Bowl and


• the NBA Finals

within a single calendar year.

As far as I know, that would be a first.

Mind you, I'm not talking about cities that had teams that participated in three major professional sports championships within a calendar year.

(I think New York came close to that when the Jets played in the Super Bowl in January 1969, the Mets played in the World Series that autumn and the Knicks played in the NBA Finals in the spring of 1970. Technically, that exceeded a calendar year, but New York did win all three.)

The site of the Super Bowl is decided years ahead of time. It has been played annually for 45 years, and, while it is not the NFL's explicit policy to prohibit cities without NFL teams from hosting Super Bowls, no city without an NFL franchise has ever hosted one.

And no host city's team has ever played in one.

For awhile, folks around here figured the Cowboys would be the team to change that. It didn't happen. Instead, two of the Cowboys' old postseason rivals met in the Super Bowl in February.

But it was played here in Dallas. In October, the Texas Rangers brought the World Series here for the first time — and now it appears the NBA Finals will be played here, too.

I think that's a first.

The Most Compelling Super Bowl Story Line

---

---

"If you don't think you're a winner, you don't belong here."

Vince Lombardi

---

I've heard a lot of story lines surrounding this year's Super Bowl between the Pittsburgh Steelers and the Green Bay Packers.

Considering that the Packers are one of the teams competing in the game, I've been kind of surprised by the fact that no one has mentioned that last September was the 40th anniversary of the death of Vince Lombardi, the man who coached the Packers to victory in the first two Super Bowls and whose name is on the trophy for which the teams will be playing.

That doesn't include a report that Packers coach Mike McCarthy wants to bring the Lombardi Trophy back to Green Bay. I didn't include it because it doesn't count. Mike Holmgren used to say the same thing when he was coaching the Packers in the Super Bowl in the 1990s.

In fact, any Green Bay coach would be expected to name that as his goal. If he didn't, he ought to be run out of town.

To look at Lombardi was to see football personified in a single man.

He was truly a block of granite, a nickname he earned as a lineman at Fordham — stocky with an angular face that resembled a block, stern, unyielding, dedicated to a goal.

His name spoke of epic duels waged in the snow and the rain and the mud, of a relentless quest for perfection.

The first time he met with his players in Green Bay, Lombardi warned the Packers, in fact, that they would do precisely that, "knowing full well that we will not catch it." But, he said, "We are going to relentlessly chase it, because in the process we catch excellence.

"I am not the least bit interested," he said, "in just being good."

Unfortunately, far too often in the four decades that have passed, the Packers seem to have been willing to settle for "just being good," for not constantly striving to meet Lombardi's standards. A quarter of a century after Lombardi died, the Packers still had not returned to the Super Bowl.

The Packers have won only one Super Bowl since Lombardi's death. Their game with the Steelers will be only their third Super Bowl since he's been gone. Holmgren coached in the other two. This will be McCarthy's first.

If the Green Bay coaching staff is ever going to invoke Lombardi's memory for inspirational purposes, now is the time to do it. Given their history since Lombardi left the scene, it may be decades before they get another chance.

The Packers probably could use a Lombardiesque pep talk. They may be 2½–point favorites, but they have lost their last three games against the Steelers, and two of those losses were recent enough that many of the players on both of the current rosters probably participated in them.

That's bound to put a mental whammy on a team, no matter how well it has been playing — and everyone agrees the Packers have been playing pretty well of late. But they seemed to be hitting their stride when the playoffs began in January 2010, too.

In 2009, Green Bay won seven of its last eight regular–season games. The exception? A 37–36 setback at Pittsburgh. (Bucky Brooks at NFL.com says there are things today's Packers can learn from that experience.)

Before that, they met in Green Bay in 2005. The Steelers won that one, too, 20–10.

In 1998, they played for the last time in Pittsburgh's Three Rivers Stadium. Pittsburgh won on that occasion, 27–20.

The last time the Packers beat the Steelers was on Christmas Eve 1995. The victory clinched their first divisional title in nearly a quarter of a century.

Fifteen years is a long time to wait between victories against anyone. A lot can happen in that time. The Packers played in a couple of Super Bowls, the Steelers played in three. But, when they face each other on Sunday, I believe it will be the first time in the postseason.

Certainly, it will be their first–ever meeting in the Super Bowl.

From that perspective, it's a clean slate.

And, while the Packers may be the favorites on Sunday, that didn't keep Peter King of Sports Illustrated from predicting that Pittsburgh will win.

He acknowledged both teams' proficiency on defense. I guess there's no disputing that. Pittsburgh had the second–best total defense (in terms of yards allowed per game) in the NFL; Green Bay's was the second–best in the NFC. Green Bay's pass defense was fifth in the NFL (Pittsburgh's was 12th), and, although the run game probably won't be a factor, Pittsburgh's run defense was the NFL's best (Green Bay's was 18th).

All that, says King, will go out the window on Sunday. It's a fast track, indoors, protected from the elements.

If he is right, though, logic says that should favor the Packers. Green Bay was tied for third in the NFL in total offense, ranked fifth in passing (with the NFL's seventh–rated passer and its fourth–most productive receiver) and averaged almost exactly what Pittsburgh did on the ground.

Lombardi was far more inclined to run the ball, but that was a different era. In all the relevant areas, it seems like this year's Packer squad is a worthy heir to those teams Lombardi coached in the 1960s — a potent offense combined with a punishing, smothering defense.

Now, if only the desire can match the talent ...

Ditka's Disgrace

---

---

Yesterday, I wrote about the 30th anniversary of the first wild card to win a Super Bowl — and I suggested that it might have been appropriate if the Jets had won the AFC title on Sunday because that would have put two wild–card teams in this year's Super Bowl.

But it might have been more appropriate if the Chicago Bears had beaten the Green Bay Packers for the NFC title.

(That isn't an easy thing for me to say, being a lifelong Green Bay fan. But hear me out on this one.)

It was a quarter of a century ago today that the Chicago Bears played in their first Super Bowl. Their opponents were the New England Patriots — and, while it is probably hard for the current generation to believe, that was the Patriots' first Super Bowl, too.

Football fans had rarely seen two teams playing in their first Super Bowl at the same time. Granted, the most recent such game had been only a few years earlier, when the San Francisco 49ers faced the Cincinnati Bengals. But it had only happened twice before that — when Broadway Joe followed through on his famous "guarantee" in Super Bowl III and in the very first Super Bowl (when it was a sure thing that both teams were making their first appearance).

There was never a chance of a team appearing in its first Super Bowl this time. But, until Sunday, there was a chance that the Bears might be able to celebrate the 25th anniversary of their first trip to the big game with a return trip.

It wouldn't have been the Bears' first trip back to the Super Bowl since that day in January 1986. They made it back to the Super Bowl a few years ago — and lost to the Colts.

Even so, it would have made an interesting story line — not that the Super Bowl ever lacks for interesting story lines. In fact, sometimes the story lines have been better than the games themselves.

For awhile, it was even possible that the Bears and the Patriots could mark the anniversary with a rematch. But that possibility ended when the Jets defeated the Patriots in the divisional round.

It remained possible — for a week — that the Bears could observe their silver anniversary with an appearance in Dallas. The odds of that happening dwindled rapidly after Jay Cutler went down with an injury.

But, really, how could you commemorate that anniversary? It was Walter Payton's only Super Bowl after a career of toiling for mostly bad Bears teams — but he really did nothing special when he got there. He didn't even score a touchdown.

That would be understandable, I suppose, if the game had been a defensive struggle. But the only defense that struggled that day was New England's.

I felt it was disgraceful that Payton didn't score on a day when the Chicago Bears set a Super Bowl scoring record with 46 points.

I guess you could call Payton the consummate professional. While no one could have known that Super Bowl XX would be his only Super Bowl, he had been in the NFL for a decade, and that is a long time for a running back.

Seems to me that any reasonable football fan would have to at least suspect that it would be his only one. And, in fact, Payton only played two more seasons after he went to the Super Bowl. The Bears made the playoffs both years, but they were one and done both times and Payton never scored a touchdown in either of his last two playoff games.

He should have scored a touchdown in Super Bowl XX.

The Bears were deep in New England territory late in the third quarter. Realistically, the game had been over for a long time. Chicago led New England, 37–3.

With the ball at New England's 1–yard line and what amounted to a five–touchdown lead, the Bears were imposing their will. But instead of calling for quarterback Jim McMahon to give it to Payton, coach Mike Ditka chose to go with the novelty act he had unveiled earlier in the season in a Monday night game — in which 300–pound defensive lineman William "The Refrigerator" Perry came in, took the handoff and made his roly–poly way into the end zone.

For a time there in the mid–1980s, the "Fridge," as he was known, became something of a cult hero.

But not to me.

I felt it was shameful that someone like Payton was denied the satisfaction of finally scoring in a Super Bowl. His team was about to do something no team had done before — exceed 40 points in a Super Bowl — and Payton's touchdown would have been the one that made that a reality.

Ditka told a Payton biographer that Payton was the greatest football player he ever saw but an even better human being.

It was too bad he didn't give him the ball from a yard out and let him get his name in the Super Bowl history books for doing more than averaging 2.8 yards per carry that day.

Payton achieved many things in his life, which ended far too soon. He was inducted into the Hall of Fame several years before his death. He ran for more than 100 touchdowns in his professional career, but he refused to celebrate when he scored; he just handed the ball to an official or a teammate and went back to the sideline in his quiet, low–key way.

He was over 30 when he got to the Super Bowl. He had given everything he could to help the Bears get there. He ran for more than 1,500 yards that season but stood back and allowed the others to take the credit.

There were many stars on that team, to be sure. And most of them were given their moment in the spotlight.

But not Payton.

The First Wild Card to Win It All

---

---

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.

But that's another story.

The Saints Go Marching In

---

---

Somewhere in this huge land of ours, a newspaper or a sports site or a TV network must have used the line I'm using as my headline.

It seems like an obvious thing.

Most people probably associate that line with Louis Armstrong and a jazz band. But, originally, it was an American gospel hymn, and it has been frequently used as a funeral march in New Orleans.

They aren't in mourning in New Orleans today. The Saints defeated the Indianapolis Colts in last night's Super Bowl.

If you read what I wrote yesterday, I picked the Colts to win. And that seemed to be the consensus, although New Orleans was the sentimental choice of a lot of observers. People often speak of how a city or region "deserves" a sports championship because of the hard times it has endured, but that seems to be particularly true of New Orleans.

With the wreckage left by Hurricane Katrina still evident in parts of the city nearly five years after Katrina made landfall, it's almost impossible to make the case that the folks in New Orleans don't deserve to feel good about themselves.

Jeff Duncan writes, in the New Orleans Times–Picayune, that the town belongs to quarterback Drew Brees, the game's MVP, and I'm sure it does.

Meanwhile, Bob Kravitz muses in the Indianapolis Star that the "football gods" may have had their revenge for the Colts' decision to sit their marquee players instead of making an earnest effort to finish the regular season with a perfect record.

But then he appeared to regain his sense of perspective. "The Saints were too good, too polished, too inspired ... too intent on bringing their wounded city a much–needed boost. Think about this: In their championship run, the Saints beat Kurt Warner, Brett Favre and Peyton Manning.

"Remarkable."

Yes, it was.

Congratulations to the Saints.

A Few Thoughts Before the Game

In a couple of hours, Super Bowl XLIV will kick off.

I've been picking the NFL games — did pretty well, too, in the regular season but just broke even, so far, in the playoffs — since the first kickoff in September so I guess it is only fitting that I should make a prediction today.

Both teams have outstanding quarterbacks. Indianapolis' Peyton Manning is probably the marquee name of the two and deservedly so. He was second in the NFL this year (behind Houston's Matt Schaub) in passing, although New Orleans' Drew Brees wasn't exactly chopped liver. He was sixth in the NFL — and actually averaged 10 yards more per game than Manning did (he also had more TD passes and fewer interceptions, but he was sacked twice as many times).

With all that talent at the quarterback position, one would expect to find more Colts and Saints among the NFL's top receivers. And the Colts do have Reggie Wayne and Dallas Clark in the league's Top 20 (the Saints have one receiver in the Top 20, Marques Colston), but it's kind of a sharp dropoff for both teams after that. New Orleans' Devery Henderson is 38th in the NFL, Indianapolis' Pierre Garcon is 44th and New Orleans' Robert Meachem is tied for 49th with Jacksonville's Torry Holt.

That seems to reflect the somewhat freewheeling nature of both quarterbacks, really — especially Brees, who seems to like having many targets from which to choose.

Wayne, however, has been having problems recently with a knee injury that has been nagging him all year and has put his status in doubt. That might affect Manning since Wayne was tied with Randy Moss for fifth–best receiver in the NFL this season. However, Manning is versatile enough that he should be able to overcome Wayne's absence if necessary.

The running game does not play a major role in either offense. Statistically, the best runner on the field is Indianapolis' Joseph Addai, who was 22nd in the NFL this season. New Orleans' Pierre Thomas was tied for 24th. The Saints' Mike Bell was 32nd. Reggie Bush, who won the Heisman Trophy when he was at Southern Cal, is probably the best known of the running backs in this year's Super Bowl, but he only carried the ball an average of five times per game during the season and finished tied for 48th in the NFL.

Consequently, it seems that sacks and interceptions may be the best way to judge each team's defensive potential. The Colts' defensive ends, Dwight Freeney and Robert Mathis, were in the NFL's Top 20; Freeney, in fact, was third in the NFL with 13½ sacks. But his status, too, is in doubt. He suffered an ankle injury late in the AFC title game, and it is unknown whether it will limit him or even prevent him from playing.

Meanwhile, the Saints' Will Smith was fifth in the NFL in sacks. The Colts will need to make keeping him away from Manning a priority for the offensive line.

If Manning and Brees can avoid being sacked, there is no guarantee they can avoid interceptions, but the Saints seem to have an edge in that regard. New Orleans' Darren Sharper, who was tied with three other players for the NFL lead, picked off nine passes this season. Free safety Antoine Bethea was the Colts' leader with four — which is the same number that the Saints' Tracy Porter had.

The game matches two potent offenses so the key to victory depends on which team keeps the other team's defensive strength in check. And both defenses have strengths that seem tailor–made to exploit the other team's quarterback's weakness.

Manning is more prone to being intercepted than Brees; unfortunately for him, the Saints' secondary had a lot of success doing that (admittedly, against lesser quarterbacks, for the most part).

Brees, on the other hand, is more prone to being sacked, which means that, if Freeney is able to play, the Colts may be able to put a lot of pressure on him. He may not necessarily throw interceptions, but he might be rushed into throwing the ball away or having to take a sack. To avoid that, New Orleans might have to keep someone in the backfield to block, reducing the number of targets for Brees.

But if Freeney is slowed by his injury or prevented from playing at all, the Saints can play their normal game.

I'm not a medical expert, but I have heard it said that the injury Freeney has is the kind that can require up to two months to heal. If that is so, then two weeks is rushing it considerably.

Because of that, I'm going to predict that, if Freeney does start the game, he won't be able to finish it.

But I wonder if that will be the decisive factor. So often, it seems to me, a Super Bowl is decided on intangibles, and statistics don't tell the whole story.

Gene Wojciechowski of ESPN.com summarizes my feelings better than I could have done myself.

"My heart says to pick the New Orleans Saints," he writes. "For the city. For those fans. For guys like Drew Brees and Deuce McAllister.

"But every other body part says to go with the Indianapolis Colts.

"Sorry, heart."

If the game turns into the kind of shootout that some folks have been suggesting, Bob Kravitz of the Indianapolis Star says the Colts will win.

Sure, I know it's homerism. But I agree with his logic. And, like Kravitz, I believe Manning will win his second Super Bowl, possibly with a Joe Montana–like fourth quarter drive.

But I know it is also possible that, as former Colts coach Tony Dungy said this week, Indianapolis could win by a couple of scores or more. Kravitz found that "shocking," but I didn't. The Saints are in the Super Bowl for the first time. First–timers often lose, and sometimes they lose by huge margins.

However, I'm more inclined to anticipate a close one. That's been the eventual outcome most of the time in recent years. So I'm hoping for a close one, preferably with a dramatic finish. Something both teams can be proud of.

I don't usually predict scores, but I'm going to predict Colts 28, Saints 24.

But, if it's a blowout, at least you've got The Who at halftime to look forward to.

Not Your Typical Super Bowl

It probably should have been obvious when the conference championship games were over, but the 44th Super Bowl — and that reminds me, don't you think it is about time to dispense with the Roman numerals? — isn't going to be your daddy's Super Bowl.

For one thing, the teams aren't your usual suspects, if such a thing exists in pro football. Certain teams — New England, Pittsburgh, Dallas, San Francisco come to mind — have been there more often than most, but the Colts will be making only their second appearance in the last 40 years and the Saints will be playing in their very first Super Bowl.

For another, the two teams with the best records in their leagues will be facing each other. That doesn't happen very often. Since the NFL introduced playoff seedings in 1975, the top two seeds have met eight times. On six of those occasions, the NFC's representative was the winner — which may be good news for New Orleans.

Something else to keep in mind. There is usually little news of any real significance from either team in the traditional two–week period between the conference championship games and the Super Bowl.

But this year may be different. There is already talk that Indianapolis may have to play without defensive end Dwight Freeney, and most NFL fans would probably tell you that Freeney is the best defensive player in a game that seems top heavy with offensive stars. Peter King of Sports Illustrated says that, if Freeney can't play, it will make running the offense much easier for New Orleans. And he's right.

How much does Freeney mean to Indianapolis? Well, Scouts, Inc. came up with rankings for all the players who are expected to suit up for Sunday's game. Colts quarterback Peyton Manning was rated "best player on the planet." There are probably some dissenters scattered around the country, but I'm inclined to go along with that. The next six were judged the "elite players." Freeney was one of those six.

Most folks probably wouldn't argue that point, either. Freeney was responsible for 13½ sacks this season as well as 24 tackles, 19 of which were solo efforts. That's going to be tough to replace.

We'll see if that is a decision the Colts are forced to make.

Teams of the Decade

Now that the 2009 conference championships have been determined, the tedious, tiresome, two–week Super Bowl hypefest can begin.

But, as I was watching the Colts and Saints win, it occurred to me that I was watching the final conference champions of the first decade of the 21st century being crowned. There wasn't a lot of suspense as far as Indianapolis was concerned, but the Saints had to go into overtime to finish off the Vikings.

Well, now that we know the identities of the champions, we can discuss the teams of the decade in the NFC and AFC.

First, the AFC ...

• In the last 10 years, one AFC team has played in more Super Bowls than any other — the New England Patriots. In February 2002, the Patriots beat the heavily favored St. Louis Rams, then they beat the Carolina Panthers in February 2004 and the Philadelphia Eagles in February 2005. They lost their fourth Super Bowl appearance of the decade to the New York Giants in February 2008.


• I suppose that makes the Pats the AFC's team of the decade, but, because of yesterday's championship games, there will be two other AFC teams that can claim to have made multiple Super Bowl appearances in this decade — the Pittsburgh Steelers and the Indianapolis Colts.
  
  The Steelers, of course, beat Arizona last year, and they beat Seattle in February 2006. The Colts beat Chicago in February 2007, and they will be trying for their second Super Bowl title of the decade when they face New Orleans next month.


• Two other AFC teams made one appearance each in the Super Bowl — Baltimore in January 2001 and Oakland in January 2003.

Now, the NFC ...

• In seven of the nine Super Bowls that have been played following regular seasons in the 21st century, the AFC team has been the winner. Only one NFC team, the New York Giants, has been to more than one Super Bowl. The Giants lost to the Baltimore Ravens back in January 2001, then they beat the previously undefeated Patriots in February 2008.


• The other NFC team to win a Super Bowl was the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, who whipped Oakland in January 2003.


• Six other teams made one appearance in the Super Bowl in the first decade of the 21st century, and each team lost — St. Louis, Carolina, Philadelphia, Seattle, Chicago and Arizona.
  
  The Panthers, Seahawks and Cardinals were playing in their first–ever Super Bowls — as were the Ravens, when they won it all, and as will be the Saints when they face Indianapolis.


• The Saints will be the ninth NFC team to play in the Super Bowl since the start of the 21st century — and the fifth to be playing in their very first Super Bowl. Obviously, they will be hoping to join the Bucs as first–time winners.


• I suppose that, in the eyes of some NFL fans, the fact they appeared in more than one Super Bowl makes the Giants the NFC's team of the decade.
  
  But, in my opinion, the fact that so many different NFC teams earned Super Bowl berths in this decade means we must approach the choice of the NFC's team of the decade a little differently. No team really stands out — unlike the Dallas Cowboys in the 1990s or the San Francisco 49ers in the 1980s.
  
  I think the best way to decide which team was truly the NFC's team of the decade is by regular–season wins. Based on that, the Giants came in third with 88 regular–season wins.
  
  Second in regular–season wins was Green Bay, which recorded 95 wins in the decade. And, if the Packers had played in a Super Bowl during the last 10 years, they might have been realistic contenders for NFC's team of the decade. But they didn't.
  
  Consequently, I would have to say that the NFC's best team was the Philadelphia Eagles, who won 103 games in the 21st century's first decade.
  
  The Eagles lost the only Super Bowl in which they played, but they advanced to five NFC championship games in the decade. That's at least three more appearances than any other NFC team.
  
  And, in the absence of an NFC team with three, four or five Super Bowl appearances, it is the best evidence of the Eagles' dominance.

Who's Going to the Super Bowl?

I think most people are probably pulling for Brett Favre and Peyton Manning today.

And I guess I can live with that, but, personally, I'm pulling for their opponents.

Keep in mind, I didn't say that neither Favre nor Manning would advance to the Super Bowl. They may both win today.

One thing seems to be sure. Win or lose, both will wind up in the Hall of Fame eventually. What is unknown, at least at this stage, is whether either or both will be in Miami in two weeks.

• New York Jets (11–7) at Indianapolis Colts (15–2) — As I have pointed out before, the Jets won at Indianapolis on Dec. 27, giving the Colts their first loss of 2009 and preserving the uniqueness of the 1972 Miami Dolphins' perfect season. That was the first time the teams had met since 2006, when the Jets lost a close one at home. They haven't met in the playoffs since January 2003, when New York whipped the visiting Colts in the wild–card round, 41–0. That game, however, was played in the Meadowlands. This one will be played in Indianapolis. Clearly, the home crowd will be a factor in the game, and, even though I don't expect the fans to have to face bone–chilling weather outside the stadium, I expect lots of noise once they take their seats. But that is only part of the story. It seems to me that the greatest challenge the Colts will face is trying to stop the Jets' ground game. The Jets have one of the NFL's best rushing attacks, and I'm inclined to think the Colts will need to force the Jets into numerous third–and–long situations to shut them down. The key for the Jets? Contain Manning. He has some talent around him, but when he isn't clicking, the Colts can be stopped. I'm not sure which team will be better off today because Manning didn't play on the day the Jets handed the Colts their first loss of the season. Of the three teams that received a bye and then won their first playoff games, the Colts seemed the least polished on offense. Perhaps that was due to the Ravens' defense. Maybe it was indicative of some weakness that most of the Colts' foes did not exploit sufficiently. Indy won a lot of close games this year. My advice to the Jets would be to remain level–headed, no matter what the score may be. I'd really like to see the Jets go to the Super Bowl, but I have a feeling that the Colts will instead.


• Minnesota Vikings (13–4) at New Orleans Saints (14–3) — The last time Minnesota played in New Orleans was Monday, Oct. 6, 2008. The Vikings rallied for a 30–27 win. In fact, you have to go back to Oct. 7, 2001, to find the Saints' last win over the Vikings in New Orleans. But you may need to look no further than your TV this evening to see New Orleans' next home triumph over Minnesota. I'm sure the folks in the Big Easy are eager to see the Saints advance to the Super Bowl. That would be a first for them, and that would be their reward for winning today's game. But it's been more than 30 years since the Vikings were in a Super Bowl. They've come close a couple of times, but they haven't played in the NFL's showcase game since January 1977. Whoever wins today's game will be an unfamiliar Super Bowl entrant for most people, to be sure. As the road team in today's NFC championship game, I think a key to Minnesota's success may not necessarily be Favre's arm. He's had a remarkable season for a 40–year–old man, and I doubt that anyone would quibble with his reputation as one of the great quarterbacks of his era. But I think that the most effective weapon a visiting team can have in the playoffs, especially when the home crowd is likely to be as boisterous as the one in the Superdome this afternoon, is a strong running game. It may not always have been clear to observers this year because the offensive spotlight hasn't been on Adrian Peterson in every game, but he remains one of the most potent running backs in pro football. If the Vikings keep the ball in his hands — and save the passing game until it is needed — they can wear down the Saints' defense, which is better against the pass than the run, and they can take the crowd out of the contest. The Saints have a good running game, too, with Reggie Bush in the backfield, but their quick–strike potential can do more than put points on the board. It can whip the fans into a frenzy, and it can demoralize Minnesota's defense — which, it should be pointed out, was one of the league's best. The Vikings may be able to neutralize New Orleans' passing game if they can get to Drew Brees and sack him early, perhaps forcing him to play more tentatively. If that happens, the Saints will have a solid ground game to rely on, but I see the passing game as being what keeps the fans in the Superdome involved in the contest this afternoon. Anyway, those are the keys to this game, in my view — the Minnesota ground game and the New Orleans air attack. The outcome may be as close as it was when the teams faced each other during the 2008 season, but I'll pick the Saints to win this time.

Last week: 2–2.

Playoffs: 3–5.

Looking Ahead to the Super Bowl

---

The president will not exactly be an impartial observer on Sunday.

---

For football fans, I guess Super Bowl weekend is always a bittersweet time.

It's the weekend when the pro football season comes to an end (the college season wrapped up three weeks ago), and there won't be much football news for the next six months — other than the NFL draft in the spring.

But it's also the weekend when this season's champion will be crowned amid all sorts of hoopla.

Bruce Springsteen will be on hand to provide the halftime entertainment. And even non-football fans tune in — some to watch the commercials, some because it's what everyone else will be doing. I have a friend who is not a football fan, but he says he records the game every year, then fast-forwards through it to watch the commercials.

Anyway, just as a reminder ...

Super Bowl XLIII
Pittsburgh (12-4-0) vs. Arizona (9-7-0)
6 p.m. (EST), NBC

Now, let's break this thing down.

Who has the advantage at ...

Quarterback

Statistically, this looks like a mismatch. Arizona's Kurt Warner had the third-best QB rating (96.9) in the entire NFL — and the best in the NFC. His counterpart, Ben Roethlisberger of Pittsburgh, wasn't in the Top 20 in the NFL, and he ranked 12th (with an 80.1) in the AFC.

Warner passed for 4,583 yards. Roethlisberger accounted for 3,301. Warner connected for 30 TDs through the air. Roethlisberger had slightly more than half as many (17). Warner completed two-thirds of his passes. Roethlisberger completed just under three-fifths.

Neither had a distinct advantage in avoiding turnovers. They were about even in the number of interceptions they threw — Roethlisberger was picked off 15 times, Warner 14. And both quarterbacks lost seven fumbles.

To be fair, Warner attempted 129 more passes than Roethlisberger did — probably because Pittsburgh had a stronger running game and could rely on it more often. But, even though he had fewer pass attempts, Roethlisberger was sacked nearly twice as often. Big Ben was tackled for a loss 46 times while Warner was brought down 26 times.

Advantage: Arizona.

Rushing

Neither team has a 1,000-yard rusher.

Pittsburgh's top runner is Willie Parker, who ran for 791 yards. Mewelde Moore was second with 588. Each produced five rushing touchdowns.

Arizona's leading rusher is Edgerrin James, who only compiled 514 yards, probably because the Cardinals relied so much on the aerial attack. He scored three touchdowns. Tim Hightower gained only 399 yards, but he accounted for 10 TDs.

Of the two teams, Pittsburgh probably got more from its ground game this season, so ...

Advantage: Pittsburgh.

Receiving

With their edge at the quarterback position, it should come as no surprise to anyone that the Cardinals have the upper hand at receiver — Larry Fitzgerald was the NFC's leader in receiving yards with 1,431, Anquan Boldin was ninth in the NFC with 1,038, and Steve Breaston was 11th with 1,006. Fitzgerald also led the NFC in receiving TDs with 12, Boldin was third in the NFC with 11, and Breaston had three.

Fitzgerald and Boldin were 1-2 in the NFC in receptions — Fitzgerald had 96 and Boldin had 89. Breaston was 12th with 77. Fitzgerald averaged 14.9 yards/catch. Boldin's average was 11.7, and Breaston's average was 13.1

I don't mean to suggest that Pittsburgh doesn't have any weapons at receiver, but if the QB doesn't have the numbers, neither will the receivers.

The Steelers' Hines Ward was seventh in the AFC in receiving yards with 1,043. Santonio Holmes was 20th with 821 yards. Ward was tied for sixth in the league in receiving TDs with seven; Holmes had five.

And Ward was ninth in the AFC in receptions with 81. Holmes wasn't in the Top 20 in the AFC, but he had a respectable 55 receptions, which was good enough for a 14.9 yards/catch average. Ward's average was 12.9.

Advantage: Arizona.

Defense

Pittsburgh's James Harrison was fourth in the NFL in sacks with 16.0, and teammate LaMarr Woodley was tied for ninth in the NFL with 11.5. Aaron Smith wasn't in the Top 20 in the NFL, but he tied for 14th in the AFC with 5.5 sacks. The Cardinals didn't even have anyone who finished in the Top 20 in the NFC, let alone the NFL.

Harrison also led the NFL in forcing fumbles, with seven. Arizona's Gerald Hayes was in the NFL's Top 20 in forced fumbles with four.
So the Steelers seem to have the edge when it comes to putting pressure on the quarterback.

But, if Arizona's offensive line manages to hold up against Pittsburgh, how will Warner fare against the Steeler secondary?

Troy Polamalu tied for second in the NFL in interceptions with seven. Teammate Tyrone Carter wasn't in the NFL's Top 20, but he tied for 17th in the AFC with three.

Arizona's Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie tied for 14th in the NFL with four. He was also the only Cardinal in the NFC's Top 20 in that category.

Advantage: Pittsburgh.

Kicking

Both teams have accurate placekickers.

Arizona's Neil Rackers nailed 18 of 20 field goal attempts from inside the 39, and he made seven of eight attempts from beyond the 40. He made all 44 PATs.

Pittsburgh's Jeff Reed made 27 of 31 field goal attempts this season. He made all 10 of his attempts inside the 30, missed one between the 30 and 39 and made nine of 12 from the 40 and beyond. He missed one PAT.

If it comes down to the kicking game for either team, I don't see an advantage for either squad.

Weather

The game is being played in Tampa. The temperature should be in the 50-60 range with a light breeze. It should be mostly cloudy, but no rain is expected.

So who's going to win? Well, they say defense wins championships. If that proves to be true on Sunday, I think the advantage will belong to Pittsburgh.

It's always tempting to go with the underdog, but the New York Giants may have used up Cinderella's quota for awhile last year.

I predict Pittsburgh 27, Arizona 20.

Peter King's Random Thoughts About the Super Bowl

Peter King is an excellent, entertaining writer.

And, for years now, I have enjoyed reading his "random thoughts" and his "10 things I think I think" columns that he's written for Sports Illustrated.

This week, as he prepares for this Sunday's Super Bowl between the Pittsburgh Steelers and the Arizona Cardinals, he has posted a "Ten Things I Think I Think during Super Bowl Week in Tampa" that should be read by every football fan — and, if you aren't a football fan but you're planning to watch the game, anyway, you probably should read it, too.

His first item probably makes the most sense to me. "I think I wish the NFL would stop using the Roman numerals," he writes. This year's game is the 43rd Super Bowl — and, instead of calling it Super Bowl XLIII, King says it should simply be called Super Bowl 43.

I agree. Using Roman numerals made sense when the game was young — and I'm old enough to remember those days. I was in first grade when the first Super Bowl was played. But now that we've nearly had as many Super Bowls as we've had presidents, it's time to modernize it.

King's other observations are probably more suited for the hard-core football fans. And, while I consider myself a hard-core football fan, I understand that millions of non-football fans will tune in to the game — because it's the "in" thing to do or because they want to see the ads that are being shown this year or because they want to watch the halftime show with Bruce Springsteen.

Whatever motivates you to watch the game, make sure you have something to nibble on. And enjoy yourself!

Who'da Thunk It?

The Arizona Cardinals withstood the Philadelphia Eagles' comeback the other day and earned their first trip to the Super Bowl.

I have to admit that I never thought I would see the day when the Cardinals would be going to the Super Bowl, even though I saw them play when they were in St. Louis in the 1970s — during what was, arguably, one of their best seasons.

The Cardinals didn't have the best record in franchise history this season — but they proved that, once you get into the playoffs, that doesn't matter. They've demonstrated — in case anyone needed further convincing after the Giants' season last year or the Steelers' championship season a few years ago — that anything can happen once you qualify for the playoffs.

I'm not sure that charmed existence will carry on through the Super Bowl. But I do hope that the game will be competitive.

Congratulations, Cardinals.

You know, with the Cardinals going to the Super Bowl and Barack Obama becoming president, it's starting to seem like anything really is possible. Who knows what 2009 will bring?

Who Will Advance to the Super Bowl?

---

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.

My prediction: Pittsburgh 20, Baltimore 14.