04/19/24
February 01, 2009
Steelers Win Sixth Super Bowl: With an astonishing 100-yard interception return by James Harrison to end the first half and a last-minute touchdown catch by Santonio Holmes, the Pittsburgh Steelers won a league record sixth Super Bowl with a 27-23 win over the Arizona Cardinals. The refs were a huge factor in the game, calling numerous penalties and ending the game without reviewing Cardinals' quarterback Kurt Warner's fumble.
Jesus hates Kurt Warner.
posted by justgary at 11:35 PM on February 01, 2009
Kurt Warner's demeanor in the postgame interview makes me think he's done. That would be a shame, since he's still obviously one of the monster QBs in this league. I really wanted the Cardinals to complete their unbelievable playoff run by hoisting the Lombardi, but the Harrison interception and Holmes catch were as epic as I've ever seen in the bowl. So all hail Pittsburgh.
Larry Fitzgerald is an incredible receiver. It's almost painful to say something that obvious, but I had to say it again. It should be illegal to retire from this league when you have Fitzgerald at the other end of your passes.
posted by rcade at 11:47 PM on February 01, 2009
Upon further review...holy shit--what a great fucking catch!
posted by kirkaracha at 11:50 PM on February 01, 2009
Ugh, I hated the way that game ended.
Nothing against the Steelers, just wanted to see Warner pull it off.
Very surprised that the fumble was not reviewed...seemed like an obvious situation for a review.
I agree that it appears that Warner is going to call it quits, hope he sticks around another year.
posted by dviking at 11:55 PM on February 01, 2009
They didn't review the final play, but it was a good call. As soon as I saw the replay I knew it wouldn't be overruled.
All the big plays seemed to be reviewed, but I think all of those were reviewed correctly. Pretty well officiated game actually, with the only 2 disagreeable penalties in my mind
1) the roughing the passer against Ben. I'm a little drunk right now, but I don't think that resulted in points anyways
2) the safety hold. May have been a hold, but only after the ball was out of Ben's hands, if at all...thought that was horrible call in that situation.
Great came and spectacular catch. Swann-ess. Holmes came up big, no doubt, but I would have given the MVP to Ben...yet another clutch last minute drive. I'm as critical as anybody of him, but what a MVP caliber drive. Sealed his seat in Canton in my mind (and he's still young).
Note: Only Jim Plunkett has multiple SB wins and isn't in the HOF.
posted by bdaddy at 12:02 AM on February 02, 2009
I will add, although Warner lost, he seemed to seal himself a seat in the HOF as well. I agreed with Tom Jackson before the game, that the big drop off between his wins in St. Louis and his drive with Arizona was a hole in his resume for a group that generally looks for consistency. But to play like he did in his 3rd SB appearance against that sort of defense, even in a losing effort, will not be lost on the voters come election time.
posted by bdaddy at 12:09 AM on February 02, 2009
There's no way the last call shouldn't have been reviewed. You at least have to have a booth review to confirm one way or the other. They've done it all season long in meaningless games on calls much less more questionable than that one -- why not in the freaking Super Bowl? If we find out tomorrow that the booth called down and said, "Fumble," I still won't be mollified.
I'm also not a guy to bitch about officiating, and I thought the Steelers deserved to win the game -- but for God's sake, Arizona got completely screwed on three calls in the drive that put Pittsburgh up 20-7.
Screwjob #1: The roughing the passer call on Dansby. For God's sake, the guy's just been scrambling for five seconds, and you can't give the defender a step on a shovedown?
Screwjob #2: Roethlisberger's forward progress was stopped on the ball he threw out of bounds that was to being grounding. It wasn't, but he was already in the grasp and moving backwards. That's a sack, folks -- especially in light of the call immediately before it. If you're going to say the QB is finished as soon as he releases the ball, it only follows that he's also finished as soon as he's in the grasp and headed backwards.
Screwjob #3: This didn't affect the outcome of the drive (aside from forcing the Cards' D to exoend more energy), but Wilson running over the holder? He was pushed, and what the hell was he supposed to do? He was falling forward, so he couldn't jump over Berger, and had he dove, he would have just nailed him with his helmet. The least egregious of the three, but still lousy.
posted by wfrazerjr at 12:24 AM on February 02, 2009
bdaddy,
I've never really bought arguments like Jacksons'.
Case in point: Most people think Eli is pretty good, but Eli has NEVER had the QB rating Warner had in his one year in NY.
I think people have lost a little perspective on Warner since when he left the Rams, he was leaving one of the most prolific offenses ever. Therefore, only turning in a solid, respectable year pales in comparison. Granted, if all his seasons were merely that way, then i'd agree.
But to me, you have a guy who dominated early in his career, played solid for most of the middle of his career, and looks amazing again as he's approaching 40.
How many guys like that aren't in the HOF, who have been to multiple superbowls, played MVP level football for half their career, and won both a regular season and a superbowl MVP?
I don't understand how this is even debatable.
posted by brainofdtrain at 12:27 AM on February 02, 2009
This game puts Warner's average passing yards in the postseason over 300 yards. It also puts him 10 yards past Joe Montana for all-time yards in the postseason, and his quarterback rating for the game was 112.25. He's got the second QBR of all-time in the postseason and the best winning percentage for a quarterback with 10 or more postseason appearances.
I think the debate over whether he'll reach the Hall of Fame just ended.
posted by rcade at 12:29 AM on February 02, 2009
fraze,
totally agree on the fumble call. It should have been reviewed. Would it have changed the outcome? Probably not, but after all the work the Cards organization put in this year, and all the money on the line, would it have killed them to see if Warner deserved one more shot to wing towards Fitzgerald in the end zone?
I think that they deserved at least an honest look.
posted by brainofdtrain at 12:31 AM on February 02, 2009
Penalties really killed Arizona early .. not so much as they amounted to points, but moreso that they kept Zona's offense off the field.
I've always thought of Rothlesberger as the most over-rated player in the game, but he did get the job done when it counted. Didn't make many plays, but didn't hurt his team too much either. Kind of fits with the Steeler's legacy, no superstars, just a solid group up and down. Canton? He'll need to pay to visit just as I would.
Arizona's offense was tremendous ... Warner will be making the mistake of his life if he decides to walk away.
posted by cixelsyd at 12:34 AM on February 02, 2009
Arizona's offense was tremendous ... Warner will be making the mistake of his life if he decides to walk away.
I think all players would choose to go out on their own terms rather than face a situation like Favre's, in which some people are hoping he won't return. Past success or not.
posted by BoKnows at 12:38 AM on February 02, 2009
But to me, you have a guy who dominated early in his career, played solid for most of the middle of his career, and looks amazing again as he's approaching 40.
It's the "played solid for most of the middle of his career" that myself and Jackson disagree with. He was benched in St. Louis. He was benched in NY. He was benched in Arizona. He has been nothing remotely similar to "solid" in the middle part of his career. He had a strong start, and no doubt a strong finish, it's the "in between" that was his big question mark (no doubt related to injury and circumstance, but never-the-less).
posted by bdaddy at 12:39 AM on February 02, 2009
Screwjob #1:
Agreed...bad call. (per my earlier comment, I guess this did cost points..3 of them)
Screwjob #2:
what the heck are you talking about here? Seriously. Forward progress stopped? On Ben? The guy who is known for breaking tackles and making plays. There wasn't even remotely a close whistle here, even on a QB not of Ben's style. I didn't even know this one was ever in question? Even old Seahawks fans aren't bitching about this one :-)
Screwjob #3:
That's a penalty...he wasn't pushed. He ran over the guy because he over committed on the rush. I can see debate on this one (more-so than on #2), but the block occurred well before he hit the holder. Like you said though, not any difference in the game on this call, so not worth arguing I guess (sort of like the running into the kicker in the baltimore game)
posted by bdaddy at 12:44 AM on February 02, 2009
regarding the fumble review...Michaels said during the game that it was reviewed. Anyone know for sure? (I know the sites are saying it wasn't but I don't really trust them) :-)
posted by bdaddy at 12:45 AM on February 02, 2009
Canton? He'll need to pay to visit just as I would
5 seasons
3 AFCC games
2 SB victories
19 4th quarter rallies
.725 winning percentage
9-2 ( I believe?) postseason record
Only person with better credentials then that is porking a Bunchen right now.
Like I said, only 2-time winner not in Canton is Pluckett. If Ben has a "decent" career post 2009 I think it's an easy enshrinement for him.
posted by bdaddy at 12:54 AM on February 02, 2009
Roethlisberger hasn't played that well in his Super Bowl wins. He's a great quarterback, and the two rings are impressive, but he still has a lot to prove before he deserves to be in Canton.
posted by rcade at 01:00 AM on February 02, 2009
Roethlisberger made a great pass on the winning TD.
Full disclosure: I like the Steelers and was rooting for them, but I really admire the way the Cardinals played this game and I would've been fine with them winning the Super Bowl. They got their asses kicked in the first quarter--the joke at our party was they only play defense inside the five--but they held the Steelers to three points and kept themselves in the game when a lot of teams would've folded. Then the 100-yard interception return could've really been a backbreaker, but they nearly pulled off the biggest comeback in Super Bowl history in the second half. They did a great job putting themselves into a position to win the Super Bowl after that first half when most teams would've folded.
Obligatory complaint about refs: I didn't see any conclusive evidence that Roethlisberger didn't break the plane before his knee hit the ground on the TD that was called back.
posted by kirkaracha at 01:09 AM on February 02, 2009
The two red zone goal line stops (3rd qtr) in which the Cards limited the Steelers to 3 points hopefully proved that the Cards were not just offense tonight. I thought it was a great game. Bravo to the SB this year.
posted by BoKnows at 01:13 AM on February 02, 2009
The New York sports media has already begun fitting LeBron James for a Knicks uniform next year. I expect there be some idle thoughts published on Larry Fitzgerald in Giants or Jets gear.
posted by Newbie Walker at 01:15 AM on February 02, 2009
That hole in Warner's resume isn't exactly gaping. His nine-game rating for the Giants is more than Eli has ever managed and in Arizona he's put in 85-89-89-96 rated seasons.
He has a Superbowl win, was the second fastest guy to 20,000 yards, is #4 in career passer rating and is #1 all time in ypg. If he goes now I don't think the Canton voters will have any trouble with him.
Even more so because the NFL eats up things like his grocery-store-to-league-MVP story.
posted by Mr Bismarck at 01:26 AM on February 02, 2009
There was a moment there where Pittsburgh went up by 13 and the dynamics of the game started to shift. The Steelers started playing both safeties just ridiculously deep, the Cardinals went no-huddle, and it turned the game into a streetfight that, to me, looked like it was going in the Cardinals' favor. The strategy didn't seem to work for the Steelers but it made for a damn entertaining game.
posted by chmurray at 01:34 AM on February 02, 2009
Big Ben is a good QB, however, a career rating of 89.4 will need some boosting before I enshrine him in Canton. If he wins another SB he's in regardless of stats, if he doesn't I think he'll have to bring the numbers up a bit.
posted by dviking at 01:43 AM on February 02, 2009
Really good game. Penalties on the Cards hurt a lot. As for Warner going into the Hall, his great story and the way he lives his life off the field should count for something. I realize Canton is mainly a place for guys with gaudy stats, but it would be nice if those other thins counted. And I may have been shitfaced but his wife looks way, way better than she did when he was in St. Louis. And Springsteen at halftime rocked. Hopefully we've seen the last of rap stars, Brittany Spears, and other no-talent, boring clods at big halftime shows (but I doubt it).
posted by dyams at 06:37 AM on February 02, 2009
I can't believe how many are crying about the lack of a review on the fumble. Do you really believe they would of scored with 5 seconds left. Warner does not have enough arm to throw the ball around 60 to 65 yards, which he would of had to do. They played a great game,but the better team prevailed in the end.Give credit to Holmes for a great catch when it counted.
posted by Doehead at 08:42 AM on February 02, 2009
"Warner does not have enough arm to throw the ball around 60 to 65 yards"
O RLY? [YOUTUBE]
I make that 28 to 12 yard lines, or 60 yards.
posted by Mr Bismarck at 09:01 AM on February 02, 2009
Best superbowl I have ever watched. Sure you could make arguments for calls or non-calls, but isn't that the same with just about every game? I think there were questionable calls on both sides of the ball, but for the most part I think the refs called a good game.
The Steelers were just the better team, and the Cards defense looked non-existant on the last TD drive, especially when they had Holmes triple covered in the endzone and they still find a way to get the ball to him.
Only major complaint about this game was that Ben didn't get MVP...not that Holmes played bad or anything...can you co-MVP in the SB?
posted by fadetoblack5 at 09:07 AM on February 02, 2009
So I guess by the comments in this thread the Cardinals won, eh? Bloody hell, people. Start another thread about Warner and the HOF.
The Steelers won their 6th Super Bowl, 2nd in the last 4 years, and with two different coaches. They are a model organization that doesn't play the BS that other teams do, and they consistently put winners on the field. They build from the draft for players, and they look for coaches that have a work ethic.
The Cardinals played a GREAT game, and I was very impressed with how they stuck around. BUT the Steelers coaching staff are who nearly gave the game away. They choose poor plays at the goal line and settled for 3 points twice. Someone above mentioned the Cardinals playing soft on the last drive, but that's what teams do. It used to be called "prevent defense." But the Steelers started playing it when they were up by 13 and it nearly cost them the game. And on the last Steelers possession before the Cardinals went ahead, the Steelers ran Willie Parker for 4 yards, and then go to an empty backfield on the next play?! WTF? Dumb.
As for talk of Ben and the HOF, he is 26, and has only been in the league for 5 years. It's too soon to say, not because his stats aren't there (they are, and QB rating is a BOGUS stat, so quit throwing it around) including 2 Super Bowl wins. But they also include career completion rating of 62.4. 14,974 yards (nearly 3,000 per year for every year in the league, INCLUDING his rookie year), 101 TDs (20/year average). He's 51-20 (regular season) in his first 5 season in the league, and 8-2 in playoff games. He has led 19 4th quarter come backs already in his career, including 6 this season—one of which was the Super Bowl last night. In his 5 season in the league he has been in 3 AFC Championship games, and won 2 of those.
I could go on and on, but the information is out there, if you choose to read it and not just listen to Mike Fucking Holmgren (can you say sour grapes, Mike? I thought you could, you punk) and the other babbling idiots talking out of their bums.
Ben didn't have a great game last night, but still was good enough to have a legitimate claim at MVP. He threw all the passes that Santonio Holmes caught, including that amazing pass for the game winner. Yet, again he found a way to win. Willie Parker barely showed up. Hines Ward was practically not on the field. Nate Washington continued to drop passes and was not that involved. Ben scrambled and he found Santonio Holmes all night.
It was an odd night in our Steeler household. When the Steelers gave up that go-ahead TD I started trying to prepare myself for the loss, so when they won I didn't know what to do.
I was very impressed by the way the Cardinals players and coaching staff handled themselves in defeat. Classy. My wife and I applauded Warner when he was shown after the game as well as Ken Whisenhunt.
BTW, has one person here even mentioned Mike Tomlin? The guy is an amazing coach, and a great person.
OK, you all can go back to discussing Kurt Warner now. I'm going to go read every article on the Post Gazette site where they have a big headline that reads SIXTH-BURGH
HERE WE GO STEELERS, HERE WE GO!
posted by scully at 09:08 AM on February 02, 2009
can you co-MVP in the SB?
Harvey Martin and Randy White were named co-MVPs of Super Bowl XII, the only Super Bowl where co-MVPs were named.
posted by scully at 09:12 AM on February 02, 2009
Regarding Kurt's chances at the HoF, if he never throws another pass, I don't think he gets in. Numbers are huge to get in, and the way I see it, he's only had 4 tremendous seasons (3 with the Rams early, and obviously this year). All 4 of these seasons, he has an amazing arsenal to work with (Holt, Bruce, Faulk, now Fitz, Boldin, and throw in Breaston). The seasons in between these were above average at best. Nothing against Kurt, he's a good QB, but not HoF worthy IMO.
posted by fadetoblack5 at 09:12 AM on February 02, 2009
Preface: I couldn't watch the game, due to a combination of work and location in the world. So I can't judge the beauty of the game.
With that said, I think that Big Ben will go to the HOF. Whether he should, better question. My initial gut feeling is no, but he still has time to prove himself as a truly great qb, rather than a talented guy with a great defense to help him. I feel that he will go into because people will remember him as the signature player on some very dominant teams. Sort of like Bob Griese. People remember Griese as a great quarterback, largely because he was associated with '72 Dolphins. Now I'm not saying Bob Griese sucked. He was a pretty good qb for some great teams. But his role was largely to hand off to good running backs.
I think Ben is a lot better qb than Bob Griese was. But when people think of these Steeler teams, they will probably think of Big Ben, the Defense, and Hines Ward (not necessarily in that order, though). Since you can't send an entire defense to the HOF (and is there anyone on that D now that you would send? Polamalu (sp?)? Harrison? Nobody immediately sticks out to me), Big Ben will be the default, IMHO. Of course, I could be wrong, too...
posted by Bonkers at 09:12 AM on February 02, 2009
BTW, has one person here even mentioned Mike Tomlin? The guy is an amazing coach, and a great person.
I think it's because he looks like he has zero personality on that sideline. As the clock was ticking away, he looked like it was any other Sunday afternoon with 5:00 left in the first Q. No doubt a great coach, but he just doesn't offer those sound bites or entertainment value of some other coaches.
posted by jmd82 at 09:29 AM on February 02, 2009
The Cardinals were the better story, Terrapin. For two weeks everyone I talked to who didn't have a vested interest in the Steelers had adopted the Cards.
Ben didn't have a great game last night, but still was good enough to have a legitimate claim at MVP.
It's hard for a quarterback to win a Super Bowl and not have a legitimate claim at MVP. Ultimately, I think Roethlisberger's performance in this game will grow in stature because of the winning drive, the perfect pass to Santonio Holmes and the number of times he created plays by refusing to let the Cardinals bring him down.
posted by rcade at 09:40 AM on February 02, 2009
It's hard for a quarterback to win a Super Bowl and not have a legitimate claim at MVP. Well Ben was rubbish in XL, so he didn't have it then. ;) No doubt a great coach, but he just doesn't offer those sound bites or entertainment value of some other coaches. You're kidding right? Chuck Noll and Tom Landry come to mind as two coaches who just got the job done and didn't need to be the story. That's just sad that people could care about soundbites over performance and results.
posted by scully at 09:48 AM on February 02, 2009
Speaking of soundbites and Mike Tomlin, I was impressed with his response to Sanders' comment about how Mike was referred to as the youngest coach to be in the game and win it and no mention was made of his race. Tomlin's response was great, and I need to find the quote, but paraphrased he said "I am glad that my age was mentioned because I can just get older, but I will always be black."
posted by scully at 10:05 AM on February 02, 2009
My ability to respect the achievement of Mike Tomlin is hindered by the way he dresses. In those oversized clothes, he looks like the third member of Kris Kross.
posted by rcade at 10:10 AM on February 02, 2009
Holgrem still can't accept the lose to the Steelers in Superbowl XL. He has to be the biggest crybaby coach ever. Good Riddance. As far as MVP,Holmes with 9 catches and his great catch to win it should have been co MVP with Harrison. His amazing 100 yd interception, and he also forced 3 holding penalties that killed drives. I guess the NFL didn't want to give out 2 Escalades. Tomlin is a laid back coach that gets the job done w/o clammering for the limelight. Great coaches like Noll,Dungy and Laundry were from the same mold.
posted by Doehead at 10:19 AM on February 02, 2009
Doehead, I agreed with you, and was even chanting "M-V-P" and pointing at Harrison on the screen, BUT I was extremely disappointed in him when he got that unnecessary roughness call. Unprofessional and poor timing. He punched the guy in the back. That bugged me enough to cast my nonexistent vote for a co-MVP of Ben and Santonio.
posted by scully at 10:23 AM on February 02, 2009
"Great coaches like Noll,Dungy and Laundry were from the same mold."
Is that Tom Laundry?
My favourite comment of the day.
posted by Mr Bismarck at 10:44 AM on February 02, 2009
I agree that the Harrison personal foul towards the end probably KO'ed any MVP chance he had.
Kurt Warner + Super Bowl (apparently) = excitement. Each of the three Super Bowl games in which Warner has played has gone down to the last minute if not the last second. Unfortunately for Warner, he was on the losing end on two of them.
Does it bother anyone else that the announcers refer to Roethlisberger as simply "Ben"? I understand that his last name is a mouthful, but come on -- it's not like you have to spell it. Speaking of Roethlisberger, it was probably one of the more overhyped things going into this game and certainly discussed quite a bit during the game, but the difference in that game came down to a half dozen plays that he kept alive by scrambling around to keep a play alive and then completing a pass or getting rid of the ball. I would not call Roethlisberger exactly fleet of foot, but he moves around in the pocket very, very well.
posted by holden at 10:50 AM on February 02, 2009
You're kidding right? Chuck Noll and Tom Landry come to mind as two coaches who just got the job done and didn't need to be the story. That's just sad that people could care about soundbites over performance and results.
I didn't mean that as a knock on Tomlin. I was just saying that he doesn't give the best (ie, inflammatory) press clippings for the press- or us- to clamor over.
posted by jmd82 at 01:14 PM on February 02, 2009
When all is said and done, when you have 11 penalties for 106 yards and two turnovers, one that results in a TD you have put yourself in a tough situation to overcome.
posted by Folkways at 01:31 PM on February 02, 2009
posted by Doehead at 08:42 AM "I can't believe how many are crying about the lack of a review on the fumble. Do you really believe they would of scored with 5 seconds left. Warner does not have enough arm to throw the ball around 60 to 65 yards, which he would of had to do. They played a great game,but the better team prevailed in the end.Give credit to Holmes for a great catch when it counted."
I see two things wrong with your statement...
#1 - Yes, I actually do believe Warner has enough of an arm to do just that.
BUT...
#2 - He wouldn't have had to throw that far...
The ball would have been placed on the Steeler's 29 yard line, thanks to a 15 yard penalty on Pittsburgh for taunting.
Five seconds - time for one more throw to Larry Fitzgerald. But thanks to the refs we'll never know if he would caught it or not.
posted by MAYANKEE at 01:40 PM on February 02, 2009
#2 - He wouldn't have had to throw that far...
The ball would have been placed on the Steeler's 29 yard line, thanks to a 15 yard penalty on Pittsburgh for taunting.
Would the taunting have counted? Michaels seemed to act like it wouldn't if the play was overturned (although he may be wrong). Seems to me it would, but then again they wouldn't have taunted if it wasn't a fumble :-)
Five seconds - time for one more throw to Larry Fitzgerald. But thanks to the refs we'll never know if he would caught it or not.
I saw a scroll on the bottom of ESPN today that said the play was reviewed upstairs and they determined it was not a fumble, hence they didn't buzz the ref downstairs. It was clear enough to the officials upstairs that they didn't believe it warranted additional review downstairs (I tend to agree..when slowed down you can see he was hit as the ball was still moving backwards...yes, he threw his hand forward after that, but the ball wasn't in his control at that point.)
posted by bdaddy at 02:53 PM on February 02, 2009
Big Ben is a good QB, however, a career rating of 89.4 will need some boosting before I enshrine him in Canton
Boosting? There's only 2 HOF'ers who have a career rating better than 89.4. Montana and Young (96.8 and 92.3).
posted by bdaddy at 06:14 PM on February 02, 2009
Warner's 377 yards passing was the second most in Super Bowl history. Who threw for the most yards in Super Bowl history? Kurt Warner. Who's #3 on the list? Kurt Warner.
posted by kirkaracha at 08:58 PM on February 02, 2009
who's 1-3 in Superbowls? Kurt Warner.
(Just kidding..as I said, I think his performance in the SB was very impressive)
posted by bdaddy at 09:14 PM on February 02, 2009
who's 1-3 in Superbowls? Kurt Warner.
I believe Warner is 1-2 in Super Bowls.
posted by holden at 10:11 PM on February 02, 2009
Boosting? There's only 2 HOF'ers who have a career rating better than 89.4. Montana and Young (96.8 and 92.3).
Yes, I think Ben will have to boost his numbers.
Keep in mind that one is judged HOF worthy based on performance against his peers, and right now Roethlisberger's main peer would be Brady. Brady has far superior numbers across the board. Of the current QB's that get mentioned as HOF potentials, only Favre has a rating below Ben's, and he gets in due to the length of his career.
Some of the stats that you and terrapin throw out (But they also include career completion rating of 62.4. 14,974 yards (nearly 3,000 per year for every year in the league, INCLUDING his rookie year), 101 TDs (20/year average) only look good when comparing Ben to QB's from the past. The game has changed considerably in the last 15 years.
This past year Roethlisberger was in the middle of the pack in all major QB stats except interceptions/sacks and fumbles...those he was at the top of the list...not exactly where a HOF candidate should be.
But, don't get me wrong, I clearly said that if he wins another SB he's in regardless of stats, otherwise I think he'll need to improve the stats.
posted by dviking at 10:16 PM on February 02, 2009
I spent more time on this than comments like yours deserve, dviking, but wtf, I'm unemployed. Below is a table I created with the help of data from the Hall of Fame website, and specifically the section on QBs of the modern era. I decide to only include the players who started in at least 1 Super Bowl because in the new modern era that seems to be what the general public uses to measure success. So George Blanda was left out, and while Steve Young was a player on more Super Bowl teams, he only started in 2. I have used bold face to indicate who leads (or is tied for a lead) in any particular category and sorted the table by dviking's criterion.
I personally think it is WAY too early to be speaking of Ben's possible position in the HoF, but I completely disagree with 2 things dviking said above: 1) That a HoF career is measured against one's peers. I believe that each player is measured primarily based on what they did playing the game as an individual first and a team player second. Arm chair and Monday morning QBs are more likely to compare apple to oranges (QBs vs. QBs) than those who actually decide who is enshrined. 2) That a passer rating means anything to the Hall of Fame because that statistic does not reflect leadership, play-calling, and other intangible factors that go into making a successful (read: Hall of Fame) professional quarterback. It doesn't measure how a quarterback manages the game, and it doesn't take into account that a QB may be throwing more when a team is behind, and WAY behind. For those who want more details on passer rating, check out this site.
However, If I use dviking's opinion that players are measured in comparison to their peers and their career passer rating then Ben Roethlisberger will be a shoe-in for the Hal of Fame because Joe Namath is in the Hall.
| Player | Super Bowls Started | Super Bowl Record | Career Passer Rating |
| Steve Young | 2 | 2-0 | 96.8 |
| Joe Montana | 4 | 4-0 | 92.3 |
| Dan Marino | 2 | 0-2 | 86.4 |
| Jim Kelly | 4 | 0-4 | 84.4 |
| Roger Staubach | 4 | 2-2 | 83.4 |
| Len Dawson | 2 | 1-1 | 82.6 |
| Sonny Jurgensen | 1 | 0-1 | 82.6 |
| Troy Aikman | 3 | 3-0 | 81.6 |
| Warren Moon | 0 | 0-0 | 80.9 |
| Bart Starr | 2 | 2-0 | 80.5 |
| Fran Tarkenton | 3 | 0-3 | 80.4 |
| Dan Fouts | 0 | 0-0 | 80.2 |
| John Elway | 5 | 2-3 | 79.9 |
| Johnny Unitas | 2 | 1-1 | 78.2 |
| Bob Griese | 2 | 1-1 | 77.1 |
| Terry Bradshaw | 4 | 4-0 | 70.9 |
| Joe Namath | 1 | 1-0 | 65.5 |
posted by scully at 08:19 AM on February 03, 2009
Keep in mind that one is judged HOF worthy based on performance against his peers
Ben currently is #9 overall in career QB rating. That is against his peers, against HOFs, against everybody. I don't believe QB rating comes up much in HOF voters minds, but even if it did, being 9th overall surely is no negative connotation?
posted by bdaddy at 08:30 AM on February 03, 2009
Terrapin, why the slam? Can't we debate on the merit of the topic?
Anyway, try reading my post a bit more slowly. I clearly state that Ben will have to play some more to get in. He has to win another SB or improve his numbers is all I'm saying.
Every time I hear sports announcers/writers/etc. discussing whether or not a particular player should be in the hall they say something on the line of "He was the dominate player at his position during his career".
Clearly Ben is not being considered next to Sonny Jurgensen, or Johnny Unitas. Sure they were in the modern era, but they played a different game than what is played now. With the increased emphasis on the passing game QB ratings/stats play a larger role in getting into the hall. I do agree that QB rating can be skewed, but all stats can suffer that fate.
I'll stand with my opinion that he is a very good QB that still has some work to do in order to get into the hall.
posted by dviking at 01:32 PM on February 03, 2009
Sorry, dviking, but if you aren't backing up what you say with facts, what you are saying comes across as just stirring the hornet's nest. And so I responded in kind, but with facts.
I'll stand with my opinion that he is a very good QB that still has some work to do in order to get into the hall.
And that's not what you originally said. You said he is "a good QB, however, a career rating of 89.4 will need some boosting before I enshrine him in Canton. If he wins another SB he's in regardless of stats, if he doesn't I think he'll have to bring the numbers up a bit."
The facts above don't back it up any of your statements. We've established that low passer ratings do get you in the hall, and low or no super bowl championships do get you in the hall. If you have data that suggest the bar has been risen, then great, present that. But, I still stand by my opinion that even mentioning Ben in the HoF is premature, and I'm a Steelers' FFS. And I still stand by my disagreement with you that passer rating means ANYTHING when determining a players HoF qualifications. It is a neat little stat for a GAME, but not a career.
Like I said, two words... Joe. Namath. He had a lousy career, and he even had a lousy Super Bowl, but because he made some silly boast that every player makes, he is in the HoF. If he can do it, Ben can.
posted by scully at 02:53 PM on February 03, 2009
Here's the real reason that Pittsburgh was able to prevail (from my favorite news source).
posted by Howard_T at 04:21 PM on February 03, 2009
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on whether Ben will be judged against Joe Namath when it comes time to enter the hall, or if he'll be judged against Favre, Brady, Manning, Warner and the likes.
Facts do back up my points...now, I don't have the time to make a nice chart like you did, so here's a link to a sortable listing of current day QB's. You'll notice that Ben is 26th in QB rating, 14th in yards, 15th in TD's, 21st in completion % for this last year.
My point is, if he continues with production similar to this for the rest of his career, he'll need to win another Super Bowl to get in. If he has several years more like what he did in 2007 he's in easily.
posted by dviking at 05:53 PM on February 03, 2009
Namath is one of those guys who (rightly or wrongly) is in the Hall largely on the basis of his perceived historical importance. Mix one part iconic moment (the guarantee) + one part perception that he helped give the AFC legitimacy + one part his role in helping to redefine QB as a glamour position with corresponding celebrity status and endorsement potential = Hall of Fame. For those reasons, he is a bad comp for just about anyone.
In terms of QB rating, it's a dumb stat that clearly favors the contemporary style passing game -- and when I say contemporary, I mean last 10-15 years, tops. Look at the passer rating leaderboard -- 8 of the top 10 (and 12 of the top 15) players in career passer rating are current players (Roethlisberger is tied for 9th with Drew Brees, for what it's worth). Now, part of that trend surely has to do with the fact that QBs lose effectiveness over time and you would expect some of these guys to drop as they play out their careers, but I think it still points to the fact that offenses are different now than they were historically.
posted by holden at 06:33 PM on February 03, 2009
You'll notice that Ben is 26th in QB rating, 14th in yards, 15th in TD's, 21st in completion % for this last year.
And you'll notice he's the only one with a Super Bowl ring this year :)
posted by scully at 09:10 PM on February 03, 2009
And now video of Troy Polamalu crowd surfing at the Pittsburgh VICTORY parade today.
posted by scully at 09:11 PM on February 03, 2009
And you'll notice he's the only one with a Super Bowl ring this year :) Absolutely, if he wasn't we wouldn't even be having this discussion.
BTW, just to make your point, a writer with the local rag in Dallas, Rick Gosselin, had a piece on Ben today, seems he thinks Ben is pretty much in already, though he did admit that he is a "statistical nightmare". Gosselin is on the voting committee at the HOF, so it seems you have a vote your way. The crowd surfing video was great.
posted by dviking at 11:28 PM on February 03, 2009
In Roethlisberger's defense, his O-line pretty much sucks.
posted by holden at 11:29 PM on February 03, 2009
In Roethlisberger's defense, his O-line pretty much sucks
Yet, the Steelers still won the Super Bowl with his suck-y O-line. Interesting...
posted by BornIcon at 03:19 PM on February 05, 2009
Yet, the Steelers still won the Super Bowl with his suck-y O-line. Interesting...
Not sure I follow your point. Are you suggesting that the O-line could not have sucked because the Steelers won the Super Bowl? Almost every championship team is going to have a weakness -- for the Steelers, in addition to perhaps special teams (excluding FGs), it was an O-line that did a pretty lousy job of pass protection and did not open holes for the running game. Kudos to the Steelers that they won the Super Bowl in spite of their crappy O-line, but my guess is that shoring up the O-line is post-season priority number one for the Steelers.
posted by holden at 09:13 PM on February 05, 2009
The lack of a review at the end was kinda weird. I really expected to see one. I'm not sure it was as conclusive a fumble as they seemed to believe.
Arizona's defence gave the game away. They played soft when they needed to come up big the most. They took bad penalties. Warner played an amazing game, as did Edgerrin James and Larry Fitzgerald.