Super Bowl LX, 2/8/26 Levi's Stadium

[JuggernautJ]

In hindsight, the real SB was the NFC Championship game....

Maybe... but I'm not in complete agreement with that sentiment.
I do think of the surviving four (and if you include Bo Nix in the mix) the Patriots were probably the weakest team.
But I think the Broncos (again, with a healthy Bo) would've been a worthy champion.

I think it'd be more appropriate to acknowledge the Seahawks for their strengths than to just demean their opponents.
(Not referring to you, Brian. Your opinions are more nuanced...)
That Seattle squad is a good team with good coaching. I was very impressed by MVP KW III's effort.

It'll be interesting to see how they fare in the next few years.
And to see what effect Walker's success has on the perceived value of running backs in the short term.

[Brian wolf]

After watching a replay of the game, the Patriots defense came to play but just got worn down with the offense turning the ball over. With 9-0 and 12-0 leads for Seattle, the Patriots still could have called more runs or screens but once Maye got that first pick, the dam finally burst.

Walker deserved the MVP, though the defense had alot of stars led by Witherspoon and Hall. The kickers for Seattle were awesome. That punter, had a great game.

Even though Walker's big run was called back, you could see that the frustrations of his injury plagued seasons, were finally washed away and like former Raven Priest Holmes, who shared the backfield before winning his only SB, could Walker go to another team and become a great back like Holmes did going to KC? Would the Chiefs themselves look at Walker in free agency, if they dont try for Love in the draft?

[CSKreager]

In hindsight, the real SB was the NFC Championship game.

Seahawks/Rams being the real SB says all I need to know how watered down and mediocre a season this was

[Brian wolf]

The NFC West, North and AFC South divisional races were outstanding.

[sluggermatt15]

The NFC West, North and AFC South divisional races were outstanding.

AFC North came down to the final play of the regular season, too.

[Brian wolf]

There is no doubt that the Dark Side defense had a great SB but watching the NE left side of the offensive line, those guys Campbell and Wilson, were constantly being thrown back to the QB, like they were on skates? Did they not wear the right shoes/cleats for the field? Even with run blocking they struggled.

You have to criticize the Patriot coaches for not giving them more tight end or backs help with chipping those rushers.

Their performance reminded me of the Broncos in the 1977/78 SB, where their left side linemen kept getting tossed aside by Harvey Martin and Randy White.

[74_75_78_79_]

After, practically, three decades of bad Super Bowl games to start off with, we’ve been pretty ‘spoiled’ since SBXXX. Two more good SB games would follow from there, making it three in a row. From there we had bombs like Den/Atl, Balt/NYG, and TB/Oak but each one sandwiched by good games. There wouldn’t be another bad SB game all the way until Seattle over Denver!

Yes, Pit/Sea followed by Ind/Chi - both weren’t good games, but they weren’t bad either. Same with Den/Car and the second Pats/Rams one. The next clunker after ’13 would be TB/KC. Which leads us to these last two SBs…the first back-to-back ‘bad’ SBs since Steve Young getting the monkey off his back and the three consecutive SBs leading up??

What do you all think it was that made the first thirty years of this event usually a bad game whilst the three decades since have been mostly good? A coincidence?

[Brian wolf]

The Chiefs clunker last year was almost identical to the performance against TB in 2020/21. It really makes you wonder, especially since their offensive line held up well against Buffalo in both AFC Championship games?

Free agency helps play a role in better later SBs, where the first thirty years, it was usually more dominant teams. Especially the NFC in the 80s, 90s ... better coaching and teams.

Its really amazing how many players constantly move around these days. It really is, a results driven league rather than patient player development. A player either has it down with a team or system within 2-3 years, or he is gone and replaced. If experience can help Darnold resurrect his career after being thrown to the wolves with the Jets, which current QBs, especially free agents, could also have a resurgence?

Could Mac Jones, Kyle Murray, Tua Tags, Zach Wilson, Kenny Pickett, Marcus Mariota, Malik Willis etc ... get a fresh start and develop along with a team at a higher level? We have already seen it with Stafford, Mayfield and Darnold, who had 1st round grades.

[JuggernautJ]

Its really amazing how many players constantly move around these days. It really is, a results driven league rather than patient player development. A player either has it down with a team or system within 2-3 years, or he is gone and replaced...

Which means to me, among other things, that there is a far greater emphasis on raw, physical talent and much less on teamwork, strategy, skill and development... things which used to constitute good football (and which football was supposed to "teach" the young people who played it).

Are today's athletes superior to what we saw in the earlier days of the NFL?
Absolutely, yes.

Are the teams proportionally better?
That's a matter of opinion but I would say "No."

What do you all think?
I know we're a bunch of old folks (i.e. historians) here but (in your opinion) is the game played today a better game than the one we grew up with?

For myself I'll just say that this season constituted and all-time low in live games watched and an all-time high in old games watched on youtube, etc.
I've gone from watching every game available to maybe one to two games a week... usually Sunday and Monday night. There are more games available and, being retired now, I am available to watch more of them but my viewership is probably 25% of what it once was. Whereas my watching older games has increased at least by the inverse of that number.
I hope NFL Marketing reads this and realizes it is the wave of the future if they don't get back to basics.

[Jay Z]

Its really amazing how many players constantly move around these days. It really is, a results driven league rather than patient player development. A player either has it down with a team or system within 2-3 years, or he is gone and replaced...

Which means to me, among other things, that there is a far greater emphasis on raw, physical talent and much less on teamwork, strategy, skill and development... things which used to constitute good football (and which football was supposed to "teach" the young people who played it).

Are today's athletes superior to what we saw in the earlier days of the NFL?
Absolutely, yes.

Are the teams proportionally better?
That's a matter of opinion but I would say "No."

What do you all think?
I know we're a bunch of old folks (i.e. historians) here but (in your opinion) is the game played today a better game than the one we grew up with?

For myself I'll just say that this season constituted and all-time low in live games watched and an all-time high in old games watched on youtube, etc.
I've gone from watching every game available to maybe one to two games a week... usually Sunday and Monday night. There are more games available and, being retired now, I am available to watch more of them but my viewership is probably 25% of what it once was. Whereas my watching older games has increased at least by the inverse of that number.
I hope NFL Marketing reads this and realizes it is the wave of the future if they don't get back to basics.

If you watch the old games, the talent today is clearly better. The old players were much more sloppy, more really bad passes and ints thrown, carrying the ball like a loaf of bread and fumbling a lot. Better play is why turnovers have gone down so much, teams spend a lot more time on ball security.

Passing percentages, kicker accuracy, you can't watch old games and say it was as good. Receivers getting their feet down in bounds, they nail it almost every time now, much sloppier in the past. The players practice their skills much more and much longer today, let's face it, and they are better at all of those things where it's a measurable skill.

On defense in the 1970s, you rarely had subs. They started doing the nickel backs then, and a few teams would maybe switch in someone for pass rush, most didn't but a few did. And that's it, no formation variations, no trying to confuse the playcalling. And no using 7 defensive linemen in a rotation the way Seattle did, the bench just didn't play very much.

Now this goes down to the lower levels too. College and High School ball are far better played than they were in the 1970s.

This doesn't mean you can't enjoy the old games, any more than you can enjoy High School or College ball today or prefer it the NFL (of course College ball is professional at this point.)