Tomorrow, for the first time in its history, the Arizona Cardinals will be going to the Superbowl.
To some this is great news.
To others this is sad news.
To most it is no news.
To me, well, it leaves my feelings confused.
See, when I was growing up in the 70's and the 80's, the Cardinals played in St. Louis.
They were our team.
We christened them the "Cardiac Cards" since they had a tendency to either lose at the last few seconds of the game, or pull off a stunning victory. Either way we, the fans, were left amazed.
Their owner, Bill Bidwell, was not a favorite person around town. He was a cheapskate when it came to the team, not spending a penny more than he had to to field a team. One source of mine says that under NFL guidelines, there is a minimum of 2 towels available per team member. Bill kept to that minimum, and the Cardinals were the only team to do so. Other teams had enough towels, the second lowest average was 13 towels per player.
For years we rooted for the Cardinals, urged them on, and only asked one thing--that they beat the Dallas Cowboys.
When they didn't we got upset and planned for next year.
When they didn't make it to the playoffs, or died in the first round, we started planning for the next year.
Then Mr. Bidwell decided that this losing team needed a new stadium. He, of course, would not build it, but if the City of St. Louis wanted to build it for him, to meet his specs, and to give him everything he wanted, then the St. Louis Cardinals would remain.
Otherwise he'd move them out of town.
St. Louis doesn't like to be blackmailed, especially by a losing team.
After a year of ugly political infighting and public debate, we said good-bye to the Cardinals.
It didn't help that the entire team, feeling the disgust of the people, played the worst football I've ever seen. I went to one of their games that season. The Cardinals ended the day with Negative Yards Gained. They had been sacked for more losses than they had run.
They moved to Arizona and cost Bidwell lots of money.
We all wished them the worst of luck, and sometimes wishes do come true.
Years went by and we survived as a football-less town.
Then the city fathers, missing their sports boxes and football patter, built a big stadium and asked for a team.
We got the Rams.
They did terrible the first couple of years, and some complained that they were not much better than the Cards.
In truth, they beat the Cards, so I loved the Rams.
Then a rookie quarterback replaced an injured quarterback and...well...magic.
The Rams, under Kurt Warner, won it all. St. Louis went to the Super Bowl, and won it.
The next year we did almost as well. We went to the Super Bowl, but lost.
Those were good days for St. Louis Football.
Kurt in particular was everyone's favorite. The hard working underdog who was clean-living, ran charities, and was perfect.
Then Kurt stopped being so perfect. He ran into trouble, and stopped being so great.
Eventually we found a QB who seemed to be younger and better, so we let Kurt go.
He went to Arizona.
We felt sorry for him.
But there he helped do the impossible.
Bill Bidwell has gotten older, and apparently turned the running of his team over to his son, who is not afraid to spend money on it.
And between the younger Bidwell and Kurt Warner, the Cardinals are about to play in the Super Bowl.
And I have to think real hard. Is it better for me to root for a QB who brought me such great memories, or to root against a team name that bring me such bitter ones?
Its been 20 years since the Cardinals left St. Louis.
But I don't want to see the old Bill Bidwell dancing around with a Super Bowl ring.
Posts: 1941 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm rooting for the Cards. They originally came from Chicago (back when the Bears were still the Decatur Staleys) and that's all the link I need.
Posts: 4515 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well I'm rooting for the Cards, for these reasons:
1) They were the first team I liked when I started watching football as a 23 year old foreign student at BYU Hawaii in 1977 - Terry Metcalf, man, what a running back. I moved on from them over the years, eventually settling on the Houston Oilers as my team, and transferring that allegiance (after a period of bitterness about THEIR move) to the Titans;
2) My son and his family live in Phoenix, and I actually spent a week there in 2007, so I'm claiming hometown fan status for myself
3) I'm really happy to see Kurt Warner doing so well
I can relate to how you feel about Bidwill, but I decided a long time ago that if I let what goes on in the front office mess up how I feel about a team I won't be able to support any team. It's why I forgave the Titans and started supporting them again. For me, the team is who I see on the field and sidelines on game day (not counting Jerry Jones intrusions), forget about the rest.
If the Cards win, turn the tv off before the owner starts celebrating, that's my advice. Just enjoy Big Red.
Posts: 867 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: You could also choose not to care.
Yeah but nobody takes that option seriously.
In the interest of full disclosure it's full steam ahead for the Cardinals as far as I am concerned.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I suppose that I'm vaguely rooting for the Steelers because in elementary school most of the other kids had favorite NFL teams so I arbitrarily picked one to be mine (that nobody else had - being non-conformist in my conformity) - which ended up being the Steelers.
I don't know if I'll actually get around to watching the game, though. I don't really follow the NFL.
Posts: 1466 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Great game, marred by some stupid calls by the officials, including the failure to at least review the last 'fumble' by Warner. We got the NFL Network broadcast here (NZ) on ESPN's international feed and Sterling Sharpe is really annoying.
Posts: 867 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Rough game. That interception/run at the end of the 2nd was redonk, but they should have thrown 92 out of the game after that crazy personal foul later on. He basically attacked the other player. The last quarter was a freakin' roller coaster. And it looked like both feet were on the ground.
Also the one second High Life commercial was better than any of the full length ones by far.
Posts: 2596 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lisa, the key is recognizing at which point Santonio Holmes had control of the ball. It was when it was firmly in his grasp. That was before he tucked it in while falling down. When he had the ball firmly in his grasp--no juggling--both his feet were solidly on the ground.
Holmes also won the MVP award, mainly because of that catch, and the skill with which he kept both feet on the ground.
You know, the Cardinals have nothing to be ashamed of. They very well could have won the game. They almost did, leading 23-20 with only two minutes left in the game. This despite the adversity of having that pass intercepted at the goal line at the end of the first half, and returned all the way for a touchdown the other way--the longest play in Superbowl history.
I tend to be a "homer," I don't care much for post season games unless my home (Detroit area) team is in the playoffs. But since that means the Lions, it will be a long time before I see them in the Superbowl. So I went ahead and watched the game. It was a very good, entertaining game. Pittsburgh had been favored by six, and only won by four, so you could say it was a moral victory for the Cards. They certainly did prove they belonged in the Superbowl.
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
From what I saw, his left foot touched down, and his right foot hit the back of his left foot. But it never touched the ground.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Cashew: Great game, marred by some stupid calls by the officials, including the failure to at least review the last 'fumble' by Warner. We got the NFL Network broadcast here (NZ) on ESPN's international feed and Sterling Sharpe is really annoying.
Are you sure they didn't review it? They didn't make a big deal of it, but I could have sworn that the announcers did mention them reviewing the play and quickly ruling it a fumble.
Posts: 2437 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
They reviewed it 'in the booth' he said. A practice that has no official standing in the NFL but has cropped up a number of times this year.
No one in the booth has any standing to rule on a play, only to call (or not) for the ref to review a ruling in the last 2 minutes of a half. The replay assistant's job is not to determine whether it is a fumble or not. Their job is merely to determine if the play warrants review.
Whether it was a fumble, or not, is somewhat debatable.
That it was close enough, and important enough, to warrant review is plain.
The worst part is that I have become so accustomed to these questionable actions on the part of the refs that I am no longer surprised or even upset. For an organization that takes such great pains to achieve reputable officiating a ridiculous number of games end up with these long shadows.
Posts: 675 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lisa, the refs did review the play, using all available angles, and they said both his feet touched the ground when he had the ball firmly in his grasp. It doesn't have to be at the same time--it can be one foot, then the other, so long as both feet did touch the ground after he had possession of the ball.
I liked the way the refs conscientiously reviewed several plays on their own initiative--or on the initiative of officials in the booth.
The challenge seems to be working well, too. The Cards got a Steeler touchdown overturned by it, so the Steelers had to settle for a field goal.
I just wish they would introduce this practice more extensively in baseball. I think they are going to have reviews to make sure whether the drive down the foul line was fair or foul. But for that matter, I don't see why they can't have laser beams and computers calling balls and strikes with 100% accuracy. It is ridiculous the way every umpire has a different strike zone, and sometimes it changes during the game. The batters know it. The pitchers and catchers know it. You can see it on the TV screen.
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
This game was marred by ridiculous, excessive and frankly discriminatory rulings by the referees. I bet they all received some big, quiet and anonymous $.
Posts: 3060 | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The last two minutes of the game here on one cable provider were interrupted by a porno movie. Someone hacked into the feed and inserted a full frontal male nudity scene with the focus on the male anatomy and other porno moves. Thankfully we have Dish Network so my kids didn't have to see that but plenty of kids did seeing as this cable provider is one of 2 major providers in the area.
It was a fantastic game though even though my team lost.
Posts: 1132 | Registered: A Long Time Ago!
| IP: Logged |
posted
The call that really bugged me the most was the running into the holder call. Who's ever heard of that before? The Card player had no way of stopping and was in fact stumbling, barely able to retain his balance. And whty wasn't Santonio Holmes flagged afer his TD for using the football as a prop in his celebration? The officiating really let the gane down, imo.
Posts: 867 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lisa: Yeah, what was he doing at the game? He should have been doing a differential with Kumar and 13.
--
I was pulling for the Cards because I hate the steelers. This is why they lost.
As much as I hate to say it, yes, both feet were in bounds. There was sort of a 5 o'clock angle they showed on tv and it was obvious from there that his back foot was touching and he had control of the ball.
That wasn't a fumble though, Kurt should have had one more shot at the end zone.
Posts: 7085 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would have liked to see one more Hail Mary attempt, too. Of course, the Steelers knew that was what he was going to do, it takes time for a deep play to develop (the receivers have to run a long way), so they blitzed and got to him.
As to whether it was a fumble--it looked to me like he lost control of the ball just before or at the exact moment his arm started forward in a half-hearted throwing motion. He could have been trying to throw the ball, or he may have made the arm-wave motion after knowing the ball was coming loose. If it were a tie--the ball came out at the same instant he started his throwing motion--who does the tie go to? Anyway, I felt the official call was within the bounds of acceptability.
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Both feet were definitely on the ground, he didn't intentionally knock over that player, they should have reviewed the "fumble" at the end of the game in full view of all the spectators, Cards shouldn't have given up 100 yards in penalties.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
