I don’t know what to get more excited about, The Seahawks vs. the Steelers in the Superbowl or Dick Jauron getting hired as the Buffalo Bills’ new head coach. Yeah, that’s exciting stuff.

It seems like a lot of road teams won in this year’s playoffs, and won easily. Does home field advantage really exist? If your team is good enough then you should win no matter where you play, and we know from experience that “Bear weather” really doesn’t mean anything.

And so now we head into that dark lonesome part of the winter where the Bulls and Blackhawks suck so bad that no one cares and everyone gets excited about pitchers and catchers reporting to spring training, and Cub fans start building up all this false hope. Believe me, I know all about that one. It’s a dark dark place.

4 Comments so far

  1. Dave! (unregistered) on January 23rd, 2006 @ 1:50 pm

    Dark and cold.

  2. steven (unregistered) on January 23rd, 2006 @ 2:19 pm

    Dark and cold, yes. But how can you resist the lure of ST and the fact that Cubs p’s and c’s report to camp on 2/15?? We might be beating ourselves over the heads come Aug 1 for believing, but at least let us have the glimmer of hope that is Spring Training!!! Is that too much to ask?!?!??!

    :::throwing hands up and running down the hallway:::

  3. Mirella (unregistered) on January 23rd, 2006 @ 3:37 pm

    Is the Super Bowl “blah” to you because the Bears aren’t in it, or because you don’t consider the Seahawks or the Steelers to be exciting teams to watch? Would it be less blah if Indy or the the Pats were in it?

    I ask this because, as a lifelong Steeler die-hard, I am thrilled that my team (a team that seen plenty of playoff and AFC championship action in the last decade) has finally made it back to the big game, but I’m a little surprised by the reaction thus far — that this is going to be a boring Super Bowl that no one cares about.

    I understand that only two teams’ fans have a vested interest in the game, but I’m baffled by the implication that is would be a more explosive, exciting game if one of the perenial frontrunners were in it. (I would argue that the Steelers should be a considered a perennial frontrunner, given their division titles, playoff berths and visits to the AFC championship game, but most people cleary don’t put us in that group.)

    Can anyone enlighten a thorougly bewildered member of the Steeler Nation? Doesn’t the fact that we trounced the “top three” AFC teams indicate that we can put on a good show? What’s a team gotta do to make the Super Bowl worth watching?

  4. Danny Doom (unregistered) on January 23rd, 2006 @ 5:03 pm

    Of course the Bears would have made it a lot more interesting to me, but I think the Seahawks (and the Panthers) are teams that I find hard to care about. I like the Steelers, and I hope they win, but something about the matchup leaves me cold. For reasons I’m not sure I even understand, I would be a lot more excited if it was Steelers-Redskins or Steelers-Giants, or of course, Steelers-Bears.

    Really, the NFC kind of blows.

    It’s also a blah because most of the games really sucked in the playoffs, lots of blow-outs and not a whole lot of drama.

    Then again, when the Bears trounced everyone in ’85 it was the most entertaining season I think the NFL ever had. Yes, biased, but they transcended the usual boundaries and made it a spectacle. I think part of the problem is that the Bears can’t ever seem to top that, and so everything else is a letdown.

Terms of use | Privacy Policy | Content: Creative Commons | Site and Design © 2009 | Metroblogging ® and Metblogs ® are registered trademarks of Bode Media, Inc.