Super Bowl XLIII: Cardinals vs. Steelers

[Reggie Smith]

I hope like hell I'm wrong , but I see a 24-20 game.

Damn, I'm good. I even called the following: Steelers out to an early lead, Cardinals come back late, then a late drive wins it.

Cloud friggin' nine right now!!!!!!!!!!!!

[In Mo I Trust]

It bothers me when they count up championships only from the Super Bowl era on, as if NFL titles before 1967 did not exist.
Pittsburgh was horrible for 4 decades 1930s-1960s. Doesn't that count?
Look at how many championships the Cleveland Browns won in the the early 1950s...yet you commonly here pundits say that they have never won a championship....not true at all.

One ESPN they just said the Steelers are the first NFL team to win 6 titles, ridiculous.

[BillBuckner]

Larry Fitzgerald is a man among boys.

[SLURPEE]

It bothers me when they count up championships only from the Super Bowl era on, as if NFL titles before 1967 did not exist.
Pittsburgh was horrible for 4 decades 1930s-1960s. Doesn't that count?
Look at how many championships the Cleveland Browns won in the the early 1950s...yet you commonly here pundits say that they have never won a championship....not true at all.

You're right, the NFL totally ignores the NFL championship. It's all about the Vince Lombardi trophy. Anything that happened before 1967 (unless it has something to do with Vince Lombardi coaching the Packers or the "Greatest game played") it doesn't get mentioned.
Baseball is way more nostalgic and praises it's pass more then the NFL does.
We always hear of baseball players from the 20's 30's 40's 50's and games that where played. You don't hear a peep about the 1930's Giants or Bears for ex.
The Giants actually have more championships (7) then the Steelers. So do the Bears (8) and Packers (9). But because the NFL championship gets ignored the Steelers get crowned as having the most championships.

[hardrain]

One ESPN they just said the Steelers are the first NFL team to win 6 titles, ridiculous.

The frat boys at ESPN also think that MLB began in 2004....

[gdn]

The man proved himself in the final 2 minutes....this is what lore is about..........It is what it is .......and the rest is history..............


By the way ....Steelers are the 1st team to win six.......I`m in my glory



I also bow before the Cardinals.........well done..

Big Ben absolutely is a big-game quarterback. He's come so far from the '05 SB.

[S2]

I'd put the top 5 as:
1. Yankees
2. Montreal Canadiens
3. Boston Celtics
4. Steelers
5. Packers (should look at # of NFL championships, not # of SB wins)

This is the kind of nonsense ESPN piece designed around an event like the SB.

I'd put the Lakers (way) ahead of the Steelers.

[RhodyYanksFan]

I was just listening to the BS Report from 1/28/09 breaking down the Super Bowl with Dave Dameshek. My god I had to turn it off because Dameshek was so annoying. He's the typical Steelers fan. Beyond annoying and cocky. Shut the F up.

[Hobbes40]

The frat boys at ESPN also think that MLB began in 2004....

Now now, don't associate us good frat boys with those guys at ESPN

My thoughts on the the game - it was undoubtedly more exciting in general than last year's (I am a Giants fan). However, the win was not nearly as impressive, and while Holmes' catch was incredible, Tyree's was legendary. There's almost no comparison. Last night a favorite overcame its own ineptitude to win a game they should have won handily, while last year an incredible underdog beat a team some were christening the greatest of all time with what may be the greatest drive in NFL history.

Being exciting has nothing to do with historical significance. And admittedly last night did have some historical significance, such as the end of the 1st half and Steelers getting one for the other hand. But it doesn't measure up. Heck, it probably doesn't even measure up to the Pats' first super bowl win.

[YanksFan1992]

Apparently Fitzgerald was playing with a broken thumb, and Roethlisberger with broken ribs.