Super Bowl XXXIX Rewind

Five Quick Hits

* The Patriots are 3-0 in February. No other NFL franchise has ever won a game in February.

* In his team's last five games, Andy Reid has successfully overturned an interception by his own defense and an escaped sack by his own quarterback.

* Are Adam Sandler and Chris Rock really starring in a remake of "The Longest Yard"? Sacrilege.

* FOX missed the beginning of three separate plays during a single drive in the second half. No excuse for that.

* The Freddie Mitchell comments were this week's most overblown story. This is what you get for giving the media two weeks between games.

Super Bowl XXXIX is in the books, and the New England Patriots emerged with a 24-21 victory. The game wasn't as close as the final score — which tied a Super Bowl record for second-closest ever — makes it seem, but it was competitive from start to finish. This fan has no complaints.

I'll have a short article next week to tackle the recent Hall of Fame elections and the All-Loser Team, and maybe the Pro Bowl if I watch it. For now, though, let's get right to the game.

A Tale of Two Receivers

Defenses dominated the first quarter, but both teams found heroes on offense as the game progressed. MVP Deion Branch tied a Super Bowl record with 11 receptions and gained 133 receiving yards, 30 more than the rest of his teammates combined. Terrell Owens, recovering from an injury so severe that his doctor didn't clear him to play, led the Eagles with nine receptions for 122 yards. His nine catches equaled the total by the rest of Philly's WR corps.

Over the last two weeks, I never really doubted that Owens would play in the Super Bowl, but I figured he'd have a three receptions, 30 yards kind of game.

Wrong.

T.O. clearly wasn't 100%, but he played extremely well, showing a lot of heart and determination. Owens was a difference-maker for the Eagles, and his exceptional performance (only six weeks after major surgery) was nothing less than stunning.

Before the game, I worried that if Philadelphia won without a clear MVP, Owens would get undeserved sympathy votes. By the time the Eagles started that last drive in the fourth quarter, he had earned a good chance of getting mine.

Did New England Win, or Did Philadelphia Lose?

Steve Young, speaking on NFL Primetime after the game, repeatedly mentioned that this was more a case of the Eagles losing than of the Patriots winning. Philadelphia had its chances early in the game, but didn't take advantage.

Young is mostly right, but the problem is that the situation he described is almost always true when New England plays a good team. What Young misses is that New England never beats itself. More than anything else, Bill Belichick and his staff emphasize mistake-free football. The Eagles got more yards, more first downs, and dominated third downs on both sides of the ball. But they finished -3 in turnovers.

So how did the Eagles lose the game?

* Donovan McNabb looked awful. He misfired on a number of easy passes and tied a career-high with three interceptions. McNabb's running ability was a frequently-cited "X-factor" coming into the game, but he had trouble even getting out of the pocket, and never crossed the line of scrimmage.

* No running game. Brian Westbrook is an excellent player, but he isn't a pure RB. Westbrook is more like the true halfback-receiver typified by Lenny Moore, or Charley Taylor before he became a full-time WR. Marshall Faulk is an exceptional receiver, and he sometimes lines up like a wideout, but he's still a running back. Westbrook is a true hybrid, as much wide receiver as running back.

That kind of versatility is great, but Philadelphia is a little weak in the tackle-to-tackle department. Westbrook averaged less than three yards per carry and Dorsey Levens had one rush for one yard. McNabb, meanwhile, threw 51 passes, the second-highest total in Super Bowl history. If one difference stood between the two teams, it was ability to run the ball.

* Clock management. I don't believe the Eagles could have won after they fell behind 24-14, but the lack of urgency shown by Philadelphia's offense certainly didn't help. Tough to understand what Philly's offensive braintrust was thinking.

At the end of the first quarter, Philadelphia had the momentum and clearly was outplaying New England. Owens was near full speed, Roman Phifer was having problems covering L.J. Smith, and the defense wasn't giving New England anything. The Eagles were unable to capitalize while the going was good, and by halftime, even with the score tied, it felt like the Patriots were going to win.

New England on Offense

The Patriot offense was clearly a little off its game in the first quarter. The Eagles came out blitzing, and New England didn't seem entirely ready for it. Both tackles were called for false start penalties. Receivers had trouble getting open downfield against Philadelphia's terrific secondary.

Adjustments came quickly. Most significantly, the Pats used four-wide receiver sets much more often late in the game, forcing Roderick Hood and Matt Ware into the game. The Eagles blitzed less often and seldom with more than one guy, instead keeping extra guys in coverage to help their young DBs. I hesitate to say the Philadelphia defense tired as the game went on, but it definitely appeared to have less energy in the second half than at the beginning of the game.

It appeared that the Eagles defense was better-prepared at the beginning of the game than New England's offense, but the Patriots made better adjustments during the game, and particularly at halftime. I'm tempted to believe that Charlie Weis may have out-thought himself in his initial preparation: I know they'll do X, but they know I know, so I'll do Y, but they know I know that they know...

Branch, who has established himself as one of the best receivers in the NFL, had a career game. His catch on 2nd-and-13 was the play of the game in a contest that had its share of great catches.

Philadelphia on Offense

Who would have thought coming into this game that Philadelphia's biggest weapon would be Terrell Owens?

New England's defense makes extraordinary quarterbacks look ordinary, and McNabb was just the latest in a long line of victims, but it was truly strange to see him muffing short throws — sometimes with little or no pressure — and lobbing up balls that begged to be intercepted. McNabb has the second-lowest interception percentage in NFL history. In 97 games, this was only the third time he has thrown more than two picks. It's not just Peyton Manning and undefeated rookies; the Patriots do this to everybody.

McNabb did make an incredible throw on Brian Westbrook's touchdown reception. Westbrook compensated for his lack of production on the ground with seven receptions for 60 yards, and he had some nice plays, but the Eagles never really established him as a threat. Other than a meaningless 22-yard scamper as time ran out at the end of the first half, Westbrook never broke a play for more than 15 yards.

On one play, Troy Aikman referred to #36 as Michael Westbrook. I heard Aikman do the same thing once or twice earlier this season, too, and he's not the only one. Apparently the former Washington WR made a strong impression during his disappointing tenure in the nation's capital.

New England's pass rush gave Philadelphia's (normally reliable) line problems all game. McNabb was sacked four times for 33 yards and hurried many other throws. The Eagles seemed to have problems against the 3-4. Pittsburgh also employs the 3-4, and the Steelers held McNabb to a season-worst 55.7 passer rating and the Eagles to a season-low three points.

The one player New England never seemed to have an answer for was Owens. It's tough to suggest that Reid and Brad Childress underused a receiver who caught nine passes and was playing hurt, but with Ty Law, Tyrone Poole, and Eugene Wilson out of the game, the Pats didn't have anyone capable of neutralizing T.O.'s combination of size and speed.

Most Valuable Player

I voted for Deion Branch, the first time my choice has won the award since Kurt Warner in Super Bowl XXXIV. Tom Brady, Rodney Harrison, and Corey Dillon would have been reasonable choices, too.

Comments and Conversation

February 8, 2005

Tim Shelley:

You’re wrong about Westbrook. He’s just as much of a running back as anyone else in the league. It’s just that you can dismantle a defense with the mismatches he creates so why not do that? I know your comments stem from his lack of running number in the super bowl, but can you name ONE running back that would’ve done any better ? No, because no running back can do anything when the line allows the defense to smother the running back. There were no holes….at all. In fact his quickness is what allowed for the few decent runs at all….if u put Dillon behind the ealges line in that game he has about 10 yards.

February 8, 2005

Jim:

I thought the most important play of the game – one which I have yet to find mentioned in any article about the game – was at the end when Philly had the ball on their own 5 yard line with about 48 seconds left and McNabb threw a pass in the middle of the field at the 5 yard line. Result: the clock kept running, there was no gain on the play, and by the time the receivers (who had run deep routes) got back to the line of scrimmage about 30 seconds was lost and only 17 seconds remained. At that point the game was over. The interception was predictable. I do believe the team could have moved the 60 yards necessary for a shot at a field goal during that initial 48 seconds.

Leave a Comment

Featured Site