Thoughts on the Super Bowl

It's been an interesting last few weeks in Minneapolis/St. Paul.  It started with the epic deflation of Viking fans, as the team lost the NFC Championship game at Philadelphia, and culminated in a showcase where, quite frankly, the city ended up being the star of the Super Bowl evening.  Beautiful shots of the Minneapolis skyline, and the surrounding area, peppered the broadcast, with a great salute to Prince during the halftime show making the single digit temperature city look like the hottest place on the planet.

A huge salute to the local organizers of the event.  I know people who are at these things every year and they all said this was one of the best organized and friendliest experiences they ever had.  The volunteers were amazing, making 'Minnesota Nice' the first image anyone took away.  It was as if the city was overrun by greeters from the Disney store.  The Winter Carnival was a great addition to the events, bringing in St. Paul nicely.  The Mall of America was a sensation media center for the entire event, and downtown Minneapolis never shied away from the fact this is a northern city in a colder climate.  The embracing of the cold made everything downtown click.

The only complaints I heard were from whiners, primarily sports reporters, who look at the Super Bowl as a way to get a freebie vacation in a warm, sunny destination.  Their bellyaching got old really fast.  Goodbye and let the door hit you in the caboose on the way out.

As far as the game, it was a hoot!  I did have two problems with the officiating, problems which would've likely changed the outcome of the game.  This is NOT about raining on the Philadelphia Eagles' parade, but more of a scratching of my head at what exactly the NFL's rules are.  It comes down to two of the touchdowns the Eagles got.

In the third quarter, Corey Clement caught a 22 yard pass from Nick Foles which he pulled down in the end zone, scoring a touchdown.  Replays showed two problems which should've negated the score.  Clement didn't seem to have control of the football, as the ball slightly juggled around in his hands.  At best, the ball was jostling, but giving him the benefit of the doubt on what the definition of 'control' is, he clearly didn't have control with two feet firmly inbounds, hence the touchdown should've be negated.  The TV hosts were stunned AFTER the officials looked at replay and ruled it a touchdown.

Here's my problem, something Chris Collinsworth of the broadcast echoed.  The league seems to have a WILDLY different ruling on this type of play during the regular season and the playoffs.  AT LEAST 30 catches and AT LEAST 10 touchdowns during the regular season, plays which had FAR more legitimacy than Clement's catch, were overturned.  These overturned touchdowns cost teams games and playoff standings.  If you're going to allow that touchdown to stand in the Super Bowl, then someone needs to explain to me why they're not letting these other touchdowns stand during the regular season.

The other play of question was the 4th quarter touchdown which Nick Foles threw to Zach Ertz, who clearly seemed to have control of the ball and lunged into the end zone.  An immediate review tried to determine where exactly Ertz stopped being a receiver and became a 'runner with the ball.'  If he was a receiver, then technically, since the ball was bobbling around before he went to the ground, it was not a catch.  If he had secured the ball and then dove into the end zone, the second the ball broke the plane of the end zone, it was a touchdown.

I'll side with Philly on this one.  It was a legit touchdown, which does lead to the question of how the league could use such a flimsy excuse earlier in the year to negate a clear touchdown by the Pittsburgh Steelers in a crucial game.  Once again, I just want consistency.  If you're not going to throw out the touchdown in the Super Bowl, why then, when the Steelers clearly had a far better case for their touchdown, don't you allow that one to stand as well?

Then again, there were at least seven mysterious 7-figure bets placed on the Eagles in the days leading up to the game, something so unusual even ethically challenged gambling mecca Las Vegas called it out.  Make your own conclusions...

My final Super Bowl comment has to do with Philadelphia fans and the failure the team and the league to reign in CLEARLY unacceptable behavior.  I never realized how cordial the Green Bay/Minnesota rivalry was until I saw Eagles fan.  It was bad enough the litany of completely unacceptable behavior at the NFC Championship game in Philadelphia, but I've heard reports from Minneapolis of assault, unacceptable verbal abuse and outright threats, ranging from "we'll kick your ass" to improper sexual comments made to families leaving the game.

NFL, YOU have to fix this.  Beer sales at the stadium can not be the deciding factor on what is tolerated.  If the fans are out of line, they should be escorted out of the stadium and their tickets should be revoked.  Breathalyzers should be stationed at every entrance, making sure drunken idiots are not allowed to threaten and assault people, and beer sales should be further limited in the stadium.  The Eagles organization has allowed this to get so far out of control they'll need to activate the National Guard for game security in order to clean this mess up.

On the good side Philly, you now have a ticket people will pay top dollar for.  Look at that as a way to offset the smaller beer sales.

I will be consistent;  the cost of the stadium was still not worth it.  It just wasn't.  That aside, it was a good party.  Here's hoping the short term revenues are good, because no one will remember Minneapolis/St. Paul hosted it in three years.