Skip to main content

Superbowl 50: Broncos versus Panthers

I know that some of my readers don't really understand that the Superbowl has come and gone for another year until they read what I have to say on the subject. So this one's for you.

refer to caption

The Broncos/Panthers matchup was widely anticipated. Neither of the two teams comes from a really huge consumer marker (no New York, Chicago, or southern California team was involved) but the comparisons were intriguing. A great offense, Carolina's, would be going head to head with a great defense, Denver's.

Things went Denver's way, almost from the start, more consistently than anyone had expected.

Another big item: the standout commercial in the first half was a Marilyn Monroe take on the Snickers bar series, "you're not you when you're hungry."

The stand-out for the second half involved a herd of running hot dogs, and the tagline "Meet the Ketchups."

The evolution of the game

One much watched player: Michael Oher, the inspiration for the human interest portions of Michael Lewis' book THE BLIND SIDE, and for a Sandra Bullock movie inspired in turn by that book. Lewis used Oher's personal story to give some specificity to the theme of his book, which is that the evolution of the game of American football has made the role of the offensive left tackle ever more important. Lewis thought that the career of Lawrence Taylor in the 1980s had really set this development in motion. Oher's ascent was simply a more recent manifestation thereof.

Most quarterbacks are right handed, and they tend to face right and throw that way more often than otherwise. This means that their "blind side" is on their left, and the tackle on that side is often the only fact standing between the QB and a bone crushing and/or game changing sack.

The movie adaptation isn't interested in the dry stuff about the evolution of a game over decades. It focuses on the human interest stuff concerning Oher, a black homeless fellow, and  the wealthy white family that took him into their home.

Back to the playing field

Finally we get back to the playing field and to what happened in this game, this Super Bowl. At the end of the first half, the Broncos sacked the Panthers' quarterback, Cam Newton, and twitter lit up. The tweets mostly said the same thing. Referencing a well-known scene from the movie, they said with slight variations in wording that Sandra Bullock should run on the field and give her stepson her pep talk again.

One of the relatively kind tweets said simply that the famous Oher -- pictured above -- was having nothing more than an "Oher-dinary" game.

THEN THE decisive play of the game, with 4 minutes left on the clock, was an utter failure of the Carolina Offensive line, though not especially of Oher. The whole defensive live pressed forward and, because the whole offensive line crumbled, this forced a fumble.

The tweets about that play bashed Cam Newton, not his designated bodyguards. Newton visibly drew back after his fumble, apparently trusting that another team member would jump on it, not trying to do so himself.

Here's a link to a particular discussion:  from Sporting News.

So: now you know how it went down. That fulfills my Super Bowl duties for another year.  Except for one point: this should have been known as Super Bowl L. Every porior Super Bowl has been designated by a roman numeral. This time, though, uniquely, in all the marketing it was Super Bowl 50. Go figure.


Popular posts from this blog

Great Chain of Being

One of the points that Lovejoy makes in the book of that title I mentioned last week is the importance, in the Neo-Platonist conceptions and in the later development of the "chain of being" metaphor, of what he calls the principle of plenitude. This is the underlying notion that everything that can exist must exist, that creation would not be possible at all were it to leave gaps.

The value of this idea for a certain type of theodicy is clear enough.

This caused theological difficulties when these ideas were absorbed into Christianity.  I'll quote a bit of what Lovejoy has to say about those difficulties:

"For that conception, when taken over into Christianity, had to be accommodated to very different principles, drawn from other sources, which forbade its literal interpretation; to carry it through to what seemed to be its necessary implications was to be sure of falling into one theological pitfall or another."

The big pitfalls were: determinism on the on…

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.

We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a majestic wate…