Super Bowl LVII: The Inevitable Patrick Mahomes
NFL Super Bowl - Best Super Bowl ever? Maybe, for the first 58 minutes. Worst Super Bowl ending ever? You might not want to say the words "defensive holding" anywhere near Greater Philly for a few weeks. Love it or hate it (or a little of both), the NFL gave us our money's worth with the Kansas City Chiefs' 38-35 victory over the Philadelphia Eagles in Super Bowl LVII.
Super Bowl LVII: What it Means
One Super Bowl victory is an accomplishment. Two of them make an era. With their victory over the Eagles in Super Bowl LVII, the Chiefs formally ushered in the Patrick Mahomes Era.
Oh, you thought we were already in the Patrick Mahomes Era? Not really.
Remember the Aaron Rodgers Era? Nope, because it never happened, not outside of Wisconsin. Rodgers, for all his greatness, was just a supporting character for Phase II and Phase III of the Tom Brady Epochs.
There was no Russell Wilson Era, either. Wilson lost his chance to upstage Brady and establish an era after his Seahawks vanquished Peyton Manning a decade ago. Rodgers and Wilson now behave more and more like silly Silver Age comic book supervillains with each passing year: curses, foiled again, time to slink into our volcano lairs.
Mahomes and the Chiefs faced a similar fate if they lost to the Eagles, especially with Mahomes' megabucks due to start rolling in. Joe Burrow is already being offered the Next Brady crown. The hipsters cannot stop gushing about Justin Herbert. Jalen Hurts (whose four-total-touchdown performance on Sunday may go overlooked by history) would have been the toast of the league if not for a play here and a play there. Josh Allen and his army wait to attack yet again from the tundra next year. An "overpaid, overrated" Mahomes narrative has been skulking about in the brush since Super Bowl LV, waiting for its chance to pounce.
Mahomes was having none of it. He triumphed on Sunday in every way an athlete and champion can triumph. He overcame a halftime injury, a re-aggravation of the injury that he overcame weeks ago in the playoffs. He led a comeback from a 10-point halftime deficit. He outran defenders on an ankle that looked like it should have been in an air cast. He engineered a game-winning fourth-quarter drive in the final minutes. He managed the game, with no sacks or turnovers against the most sack-happy defense of the last 30 years.
Mahomes was gritty. He was elusive. He was poised. He looked like he was buffed by a dozen power-ups and cheat codes. Sure, he got assists from Andy Reid's game plan full of surprises and some big plays from unexpected contributors. The great ones never do it alone. Mahomes was Michael Jordan mixed with Willis Reed mixed with Tom Brady mixed with, well, Mahomes. He was, ultimately, inevitable.
One Super Bowl victory can, over time, fade into "ONLY one Super Bowl victory." That sounds preposterous to fans who wait decades for one moment of vindication. But it makes perfect sense to Eagles fans who are smarting this morning, Packers fans who are perennially salty about 13-win seasons, and talk-radio personalities who cater to the perpetually dissatisfied and aggrieved. I can hear them now, echoing in my phone during my guest spots from the future of some parallel world where the Chiefs lost on Sunday. "What is Patrick Mahomes' legacy? After all, he ONLY won one Super Bowl?"
Even the best quarterbacks—ESPECIALLY the best quarterbacks, the ones that cannot claim moral victory after 11 wins and a playoff berth—are always one bad day from becoming yesterday's news.
Sunday's Chiefs win was not just a second championship. It recontextualized 2020 and 2021. Those seasons are no longer a slow retreat from glory, but the second act of the saga, Mahomes' Empire Strikes Back, complete with Brady helming a rebuilt Death Star.
And now? The Chiefs are the clear successors to the Patriots; 2019-2022 a cohesive whole of excellence; Brady a Force Ghost in his underwear; Rodgers and Wilson in full retreat; Burrow, Herbert, Allen, Hurts, and others waiting a turn that may or may not come.
And no future provocateur, eager to feed sour grapes to grouchy fans during the midday shift, will ever be able to straight-facedly claim that Mahomes was overhyped, overpaid, or othered into some "yeah, but" category again.
Amen.
Super Bowl LVII: What Happened
The Eagles opened the game with a crisp, balanced 75-yard touchdown drive, capped with a Jalen Hurts touchdown sneak. The Chiefs answered briskly with a 75-yard drive of their own, highlighted by 20- and 18-yard Travis Kelce receptions (the latter a touchdown) and a 24-yard run by South Jersey's Isiah Pacheco.
An OPI penalty on the first play of the next Eagles possession resulted in a stalled drive. The Chiefs drove into scoring position with the help of a 22-yard Kelce reception, but Harrison Butker's 42-yard field goal attempt doinked off the right upright.
The Eagles started the second quarter with A.J. Brown out-maneuvering and out-muscling Trent McDuffie and Juan Thornhill for a 45-yard touchdown.
But after an Eagles defensive stop and what looked like a promising drive, Hurts mishandled the football while changing hands during a designed third-and-6 run. Nick Bolton scooped up the loose ball for a 36-yard Chiefs touchdown. The Eagles bounced back from Hurts' miscue with a run- and swing pass-heavy 75-yard, 7:19 drive featuring two fourth-down conversions, one of them a long Hurts designed run on fourth-and-5.
Disaster appeared to strike when the Chiefs got the ball back with 2:20 to play in the half. Mahomes came up limping badly on his gimpy ankle after getting hogtied on a failed scramble. The Eagles missed an opportunity when an apparent DeVonta Smith catch was ruled incomplete upon sub-molecular replay review, but a Jake Elliott field goal gave the Eagles a 24-14 lead.
After Rihanna defied gravity in a Halftime Salute to Super Smash Bros, Mahomes trotted onto the field with his ankle shot full of Toradol and nanorobots and led a smooth 75-yard drive highlighted by several throws under pressure (including a shoestring catch by Kelce) and perhaps the most nimble scramble in history by a man with one numb leg.
The next Eagles drive collapsed into a "What's a Catch?" singularity. What was called a bang-bang Miles Sanders fumble and scoop-and-score touchdown by Bolton on the field was ruled an incomplete pass upon review. A third-and-14 conversion by Dallas Goedert was upheld after referees subjected the replay to CSI analysis and scoured the NFL rulebook with a team of lawyers. The Eagles burned 7:45 of game time (tied for the longest drive in Super Bowl history) but were forced to settle for an Elliot field goal and a six-point lead.
Everything was clicking for the Chiefs on the next possession. The offensive line protected Mahomes. JuJu Smith-Schuster and Pacheco stepped up with fine plays. And Andy Reid dialed up the deviltry with a fake-screen wheel route by Smith-Schuster, followed by a misdirection pass that left Kadarius Toney wide open from the 5-yard line to waltz into the end zone. The Chiefs took their first lead, 28-27, early in the fourth quarter.
Then the Eagles appeared to come unglued. A Chiefs blitz on third-and-2 on the next Philadelphia series led to a Hurts throwaway. Sirianni chose to punt, and Arryn Siposs' low line drive led to a long Toney return. Reid schemed up another opportunity for a short walk-in touchdown, this time by Skyy Moore (on a similar concept to the Toney touchdown), uncovered on an Eagles goal-line blitz.
Ah, but you know that momentum is not real, dear Football Outsiders reader. The Eagles got the ball back and did what they do. Runs. Short passes. A sneak. A bomb to a wide-open Smith, this time without the replay challenge. Another sneak for a touchdown, then a Hurts sweep for the two-point conversion.
The mood with the game tied 35-35:
— Bleacher Report (@BleacherReport) February 13, 2023
Mahomes moved the ball methodically when the Chiefs got the ball back. A third-down overthrow under duress of Smith-Schuster from the 15-yard line appeared to set the stage for a Chiefs field goal and one last Eagles possession.
But … defensive holding, James Bradberry: 5 yards, a Chiefs first down, and a chance to run most of the remaining 1:48 off the clock before Butker's game-winning chip shot.
The holding call was accurate, but ticky-tack. Color commentator Greg Olsen didn't like it. No Eagles fan could like it. Emotionally, this one-time child grounded for a wall-punching tantrum during Super Bowl XV hated it. Intellectually, this lover of games best settled by the players—this old sportswriter musing about whether he was watching the greatest Super Bowl ever—hated it.
But to paraphrase the Futurama accountants, the holding call was "technically correct, which is the best kind of correct."
The Chiefs deserve every accolade. But it's impossible to not imagine what might have happened—and how great this game could have been—if the Eagles got another crack, down by three, with a minute-odd left to play.
What's Next for the Kansas City Chiefs
If Patrick Mahomes retires tomorrow, he's a first-ballot Pro Football Hall of Famer. If he had retired last week, he probably would have been a first-ballot HoFer, though voters might understandably have held retiring one week before the Super Bowl against him.
Mahomes is already one of the 10 best quarterbacks in NFL history. An argument can be made that he is already among the top five.
If Andy Reid retires tomorrow, he's a Pro Football Hall of Famer. Reid is one of the top 10 head coaches in NFL history. An argument can be made that he is among the top five.
If Travis Kelce retires tomorrow, he's a first-ballot Pro Football Hall of Famer. Whether or not Kelce is the greatest tight end of all time is a matter of taste. He is absolutely among the top five.
Chris Jones may be the one member of the Chiefs whose HoF case changed substantially in the last three weeks. Jones now has two Super Bowl rings, three tipped passes in one Super Bowl victory, and a two-sack takeover of an AFC Championship Game to go with a growing stack of Pro Bowl appearances and regular-season sacks. Those "signature moments" should keep Jones from getting shunted too far behind Aaron Donald and lost in the stack when he reaches the ballot many years from now.
Far-future Hall of Fame debates are not nearly as interesting as the Chiefs' immediate legacy.
The team is in excellent shape for 2023, despite the fact that the OMG section of Mahomes' half-billion dollar contract is now kicking in. The Chiefs drafted exceptionally in 2022, and Trent McDuffie, George Karlaftis, Skyy Moore, Joshua Williams, Bryan Cook, Leo Chanel, Jaylen Watson, and Isiah Pacheco all look ready to play some sort of role moving forward. Their emergence will offset some free-agent losses, allowing the Chiefs to focus on solving the Orlando Brown riddle, extending Juan Thornhill, and perhaps letting Frank Clark wander off in a cost-cutting move.
The Chiefs have all of their 2023 draft picks and should be able to find wide receiver and edge-rusher help in a draft class with more quantity than quality. Thanks to their top-tier talent and coaching, the Chiefs can afford to scavenge for spare parts in the draft and free-agent bargain bin while remaining on the AFC contender short list.
That's the real Mahomes-Reid-Kelce-Jones legacy moving forward: the four of them make the Chiefs one of the NFL's best teams, no matter who is surrounding them.
What's Next for the Philadelphia Eagles
Offensive coordinator Shane Steichen and defensive coordinator Jonathan Gannon may be officially coaching the Colts and Cardinals by the time you read this. Jason Kelce will likely retire. Fletcher Cox leads a likely-to-depart free-agent list that includes James Bradberry, Miles Sanders, and one-year service rentals such as Ndamukong Suh.
Money is tight, and Howie Roseman must budget for the Jalen Hurts extension, so while the Eagles may make runs at free agents Javon Hargrave and C.J. Gardner-Thompson, both could easily set sail.
Now the good news. The Eagles possess two first-round picks. Succession-plan youngsters such as center Cam Jurgens and defensive tackle Jordan Davis are already on the payroll at key positions. Lots of core starters remain under contract and in their primes. Steichen and Gannon are fine coaches, but neither appears irreplaceable. (Gannon, in particular, was outfoxed on Sunday.) And Roseman knows the ups and downs of the long-term quarterback extension better than anyone: he'll build something ergonomic that fits both Hurts and the Eagles.
Meanwhile, the Cowboys are in their typical state of stalling in the playoffs due to a lack of leadership and vision, the Giants are about to learn that you must go sideways to go forward, and the Commanders are a glorified tax shelter.
The 49ers, with their loaded roster and two flavors of quarterback-of-the-future, probably enter the 2023 offseason as the team to beat in the NFC. But the Eagles enter the offseason as the team that beat 'em. And everyone else outside the NFC East is either a spunky up-and-comer (Lions, Seahawks), last-year's news (Bucs, Rams), Fraudzilla (Vikings), being held hostage by a barking madman (Packers), or just a mess.
The Eagles should have little trouble remaining near the top of that heap, and anyone who thinks Roseman cannot shepherd them through this tricky offseason hasn't seen him work through the last five.
Walkthrough Super Bowl Sportsbook
There's nothing like prop betting the Super Bowl! Let's see how Walkthrough's final action of the 2022 season played out:
First Quarter Over of 9.5 at -135
Rationale: The Chiefs led the NFL in first-quarter offensive DVOA, while the Eagles ranked third. Neither ranked in the top 10 in defense. And I love first-quarter overs in night games (even when they do not love me).
Result: Smoked this puppy before 7 p.m. Eastern time. WIN.
Travis Kelce, Most Receiving Yards at +140
Rationale: The Eagles defense ranked sixth against tight ends in 2022. But Kelce is more of an "other receiver," and the Eagles ranked 22nd against those. Anyway, I had a hunch that Kelce would get force-fed targets while the Eagles spread the ball around more.
Result: Kelce got nicked by both DeVonta Smith and A.J. Brown. LOSS.
Longest fourth-down conversion Over 2.5 yards at -130
Rationale: The Eagles attempted 13 passing plays on fourth -and-3-or-more in the regular season, the Chiefs just three. But there were a lot of paths to victory on this one, from Eagles aggressiveness to either teams' late desperation.
Result: Second quarter. Fourth-and-5, Jalen Hurts draw for 28 yards. Woot. WIN.
Eagles to Convert a fourth down in their own territory at +300
Rationale: The Eagles only attempted five fourth-down conversions in their own territory during the regular season. But I loved the juice and the concept that Nick Sirianni would be ultra-aggressive in a Super Bowl.
Result: This one stings. You know darn well that the Eagles should have gone for fourth-and-3 from their own 32-yard line early in the fourth quarter. Instead, they punted and surrendered a long return to set up the touchdown that gave the Chiefs an eight-point lead. Sirianni blinked at the wrong time, it cost the Eagles a Super Bowl, and it cost me some dough. LOSS.
Jalen Hurts to score 2+ touchdowns at +600
Rationale: Hurts had three two-plus rushing touchdown games in the regular season and ran for touchdowns in each playoff game. This was a blatant sundae-on-the-cherry homer wager.
Result: This was not a prop I expected to pay off before halftime. But Hurts got his first touchdown after Kenneth Gainwell was stopped just short of the goal line on the opening drive and his second after the Chiefs committed a fourth-down neutral-zone infraction near the goal line late in the second quarter. Hurts finished with three rushing touchdowns, plus a two-point conversion, but I could not imagine a scenario on Sunday afternoon in which a performance like that could end in an Eagles loss. WIN.
Game final score Over 51.5 at −110
Rationale: It was a freakin' Chiefs-Eagles game.
Result: This, at least, was never in doubt. WIN.
Final Tally
I earned 10.64 on five units wagered. Not a bad way to offset the disappointment of an Eagles loss just a bit.
And Finally...
The neighborhood rowdies set off fireworks at about 11 p.m. despite the Eagles loss. No sense storing them next to the lawnmower gasoline, I suppose. Maybe, just maybe, they found the peace in their hearts to celebrate a thrilling season and a tremendous Super Bowl effort instead of growling about what might have been. Maybe, having seen the Eagles return to the Super Bowl after six years, fans realize that they may soon be back. Or maybe they were blowing up an effigy of Carl Cheffers, or just setting themselves ablaze.
Less than one hour after the final gun, my sportsbook app switched to Yuna Ohashi versus Yukiko Ikedo in (I'm 99% certain) women's tennis. You cannot gamble on the past, so the sportsbooks look forever forward, not even catching their breath to reflect on what just happened.
As for me? I'm behind on my draft coverage. I have jury duty next week. The offseason crashes down with wearying finality, coupled with the disappointment with an Eagles loss that years in this business have not fully eradicated. But unlike the wagering apps, I have time to pause and reflect, if only for a moment, on the glorious spectacle of the NFL, it's exhilarations, its faults and it's frustrations, the journey it takes us on, and what a blessing it is to be a bit player in the drama, an extra in the background for Opening Night or on Radio Row, or at least a chronicler of the saga.
Walkthrough will be back later this week with some off-season musings, then soon after with draft coverage. But for now, let me pour one last drink, listen to the echoing fireworks, and take joy in the fact that I would have rooted for a Chiefs victory against 30 other teams, and that win or lose, I still have this chance to commune with all of you.
See you in a few days.
Comments
284 comments, Last at 16 Feb 2023, 7:04pm
#6 by Pat // Feb 13, 2023 - 7:17am
The officiating fiasco also made it so the other story might get forgotten: how god-awful the field was.
Apparently both teams were talking about how terrible it was in commercial breaks, so this wasn't a one sided thing. Chiefs looked like they handled it better, though.
#10 by Will Allen // Feb 13, 2023 - 7:26am
It's bizarre to me that this sod in particular has been an issue since the beginning of the season, and this stadium generally has has had a sod problem since it opened. Think the league would have made getting that problem fixed, once and for all, a precondition for getting more SBs.
#51 by Pat // Feb 13, 2023 - 9:58am
I don't know how the NFL can be a many-billions industry and still do literally the dumbest thing I can imagine doing. Game surfaces should be a joint NFL-NFLPA thing, and plans for the Super Bowl surface should be evaluated years in advance.
Especially with film review we have now, it'd be a joke to train a system to detect slippage on film and statistically evaluate surfaces. And then, for instance, you test out the Super Bowl surface in preseason to make sure it's consistent with what you expect, and if it isn't you've got months to deal with it.
#107 by Rufus R. Jones // Feb 13, 2023 - 11:51am
The officiating fiasco also made it so the other story might get forgotten: how god-awful the field was.
There was no officiating fiasco. Just an excuse making fiasco by people who were disappointed by the game's outcome.
#118 by bravehoptoad // Feb 13, 2023 - 12:05pm
I had no dog in this fight. I'm a 49ers fan, so I'd actually been grudging against the Eagles for a couple weeks. Shoot, in a previous Tanier thread at the start of the playoffs, I picked the Chiefs over the Eagles in the Super Bowl.
Still, I thought that ending sucked. If that was a defensive hold, then defensive holding should have been called another 20 times in that game. That's just not the kind of call you want to end a Super Bowl.
#176 by OmahaChiefs13 // Feb 13, 2023 - 1:55pm
If that was a defensive hold, then defensive holding should have been called another 20 times in that game. That's just not the kind of call you want to end a Super Bowl.
Ok, so let me make sure I understand your argument.
Do you believe tugging on an offensive player's jersey is not defensive holding?
If you do think it's holding, do you believe the ref should have seen holding, but chosen not to call a penalty they observed? Is that based on the score, the time left in the game, how it had been called previously, or some other factor?
And is that "ignore a penalty we saw being committed" rule and driving scenario only valid for the Super Bowl? The postseason? Any game?
I'm trying to sort out all the elements you invoked, and I can't tell which is supposed to be the driver here.
#190 by KnotMe // Feb 13, 2023 - 2:44pm
The base problem is there are a limited number of officials (7) and not all of those are even watching for penalties. With 22 players, stuff gets missed, i.e. not all penalties are observed.
It would be interesting to just have 22 guys watching (one per player), although the initial games would be unwatchable, you might bet a sense of how to change the rules to be more consistently called.
Maybe allow more contact but figure out some other way to boost offence
#207 by OmahaChiefs13 // Feb 13, 2023 - 3:14pm
With 22 players, stuff gets missed, i.e. not all penalties are observed.
Yes. Which is one of the many problems with using frequency or "tightness" of previous calls (even in the same game) as a criteria for deciding when to call a penalty.
When fans see a game called loosely (like last night), then suddenly see a tighter call (also like last night), they assume the refs saw, but chose not to call, all those earlier penalties, and the refs are now "changing the way the game is getting called".
When, to your point, it's not only possible but likely that the earlier fouls would have been called had they been seen....and they simply weren't seen.
Either way, it sounds like a lot of people want to be able to allow the officials to witness a penalty and decide "nah, that isn't illegal this time"....and they nearly always seem to want that in support of a narrative, like a tight, close, high-visibility game "getting ruined" by a penalty.
The best, easiest, and fastest way to NOT have last night's game end on a penalty was for Bradberry to simply cover without the jersey tug. He didn't, so here we are....all the ref angst is strictly secondary and narrative-based.
#249 by rpwong // Feb 13, 2023 - 5:09pm
When fans see a game called loosely (like last night), then suddenly see a tighter call (also like last night), they assume the refs saw, but chose not to call, all those earlier penalties, and the refs are now "changing the way the game is getting called".
This x100. People seem to think that the refs are consciously deciding what they're going to do in the split second that they see the penalty and call the penalty, debating the resulting scenarios in their heads.
The equivalent would be seeing someone knock a plate of food off of the table. In the time before it hits the ground, do you think about how you'll have to clean the floor and what to do if the plate breaks? Do you rationalize how many other plates you have and if you're going to run out of food as a result? No, you just react. You try to catch the plate, or you don't try to catch the plate. Maybe you think about whether or not you want to risk injury or get your hands dirty, but that's all instinctive thought. The refs aren't thinking, "how do I make sure this game ends in the most exciting way possible?"
Refs have to make subjective calls in a fraction of a second, and those aren't always going to come out the same. But anyone who saw this exact penalty take place in the first quarter of a Week 8 game would say, "yeah, that's a penalty". This wasn't subjective.
The best, easiest, and fastest way to NOT have last night's game end on a penalty was for Bradberry to simply cover without the jersey tug. He didn't, so here we are....all the ref angst is strictly secondary and narrative-based.
I agree with this, too. Regardless of whether Bradberry held intentionally or had this thought after the fact, he's a pro athlete who knows the rules of his game. He's at fault for putting the refs in a position to call a penalty, and full credit to him for owning it.
What's really amusing is that everyone who didn't like the penalty is using the same phrase to describe it: "ticky tack". Meaning, "yes it's a penalty, but it's only 4/10 on the penalty scale and should have been overlooked." In my opinion, it's a much bigger problem if/when officials try to call penalties on such a scale.
It's also worth noting that the range of outcomes of a no-call would have included anything from a missed field goal to a turnover, setting up the Eagles to win the game on a field goal. If that had happened, we might be talking about the fact that this penalty wasn't called.
#252 by DGL // Feb 13, 2023 - 5:24pm
It's also worth noting that the range of outcomes of a no-call would have included anything from a missed field goal to a turnover, setting up the Eagles to win the game on a field goal. If that had happened, we might be talking about the fact that this penalty wasn't called.
I mean, maybe? The pass was overthrown and it seems to me very unlikely that JJSS would have gotten anywhere near it even if he wasn't held. In the universe where the pass drops incomplete, Butker misses a 33-yard FG, and PHL drives for a winning FG, there'd be a few people talking about the fact that there could have been a holding call - but there'd be lots more talking about how Butker choked missing two makeable FGs, and how KC's special teams were their weak link, and all the other dozens of contingencies that could have given KC the game - of which this uncalled penalty would have been only one.
#257 by IlluminatusUIUC // Feb 13, 2023 - 6:51pm
The base problem is there are a limited number of officials (7) and not all of those are even watching for penalties. With 22 players, stuff gets missed, i.e. not all penalties are observed.
This isn't the right way to think about it. There are 22 players, but they are not scampering randomly like toddlers on a playground. The vast majority of live-ball penalties can only occur when players from the teams are interacting. Guys off away from others, like the QB after a handoff or a deep safety with no one yet in his zone, are not relevant unless they join the action. Then on a pass play, the fight in the trenches and the QB are accounting for about ~9-11 of those 22 players and they have two officials focused on those guys specifically.
So downfield, you've got 5 officials to account for 5 eligible receivers and whichever defenders are playing them. Does stuff get missed? Of course. Some of these refs are standing dozens of yards from the players. But there should be enough eyeballs to account for the bulk of the action on every play.
#212 by bravehoptoad // Feb 13, 2023 - 3:31pm
I'm trying to sort out all the elements you invoked, and I can't tell which is supposed to be the driver here.
What's wanted is consistency in the calls. If that last call was holding, then fine, let it be holding, but make it consistent. It's neither fair nor fun to have what's called change at random from play to play.
If it's too hard to make it consistent, then you've got a bad rule that needs to be changed.
#215 by OmahaChiefs13 // Feb 13, 2023 - 3:39pm
If it's too hard to make it consistent, then you've got a bad rule that needs to be changed.
I'd love to. As a starting point, we can eliminate the automatic first down component of defensive holding....that seems to be the source of most of the problems.
I promise you, no Chiefs fan would ever argue with that change....we've been on the losing end of that rule wrinkle far more times than we've been the beneficiaries.
But "consistent" means "call every foul we see based on the definition in the rules".
It should NEVER mean "decide this illegal thing is suddenly legal because some fans noticed a call we missed earlier".
Like I said elsewhere, the fastest, easiest way for the game to not end on a holding call was for Bradberry to not tug JJSS's jersey. Everything else is fan perception of "fun" and reaction based on narrative outcomes.
#219 by Aaron Brooks G… // Feb 13, 2023 - 3:57pm
Like I said elsewhere, the fastest, easiest way for the game to not end on a holding call was for Bradberry to not tug JJSS's jersey.
Sort of like the flipside of the counter-argument to basketball's 'let them play' in end-game situations, if you switch from lenient to tight or tight to lenient, what you are really doing is advantaging the side that can switch tactics at the last moment.
It's not so much the leniency or the tightness that's a problem (although it can be), it's the sudden reversal in behavior that tends to allow one side to functionally cheat on a critical play.
\the real problem with the Pats-Colts game that led to the sea change in how IC/DH/DPI is called was that only one side was abusing the rules/refs. Had both sides been doing either behavior, it would have been game-on. But when only one team is held to the agreed-upon rules, the other team gains a huge advantage. This is the problem with the behavior switch -- the other team gains a huge advantage.
#232 by Pat // Feb 13, 2023 - 4:34pm
Sort of like the flipside of the counter-argument to basketball's 'let them play' in end-game situations, if you switch from lenient to tight or tight to lenient, what you are really doing is advantaging the side that can switch tactics at the last moment.
Just to be clear I don't think it's an "end game" situation - I actually just think it's a red-zone thing. I wouldn't call a play like that holding in the red zone. It's just too high leverage for a marginal call. You want things to be clear and obvious in those situations.
#231 by Pat // Feb 13, 2023 - 4:31pm
Everything else is fan perception of "fun" and reaction based on narrative outcomes.
It really isn't just that. You hear from former officials when they say "wouldn't make this call at this point in the game." Fans aren't the ones saying this. The officials are. This is how they think about it. Not just fans.
#258 by OmahaChiefs13 // Feb 13, 2023 - 7:29pm
That's how a former official, who is now essentially one more network talking head, looks at it with the advantage of every-play replay and more than a second to think about it.
That's not "how officials look at it"....it's how "one individual fan that used to be an official now gets paid to look at it."
Talk about gross overstatement in service of a narrative.
#275 by bravehoptoad // Feb 14, 2023 - 12:01pm
But "consistent" means "call every foul we see based on the definition in the rules".
Yeah, that's not what "consistent" means. When you add that "we see" in there then you're grading officials--not on their results--but on their perception and their intent, which are things impossible to know. You're forcing yourself to become a mind reader.
You're saying they threw that flag because they saw this foul and didn't see earlier DPIs of the same sort. You can't know that. No one can. Why are you claiming you can make that judgement?
The questions to ask about these fouls is: are the refs capable of calling them consistently? That's something you can grade. If they're not, it's a bad rule that's bad for football. Like this call under discussion...it lead to a Super Bowl ending that was a bad advertisement for the game. I don't see how there's any arguing with that.
#135 by Lost Ti-Cats Fan // Feb 13, 2023 - 12:24pm
It's the headline about the game on CNN. Regardless of your opinion of that media source, the officiating call has become the main take-away from the game, especially for non-football fans. When picking up breakfast from my local diner this morning, the staff and people in line were talking about Rihanna and the holding penalty, nothing else about the game. That's an officiating fiasco for the league, if only from a PR perspective.
#213 by bravehoptoad // Feb 13, 2023 - 3:36pm
Yeah, neither my wife nor my kid watch much football, but we watched the end of the game. I was trying to set up for them how big the moment was: 35-35 in the Super Bowl. I'm a quiet guy; I didn't say anything when that last flag came out. The takeaway of these two non-football people was that it's not much of a sport if that's how games are decided.
#216 by OmahaChiefs13 // Feb 13, 2023 - 3:46pm
The takeaway of these two non-football people was that it's not much of a sport if that's how games are decided.
You realize that's pretty much "officiate to fan's perceptions, rather than to the rules" almost by definition, right?
#233 by Pat // Feb 13, 2023 - 4:36pm
What's wrong with officiating to the fan's perspective? Certain penalties are technical details, sure, but other things like catch/no catch, restriction penalties - those are "go with the fan's perspective." That's literally the standard they talked about when they talked about the catch rule change!
#266 by OmahaChiefs13 // Feb 13, 2023 - 8:13pm
What's wrong with officiating to the fan's perspective?
Because not all fans have an identical perspective, nobody can even necessarily claim a real majority at any given time and for any given span of time, those perspectives change constantly, and are also subject to a very wide and diverse array of influences.
In real terms that one could legislate to, there isn't any single (or even dominant) fan perspective.
And that's before we even consider rooting interests (for OR against).
I'd think that all goes without saying.
#263 by OmahaChiefs13 // Feb 13, 2023 - 7:58pm
Or potentially the way the officiating is presented.
I mean, no disrespect to this man's wife and child, but I'm sure they understand certain things are declared against the rules in any game, yes?
And that when people break those rules, something should happen as a result?
#264 by OmahaChiefs13 // Feb 13, 2023 - 7:58pm
Or potentially the way the officiating is presented.
I mean, no disrespect to this man's wife and child, but I'm sure they understand certain things are declared against the rules in any game, yes?
And that when people break those rules, something should happen as a result?
#227 by Lost Ti-Cats Fan // Feb 13, 2023 - 4:18pm
The key takeaway from that comment is that the defender had a rational belief that the tug would not be called. Presumably because usually/often it isn't.
Another takeaway is that was poor situational football. The penalty hurt way more than giving up a touchdown. Better to let the guy blow by you unhindered in those circumstances.
#272 by Big_Chief // Feb 14, 2023 - 10:32am
I miss the good old days when people complained about officials blowing calls. Now the complaints are that a legitimate call spoiled what some think would be a "better" or "more exciting" ending.
I also love the claims that the officials weren't calling defensive holding the rest of the game like that, but no one has shown any evidence showing another receiver's jersey getting pulled wasn't flagged. From what I saw live and in the replay on NFL, I didn't see much evidence of a lot of grabbing in the secondary by either team. I think it's more likely that after being beaten by whip routes a few times, Bradberry grabbed him in the clutch, but if someone has video showing otherwise, where the official could clearly see it, I would be interested to see it.
#4 by Ferdibraakman // Feb 13, 2023 - 5:42am
Mike, all the way from the Netherlands thank you yet again for ta(l)king me through another season.
The Mahomes of sports writing. Hope to congratulate you next year on better news.
Enjoy your break and please be back.
#5 by big10freak // Feb 13, 2023 - 6:25am
The Chiefs o line picked a great time to have a fantastic game as a unit. Went toe to toe with a great d line and won the bout. Just wow
Andy Reid scheming up goal line plays against a great D where a guy more than once is WIDE open to stroll into the end zone. Amazing
Chiefs conditioning coach sure did the job One would have thought the Chiefs D was on fumes after the Eagles held the ball forever But they hung in there just enough to let Superman win the day
When the guy called for the penalty says yeah I did it kind of deflates any gripe
#7 by Pat // Feb 13, 2023 - 7:19am
The Chiefs OL didn't have a great game all game, though. They were giving up a good amount of pressure early. They just got way better in the second half. Waaay better.
And Bradberry saying it was holding is just class on his part. Of course it was holding, but they weren't calling it that tight the entire game. Just a completely crap way to end a great game.
#134 by Pat // Feb 13, 2023 - 12:23pm
Okay, then. Do you want a freeze-frame of all of the other judgement call penalties that weren't called?
The 3rd and 8 incomplete that led to a punt had a clear jersey tug and early contact by an Eagles DB. The Toney TD had clear blocking downfield by the linemen before the pass. The 2nd and 3 Mahomes run had Wylie comically holding Reddick, who had slipped to the ground (seriously, it's hilarious).
The officials were letting them play all game. Until they didn't.
#178 by OmahaChiefs13 // Feb 13, 2023 - 2:02pm
Do you want a freeze-frame of all of the other judgement call penalties that weren't called?
What would that solve or accomplish? Is it your belief that if officials see a penalty being committed, they should choose whether or not that act is illegal based on what they saw and/or called previously?
I mean, if we're going to argue for officials seeing a penalty and deciding that act isn't going to be illegal for some reason, let's at least be clear about when and how we're willing to make rules subordinate to narratives.
#191 by Pat // Feb 13, 2023 - 2:47pm
What would that solve or accomplish? Is it your belief
It's my belief that the game wasn't called consistently. It was called very loosely through the whole game, and then the holding penalty came out of nowhere in terms of what was called prior. I don't care if a game's called loose or tight, but you call it the same way throughout. I mean, there were blatant calls (from both teams!) earlier that wouldn't've been called, and now here you've got a defensive holding call that former refs are saying shouldn't have been called because it didn't affect anything. It's a clear outlier.
Defensive holding, offensive holding, illegal contact, DPI, roughing, and (stupid as it seems) ineligible man downfield are the main judgement call penalties from officials. By the book, they happen tons more than they're actually called, but it's all about whether or not it's worth calling. And Cheffers (if it was his crew) has called games super tight throughout the year, and so to see it be so loose and then suddenly "nope, holding"? I mean, if you're gonna talk "narrative," that has a bigger narrative.
I mean, if we're going to argue for officials seeing a penalty and deciding that act isn't going to be illegal for some reason
They do this all the time. The weasel-words in the rules are like "does not materially affect the play" and "away from the point of attack" and such. The simple fact that everyone's zooming in a jersey pull and saying "holding!" is exactly the point I'm trying to say. That's what crappy refs do.
#210 by OmahaChiefs13 // Feb 13, 2023 - 3:31pm
It's my belief that the game wasn't called consistently. It was called very loosely through the whole game, and then the holding penalty came out of nowhere in terms of what was called prior. I don't care if a game's called loose or tight, but you call it the same way throughout
Here's the problem: you're assuming the officials saw all those earlier penalties and decided not to call them.
It's at least as likely they simply weren't seen, and would have been called if they had been. A pulled jersey does tend to stick out...it's why it so frequently results in a call.
Put another way, you're ascribing the relatively small number of earlier penalties to a conscious decision to call a looser game....when we don't know if that's actually the case (and may never know either way).
I think we all want to see more consistency from refs. But that consistency has to start with "call penalties when we see penalties". Any other line of reasoning inevitably ends with officials making decisions based on observer perception (a tight or loose game, etc) instead of on rules.
Note that when I say "narratives", I'm not speaking to anyone's motivations here....nobody's accusing anybody of anything. But our perceptions as fans are always influenced by narratives at some level or another....the last thing we should want is referees making decisions on the basis of what "feels right" to us.
#211 by OmahaChiefs13 // Feb 13, 2023 - 3:31pm
The weasel-words in the rules are like "does not materially affect the play" and "away from the point of attack" and such.
It's also worth pointing out that none of those weasel-words are part of the defensive holding definition....it's one of the most straightforward penalties in the game in terms of rules lawyering.
In fact, the only specific element or example they bother to specify is....you guessed it...a jersey tug.
#234 by Pat // Feb 13, 2023 - 4:39pm
In fact, the only specific element or example they bother to specify is....you guessed it...a jersey tug.
Yes. Which is why it's a crap penalty in the rules. Giving specific examples like that are just horrendous. Tugging a jersey doesn't do anything intrinsically to restrict a player.
It's the same thing as the old catch rule. Go by the letter, be specific, and it looks dumb as crap to fans.
#259 by OmahaChiefs13 // Feb 13, 2023 - 7:32pm
Yes. Which is why it's a crap penalty in the rules. Giving specific examples like that are just horrendous. Tugging a jersey doesn't do anything intrinsically to restrict a player.
Cool. So we've established you're fine with simply not calling penalties you personally believe aren't "good penalties"?
Doesn't matter if they're the established rules of the game or not....how do they feel to an observer?
We've come a long way from "sure, it was holding and those are the rules, but it was 'ticky-tack' and you don't call that there" to "well, holding is a bad rule anyway".
Really sells the whole rational, dispassionate "no rooting interest here" angle.
Either the current rules of the game say that was a penalty, or they don't. As it happens, they do. All the rest is just trying to dress up disappointment at the outcome as something more.
#277 by bravehoptoad // Feb 14, 2023 - 12:05pm
All the rest is just trying to dress up disappointment at the outcome as something more.
No, not everyone watching that game who didn't like that call had routing interests in that game.
You're mind reading again.
#270 by coltsandrew // Feb 14, 2023 - 10:16am
I wouldn't want a freeze frame, but I think it would be great if they had more refs in preseason games and were extremely stringent about calling penalties. I think it would help normalize a higher standard of play
#9 by big10freak // Feb 13, 2023 - 7:26am
Unless there is a review showing multiple no calls on egregious holding right now my view is that if you pitch a near neg play shutout (only 1 negative play generated by Eagles defense) against a D-line that has killed everyone all season your line has had a great day.
#12 by Will Allen // Feb 13, 2023 - 7:33am
Yeah, I didn't see the uncalled stragulation specials that I've seen all year, although this is the game I tend to watch least closely, given it is usually involves more socializing. In the 2nd half in particular, they just flat-out won, and there was no particular reason for the Eagles D to be fatigued.
#13 by Pat // Feb 13, 2023 - 7:37am
Early in the game Philly was at 40% pressures/knockdowns. They ended at around 25% full game.
Really curious to see what adjustments they made, but I think most of it was route changes. Late in the game they were targeting exchange points between defenders, so the pressure had less time.
#17 by Pat // Feb 13, 2023 - 7:55am
Plus the TD didn't matter! The penalty is literally the worst outcome there. If the Chiefs had gotten to 4th and short on that play (honestly I don't remember if it was goal to go, just imagine it wasn't) it would've been an interesting argument for them to go for it and end the game.
#21 by DoubleB // Feb 13, 2023 - 8:22am
I actually made the argument Philly should have let KC score at 1st and 10 on their own 17 with 1:45-ish left and 2 timeouts. A) Not sure what analytics says about this--probably against it, but didn't have the clarity everyone else had about the Philly D or O at the moment and B) not sure KC would have taken the bait anyway--guess they would have since they threw to the end zone on 3rd and 8.
I think it's much harder to get a TD with no timeouts and under 2 minutes so would think the FG, but you may be right. A Philly FG would seem a better than 50-50 proposition after a KC kickoff and a TD is clearly not impossible. I think a KC FG gets KC at worse into OT while not converting the 4th and short probably loses you the game. Making it clearly wins the game.
#40 by Aaron Brooks G… // Feb 13, 2023 - 9:25am
Philly, I think correctly gambled that Reid has conservative tendencies and could be goaded into a FG.
What they probably should have done was sent the house on 3rd-long and taken either big play. But that's retrospect.
It's also interesting to consider that if Sirianni had a little less faith in his defense, he could have onside kicked after that last TD.
#48 by DoubleB // Feb 13, 2023 - 9:48am
I thought that as well. It's hard to take 5+ minutes off the clock starting in opposition territory.
And they should have sent 11 on the 1st 2 downs. More than anything else, they needed the ball back with some time.
#91 by coltsandrew // Feb 13, 2023 - 11:21am
Yes. The point is that a protracted drive would be the worst scenario, so giving up a TD quickly would be better than than giving up a field goal slowly. Thus, being highly aggressive is the better tactic because it eliminates the worst-case scenario AND potentially gives you a very high upside.
#58 by DGL // Feb 13, 2023 - 10:11am
It was 3-8 from the 15. So without the holding call, it would have been 4-8 from the 15 and KC clearly kicks the FG; assuming a make, PHL is probably starting a drive at their own 25 with about 1:45 on the game clock needing a TD to win or FG to tie.
Without the hold, it's either an incomplete pass with the same result as above (the ball comes down five yards into the end zone while JJSS is at the goal line; it's not at all clear to me that the jersey tug slowed him down so much that he would have gotten to the ball without it) or a TD, meaning that PHL starts the next drive at their own 25 with about 1:48 on the game clock needing a TD to tie (or TD and 2PC to win).
The penalty was literally the worst outcome for the Eagles and for everyone watching the game who didn't have a KC rooting interest (or the Under at 75...). If anything, this should put to rest any claims that the officials are in the tank for the NFL to keep games exciting.
#74 by Pat // Feb 13, 2023 - 10:45am
Without the hold, it's either an incomplete pass [...] or a TD
Well, with that specific outcome. They had a dumpoff route underneath which, if Bradberry had maintained leverage better, Mahomes might've went to and they could've ended up in a 4th and short. That's kindof what I was suggesting.
If anything, this should put to rest any claims that the officials are in the tank for the NFL to keep games exciting.
Holy crap yes.
#19 by DoubleB // Feb 13, 2023 - 8:14am
The goal line TDs were literally the same play. It was man coverage and Philly apparently decided to leave the man running a simple motion (in and then out at the snap) alone. In both cases one of the man defenders is running across the formation staring in the backfield while his man is hanging out near the sideline. For it to happen once is awful. Twice? Complete coordinator malpractice.
The first one is such a screw up defensively that Kelce would have been open in the corner for a TD as well.
#61 by Pat // Feb 13, 2023 - 10:16am
The goal line TDs were literally the same play. It was man coverage
When Moore went in motion, if he goes to the other side, that overloads the offensive right side: on the Moore TD they start with a 2x2 alignment, so Philly's balanced in coverage. When Moore goes in motion, they'd be in deep trouble without any adjustment, and Maddox was the nickel, so he needs to move.
They rushed 7. That leaves 4 in coverage. The reason those guys sprung open wasn't just the motion, it was when it happened. KC was calling those plays when Philly was already doing something that the coverage was going to be compromised, and the motion happened so close to the snap that it screwed up already undermanned coverage.
The mistake that Maddox made on the Moore TD was not realizing that the motion was a bluff - it was happening way too close to the play clock running out for him to cross the formation. But defenders don't watch the play clock. It wasn't a "for some reason." They knew exactly what Philly was doing and targeted it.
#94 by Mike B. In Va // Feb 13, 2023 - 11:28am
Agreed, these plays both looked like examples of a coordinator putting the players in a position to win if Philly played the expected coverages. This is what good coordinators are supposed to do. In both cases, they executed and it resulted in TDs.
#103 by Ben // Feb 13, 2023 - 11:38am
I agree, it really seemed like this was one of those plays that KC coaches were certain was going to work, so they held it back until a key moment.
Now, I doubt they were certain it would work twice, but I suspect the Philly D played the first TD exactly how KC expected they would. So, why not try again if they get the same look.
#116 by Pat // Feb 13, 2023 - 12:02pm
It wasn't the same play - I don't know why people keep saying it was. It was the same action, but it wasn't the same play or coverage. Philly wasn't jailbreak blitzing the Toney play, for instance, and the KC line wasn't pass protecting.
The Toney play was very obviously a "tendency breaker" KC type play, but I don't know what specifically the KC play was they were breaking tendency. Watch the difference in the Eagles players: on the Toney play, at the motion, Slay and Maddox both react and signal back to CJ, who starts drifting to the other side. But then the ball snaps, and Maddox and Slay are watching the run action and out of position.
My guess is that it's a typical 2-route inside/out type combo they're breaking tendency from - Slay and Maddox expect Toney to release inside Kelce and be the primary target, and so Kansas City runs the exact opposite.
Oh, and for all you "that was technically defensive holding!" go ahead a do a freeze frame of Toney's play when the ball was thrown, and go and take a look at what KC's offensive linemen were doing. That, folks, is "technically" ineligible man downfield.
#129 by DoubleB // Feb 13, 2023 - 12:19pm
It's still man coverage on the 1st TD, even though there isn't the pressure from Philly. Kelce actually veers inside before breaking for a corner route.
My best guess is they are both pick-type plays where there was no need for a pick because there's no defender in the neighborhood.
#138 by Pat // Feb 13, 2023 - 12:27pm
It's still man coverage on the 1st TD, even though there isn't the pressure from Philly.
Why do you think it's man? Because Slay adjusts in? He signals back to the safety to make sure he's watching if Toney flips formation. Maddox certainly isn't playing man technique. Slay's eyes are on the QB, not Toney.
#282 by DoubleB // Feb 16, 2023 - 6:48pm
It's pretty traditional Cover 1. Slight outside leverage by the DBs on the #2 WRs (Kelce and the H-back) allowing them to funnel inside routes to the single safety. Pretty clearly man by the CBs.
The motion screws everyone and nobody on the defense's right side is in any position to make any play. The Eagles don't look like they know what to do with this motion in this coverage. That's a DC problem.
Again, I'm not arguing the Chiefs play call isn't good. I'm arguing the defense, any defense, shouldn't be this out of position in a game such as this.
#269 by Ben // Feb 14, 2023 - 9:52am
According to former FO writer Bill Barnwell, it was the Jet Sweep that they were “tendency breaking”
It forces the man defender to go full speed following the motion, so they aren’t out of position on the jet sweep. When the motion man reverses, it takes a split second longer for the defender to react. The Chiefs snap the ball in that split second so the defender gets stuck in all the traffic after the snap and can’t recover.
#125 by DoubleB // Feb 13, 2023 - 12:13pm
It's still man coverage. Again, getting out-leveraged defensively due to offensive motion is relatively common--and good play design. Having a guy 25 yards away from his man ON THE GOALLINE is idiotic.
On the first TD, Philly is just confused. They are trying to bump guys (get them to the next eligible WR/TE) and the guy on Toney also runs into the box area. Philly is leaving Kelce wide open as well--which is its own malpractice. It's just that Toney is all by himself.
On the second TD, Philly at least bumps correctly. But the guy on Moore ISN'T WATCHING MOORE. He's just staring in the backfield while Moore returns from his original motion and is open by about 25 yards when the ball is thrown.
Rewatching the 2nd TD, I think the WR with Moore is actually going to try to pick the CB. It's just he's not even in a position to get picked because he's so out of position.
#141 by Pat // Feb 13, 2023 - 12:30pm
On the first TD, Philly is just confused.
Yeah. Because of the run action. Slay and Maddox are completely uninterested in Kelce or Toney, and the entire backside of the play is run action (enough that there's illegal blocking downfield, but the refs hadn't decided to play the game close yet. :) )
But the guy on Moore ISN'T WATCHING MOORE.
Which is how you know it probably wasn't man...? Straight man doesn't play with vision, match-type defense plays more with vision. They were heavily undermanned (it was a 7-man rush!) which is why I still think Maddox was trying to jump something and just totally screwed himself.
#164 by Pat // Feb 13, 2023 - 1:14pm
Yup, I was right! Orlovsky has a great breakdown on Twitter, the Toney TD came from literally copying the play before. Duh.
Slay's reacting to the Jet motion from literally the play before, by signaling the safety to do a Rock/Roll adjust. They fake the Jet motion and start the play literally when Slay can't see what's going on. They do it twice, in quick succession, watching them do the same thing each time. Those were 4 total plays, with only 1 different play (a Pacheco 1-yard run) in between, because of the punt return. It's entirely possible Gannon hadn't even been able to see what had happened on those plays before they ran it again.
Just insanely great playcalling.
#284 by DoubleB // Feb 16, 2023 - 7:04pm
The Rock/Roll adjust is still pretty man-like across the board. They execute it nicely on the play prior. The single safety takes the motion player and the original DB on the motioning player drops into the position of the single safety. It's an ACTUAL RUN PLAY and yet the DBs' eyes are correctly where they should be.
This shouldn't be hard to execute on the RPO being run on the very next play. Instead, everyone effs it up like they've never seen short / peel motion before.
#283 by DoubleB // Feb 16, 2023 - 6:53pm
On the 2nd TD if it isn't Cover 0, what is it? Both CBs are covering their WRs man. The safety on Kelce at the H-back spot is waiting on his release. Only #29 is playing some mystery coverage and loses eyes.
My guess is that he was confused, possibly over whatever adjustments were made after the Toney TD. And again defensive confusion is a coordinator issue.
#42 by johonny12 // Feb 13, 2023 - 9:31am
They clearly saw something on film because they were also opening huge run lanes in the second half. They were averaging over 5 yrds a run. That's brutal. You really have to credit OC too. He dialed up several goal line plays where the Eagles were just completely fooled and left receivers completely wide open.
#14 by big10freak // Feb 13, 2023 - 7:41am
Thought the announcing crew did a solid job.
My only view on the officiating is not on the refs on the field but the overturn of the catch, hit, fumble, return TD.
Look, I have heard all the explanations. Still don't like it as an outcome.
No need to lecture me like I'm five. Again, I understand the interpretation. I just don't like it.
#26 by apbadogs // Feb 13, 2023 - 8:32am
"My only view on the officiating is not on the refs on the field but the overturn of the catch, hit, fumble, return TD"
Are you referring to the non catch by Sanders (or was it Scott?)...yeah, that wasn't even close to a catch.
#18 by Will Allen // Feb 13, 2023 - 7:56am
Was the motion penalty before the fumble return the most costly motion penalty in SB history? And was that the most costly shitty punt in SB history?
You're typically going to lose when you give up 14 points on st, and turnover returns.
#44 by Lost Ti-Cats Fan // Feb 13, 2023 - 9:37am
I think there were even more than 2 guys and Toney was running right at them after catching the ball. They seemed mesmerized, like each of them was waiting for the other to make the tackle while Toney came to a stop in front of them, pivoted and headed to the other side of the field.
#47 by Will Allen // Feb 13, 2023 - 9:48am
For some reason, as soon as it came off his foot, I literally said "lookout!". Hadn't had a Super Bowl viewing moment like that since Mike Shula called for a 7 step dropback near his own goal line, with Mike Remmers singled up on Von Miller. I was a bit more certain that time, so I yelped out "WHAT THE F*CK??!!"
#20 by big10freak // Feb 13, 2023 - 8:21am
I know this is small consolation to Philly fans, but the Chiefs has to play an almost perfectly clean game (1 neg offensive play, few penalties, no turnovers) to win the game. That’s really hard when facing such a quality opponent
Edit: I count negative yardage on offense separately from turnovers Sorry for any confusion as I get that would look like double counting)
#24 by DoubleB // Feb 13, 2023 - 8:26am
I was rooting for Philly, but didn't have a dog in this fight. When your a Jags fan you never have a dog in the fight.
I expected a lot more from the Philly defense. As was mentioned above, KC's OL played a lot better than I expected but Philly's defensive braintrust looked completely outcoached outside maybe the last 5 minutes of the 1st half.
#27 by Pat // Feb 13, 2023 - 8:34am
Early on it looked mostly like defenders losing footing. KC was trying to get Kelce lined up on a linebacker or safety, and while that worked, he wasn't supposed to be wide open and I don't think he was getting open fast enough for Mahomes to stay upright all day. That just looked like circumstances and Kelce being Kelce early on - not really an "outcoach."
Later in the game things switched, though - KC started using motion to make it so defenders couldn't do coverage adjustments and then started hitting the exchange points with receivers. That was a coaching clinic. And it's not just about putting a guy in motion, it's also about when the snap happened - they would put a guy in motion, and then snap it right when adjusting defenders would get in each other's way.
That second half probably just got highlighted on every OC's desk as how you beat quarters.
#43 by Lost Ti-Cats Fan // Feb 13, 2023 - 9:32am
I'm not willing to be too hard on Philly's DC. First, Reid/Bieniemy do that to the best of them. The rules are tilted towards the offense and when you're facing really good offensive coordinators with a world-class QB, sometimes there's just no right answer and whatever you do they'll make you look foolish. Second, the core of Philly's success all season doesn't seem to have been rocket science, it appears to have been from getting pressure with a 4-man rush. If you can get pressure rushing four, you'll have a great defense; if you can't, your defense will be ordinary at best. A combination of KC's playcalling and the KC O-line flat out playing a great game neutralized the 4-man rush and turned Philly's D into an ordinary unit, and we have ample evidence of what KC can do to an ordinary NFL defense.
#49 by DoubleB // Feb 13, 2023 - 9:54am
How often does KC go TD, TD, TD, FG in a half? It's not never, but it's not all the time either. Philly has better personnel than that.
What's worse is that it didn't look hard either. Philly forced 5 3rd downs on those 4 drives. 2 were 3rd and 1s. 2 were the goalline fiascos, which is on the coordinator. And the last was the 3rd and 8 holding call.
#64 by Aaron Brooks G… // Feb 13, 2023 - 10:23am
How often does KC go TD, TD, TD, FG in a half?
More often than you'd think. Against Cincinnati last year they opened TD-TD-TD-Half, and that Half ended at the 2 yard line because Hill was stupid.
In 2019, they closed TD-punt-TD-TD-FG just in the 4th quarter against Belichick.
In the 2020 playoffs, they did this basically in every game. They went TD-TD-TD-TD-TD-TD-TD-FG against the Texans, TD-TD-TD-punt-TD-TD against the Titans, and TD-TD-TD-kneel against the 49ers.
In 2021, TD-TD-FG-FG against the Browns, TD-TD-TD-half-FG-TD-TD-kneel against the Bills.
In 2022, TD-TD-TD-TD-TD-TD against the Steelers, FG-TD-punt-FG-TD-FG-TD against the Bills. Cincinnati is up top.
The Bucs-Chiefs Super Bowl was basically the only healthy-Mahomes game where they haven't done this.
#267 by mrh // Feb 13, 2023 - 8:54pm
The Bucs-Chiefs Super Bowl was basically the only healthy-Mahomes game where they haven't done this.
In fact, Mahomes was not healthy in that game. He had turf toe that required off-season surgery to repair.
#60 by johonny12 // Feb 13, 2023 - 10:14am
I was really impressed with the KC running game. It seemed to open huge run lanes time and time again. Clearly the Eagles were not worried about the run game. Maybe Bieniemy finally gets serious looks from teams for HC position.
#98 by Mike B. In Va // Feb 13, 2023 - 11:32am
I will just continue to wonder if the Eagles' schedule (and dominance of that schedule) put the coordinators in a position of not being ready for a team that was capable of doing what KC did. Not that many teams can do what KC did, obviously, but still...
#104 by Pat // Feb 13, 2023 - 11:47am
Few things to keep in mind:
The Chiefs were not doing the same thing all game. Philly was getting pressure on Mahomes in the first half, and containing things pretty well all around. Things changed heavily in the second half. And yeah, no sacks the whole game, but "P. Mahomes incomplete," that's pressure when you're facing Mahomes.
And how many (real) drives did Kansas City have in the second half? Three. That's it. I'm ignoring the one where they started within the 5. So the other thing to consider is that Philly didn't have a lot of chances to adapt to what Kansas City was doing. You can't really adjust in a drive - you barely know what's going on during that drive.
That's part of the reason why the holding call was so frustrating. Yeah, Philly would've had to have gone down and tied/won the game. But if they had tied it, and we had gotten overtime, then you could even seen more of the back-and-forth that had been going on.
#25 by apbadogs // Feb 13, 2023 - 8:28am
I'm not a huge fan of Fox's #1 announcing team but I agree with Olsen about the holding call and glad he basically told Pereira that it was a bad call despite what Pereira said. It would have been a bad call in the 1st quarter, it was a horrendous call in the 4th quarter. Let them play the game FFS.
#28 by rh1no // Feb 13, 2023 - 8:42am
Pereira has also developed a bad habit of waiting to say what he actually thinks about a given call until the review of the play has been completed. If you watch and listen closely, you'll find that he'll recite what the NFL rulebook says and identify what the officials are looking at in a replay, but won't give his interpretation of the rule as it pertains to the play in question. Once the refs make their decision, Mike will repeat the talking point that led to their decision and tack on "and that's why this was the right call."
Earlier on in his broadcasting career, he was unafraid of making judgment calls up-front, even if his judgment was different than from that of the refs on the field.
#30 by big10freak // Feb 13, 2023 - 8:54am
Think context matters just a bit. Take the GB/TB NFC championship game Several times during game there were non calls on what announcing crew said were clear d holds or DPI. Then King does same at end and gets called. Look, he held and GB deserved to lose anyway for other reasons. But I certainly understood the folks saying “Why now?!”
I didn’t have that sense from the the game yesterday. That the Chiefs were getting away with anything and then suddenly the Eagles get called.
If folks want to say the crew was in “let them play mode” so the call was out of character in that context sure I get that stance. But I don’t think the call was wrong. Obviously holding.
#71 by Pat // Feb 13, 2023 - 10:38am
It wasn't just Philly - that crew was letting guys play the whole game. A ton. And then they didn't.
Here's the full list of penalties called in that game.
- 2x Defensive Offside
- 2x NZI
- 2x False start
- Offensive Pass Interference
- Illegal Use of Hands
- Delay of Game
- Defensive Holding
All of those penalties except the last one (and the OPI, but that was one of the obvious ones where there's mistimed blocking) are mechanics-type penalties. They don't vary much year-to-year or crew-to-crew. Offside, false start are all like, within 15%-25% year-to-year. There's no judgement.
No offensive holding calls. No DPI calls. No roughing calls. Hell, no ineligible man downfield, which is the prime example for "inconsistently called penalties" this year. None.
I'm definitely not saying the Eagles were screwed by the officials or anything (dear God no). But this is a prime example of what I've been saying all year: this new crop of officials (from the past 5-10 years) isn't officiating. They're going "by the book." See jersey stretch? Defensive holding. See a guy 1 yard + 1 inch downfield? Man downfield. Fall with the QB to the ground? Roughing. They're not watching the play - they're looking for "tells" and throwing the flag.
That's how you get inconsistency from officiating crews. Fans are watching the game, and modern officials are watching for tells. And I think that's why holding and DPI are down this year, too, because the officials have been tasked with watching for man downfield, so they can't watch for their "tells" on other plays.
edit: Also, to be clear, I still am not sure if these crews are regular season or all-star. But if they are regular season, Cheffers's crew is the highest penalty-count ref out there, and they call nearly zero judgement-type calls this game. To me that just screams that the crews were stressed to let them play more than normal, which again, also bugs the utter crap out of me. If you're regulating your officiating crews, they're not officiating.
#268 by mrh // Feb 13, 2023 - 8:57pm
All post-season crews are all-star crews. Which in my opinion is stupid: if crew teamwork is not important, then mix and match officials every week. If nothing else, this would reduce the chance of a crew conspiracy to fix a game.
#95 by coltsandrew // Feb 13, 2023 - 11:29am
I dislike the inconsistency of how and when penalties are called, particularly when they have an element of subjectivity to them, but I think that was a good call, in large part because it was *actually* holding. My opinion is that the blame for an inopportune penalty call belongs to the player committing the penalty, not the referee calling it. The only thing worse than a "ticky-tack" penalty when the game is on the line is a no-call that would have made a difference in the outcome. I don't think it's at all unreasonable to expect players to play a clean game to the very end.
#128 by Noahrk // Feb 13, 2023 - 12:16pm
We're discussing this because of the timing of the call, but the refs on the field have to make split-second decisions and sometimes they make understandable mistakes -or, in this case, calls that could've gone either way.
The people we should be bringing the pitchforks out for are the dudes in New York who, with the benefit of instant replay and as much time as they need, blew two hugely important calls. And as much as I don't believe the refs have an agenda, it's much harder to believe that about the folks in New York.
#187 by RickD // Feb 13, 2023 - 2:37pm
Olsen gets tiresome when he's wrong. As he was in this instance. I don't know what principle he's standing up. I guess he wanted the Eagles to get the ball back, because that would make for a more exciting game? But that wasn't a bad call.
Inconsistency of officiating is another issue, but Olsen, like most announcers, is happy to ignore inconsistency all game long.
As an aside: the people who think holding happens on every play are just objectively wrong. It usually happens because they don't understand the holding penalty should really be called the "holding and pulling" penalty.
#32 by Aaron Brooks G… // Feb 13, 2023 - 9:05am
after his Seahawks vanquished Peyton Manning a decade ago
Vanquished in the sense of a comic book villain. He got better.
One Super Bowl victory can, over time, fade into "ONLY one Super Bowl victory." That sounds preposterous to fans who wait decades for one moment of vindication. But it makes perfect sense to Eagles fans who are smarting this morning
It can -- and absolutely does to Rodgers and Wilson, who milked 'presumptive HoF case based on early SB win' pretty hard. I'm not sure it applies to the Eagles, unless you're trying to use Ringz to assess Kelce or Stoutland. It would have applied to Wentz, had American not lost the checked luggage that contained his brains back in 2019. But I don't think Hurts has any ghosts of 2017.
#188 by RickD // Feb 13, 2023 - 2:39pm
That's the thing about the Eagles: this Super Bowl team is mostly different from the team that beat the Patriots. Yes, there are a few holdovers (Kelce, Cox, Graham, and a few others), but there was almost no continuity between the rosters.
#33 by Aaron Brooks G… // Feb 13, 2023 - 9:09am
Mahomes was Michael Jordan mixed with Willis Reed mixed with Tom Brady mixed with, well, Mahomes.
Interesting to consider.
Mahomes feels much more like a Lebron or a Magic to me. Probably Magic. Mahomes is a fast-paced, relentless showman who lives to distribute the ball. That's Magic.
I think MJ, for all his gifts, would have been a terrible QB. In his sociopathic selfishness and relentless need to win individual matchups, MJ was a WR1. He's more TO than PM.
#85 by Paul R // Feb 13, 2023 - 11:16am
How about a Mahomes/Larry Bird comparison? In addition to great field-sense and athletic skill, they both have the ability to produce a crazy pass that looks more like a magic trick than a sports play. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=baBdnA7cui0 (Bird passing highlights.)
#120 by Aaron Brooks G… // Feb 13, 2023 - 12:09pm
Bird would fall back onto the hick shtick.
Part of the reason I like the Magic comp for Mahomes is the media savvy and the charisma -- things I don't really think of for Bird. I also mostly remember seeing grumpy Old Man Bird in person, when he was gimping up and down the court at half speed because his back was falling apart. When I think Athletic 1980s SFs, I think Dominique or Worthy or Pippen.
Bird was more athletic than he looked (most people are more athletic than Bird looked), but I wouldn't put him in the upper tier of athleticism. Mahomes basically is for QBs. He's not Josh Allen, but he runs around like a mad-man and bombs away.
Stephen Curry, maybe? That would fit being a legacy professional, too.
#35 by Aaron Brooks G… // Feb 13, 2023 - 9:18am
Those "signature moments" should keep Jones from getting shunted too far behind Aaron Donald and lost in the stack when he reaches the ballot many years from now.
Jones will have a Williams problem. It's also interesting to consider that of just players in this game, he has the 3rd-best Hall case. (Behind Cox and Suh -- and Suh and Jones are 1-1 head-to-head in SBs)
Kelce may run into that logjam, too. Especially if Witten is still banging into a ceiling at the SF or Finalist stages.
TE top-5 is interesting. I would throw out these names:
Ditka, Gates, Gonzalez, Gronk, Sharpe, Winslow. You have to toss two of these out.
\Why does no one make a case for Retzlaff? Not even Eagles fans?
#112 by rh1no // Feb 13, 2023 - 12:00pm
Top 5 TE:
- Gonzalez
- Winslow
- Gates
- Witten
- Kelce
I'm heavily weighing receptions, yards, and TDs here because that's what the TE position has evolved into.
I don't think you can put Ditka over any of these guys; he helped transform the position through his insane offensive output, but he peaked early and had very little production during the back half -- or really, the back 2/3 -- of his career.
Sharpe was the GOAT when he retired, but it's been shocking how Gronk essentially matched his stats and Kelce has surpassed him ... and both of these guys did it in 40 fewer games. You can point to his 8 Pro Bowl Selections and 4 All-Pro nods, but Kelce matches him there, too.
Gronk's peak is as high as anyone on this list, perhaps higher. He was dominant with the ball while also excelling as a blocker, which isnt necessarily captured on the stat sheets. But his career was relatively short compared to other guys on this list, and we never saw him play without Tom Brady. We've seen all the other guys on this list (except Winslow, really) be successful with multiple QBs.
You can knock Witten for being a product of his era, for not being as valuable relative to other receivers compared to old-timers of different eras, and for not being as dominant as the two other big names of his era ... all fair criticisms. But this guy played more games than any other tight end, racking up more yards and receptions than anybody besides Gonzalez. If you want to drop him down from a top 5 guy to a top 10 guy, fine. But there's no way he isn't a Hall of Famer. He won't be waiting very long to be enshrined.
Within a couple of years, I think Kelce will cement his status as a top 2 or 3 tight end all-time. Which is a shame, because I think he's an annoying, crybaby doofus. Unbelievable talent, tho.
#124 by Aaron Brooks G… // Feb 13, 2023 - 12:13pm
Sharpe was the GOAT when he retired, but it's been shocking how Gronk essentially matched his stats and Kelce has surpassed him ... and both of these guys did it in 40 fewer games.
Sharpe started his career in 1990. Sharpe is as much a contemporary of Ditka as he is of say Dallas Goedert.
Sharpe played a different game, back when Ronnie Lott was still decapitating any fool who ventured across the middle. Gronk and Kelce played in an era where a TE catching a seam pass and then wiping out a DB half their size as they land draws a penalty on the DB. It's a different game.
I'll give Ditka props for basically inventing the modern TE position. His first four years are amaze-balls by deadball era standards.
#155 by rh1no // Feb 13, 2023 - 12:51pm
I think it's totally justifiable to weigh the pioneering performance of guys like Ditka over the production volume of guys like Witten.
Sharpe would've almost certainly put up better numbers playing in the modern-day NFL, but it's tough to say that studs like Gronk and Kelce wouldn't have wreaked havoc on defenses during the 90s with their superior speed and athleticism.
Witten probably has the weakest case of all the guys on my list, but I'll be damned if being an Ironman in a sport like football doesn't merit special consideration.
Fun prompt. Would love to see other commenters post their top fives.
#156 by rh1no // Feb 13, 2023 - 12:51pm
I think it's totally justifiable to weigh the pioneering performance of guys like Ditka over the production volume of guys like Witten.
Sharpe would've almost certainly put up better numbers playing in the modern-day NFL, but it's tough to say that studs like Gronk and Kelce wouldn't have wreaked havoc on defenses during the 90s with their superior speed and athleticism.
Witten probably has the weakest case of all the guys on my list, but I'll be damned if being an Ironman in a sport like football doesn't merit special consideration.
Fun prompt. Would love to see other commenters post their top fives.
#157 by Aaron Brooks G… // Feb 13, 2023 - 12:53pm
I'll give an example of era-adjustment.
As late as 2000, this was a legal hit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XhtqhwK2er0
This is what was legal in 1990 against a TE.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MjyLHYtOdtg
You took your life in your hands when you went across the middle prior to 2008.
#165 by rh1no // Feb 13, 2023 - 1:15pm
Thanks for the examples, but I grew up watching the Brain Damage Era of the NFL and I'm glad the NFL is working to make the game safer.
It's important to look at the guys of past eras and consider how the game was different then. We can wonder, "Just how good would Shannon Sharpe have been if he played in the modern day NFL?" and "Could Ditka have performed at a high level for longer if he had been protected by the current rules?"
When we do that, though, I think it's also necessary to ask questions like, "What kind of terror would 6'5" 250 pound Travis Kelce have rained down on defenses from the 90s?"
I agree that modern-day TEs can do more because of rule changes and the efforts of guys from pervious eras. I'm putting greater value on the fact that they're doing more and you're putting greater value on the fact that the old-timers had it tougher. Just a difference in approaches when trying to compare players from different eras.
#172 by Aaron Brooks G… // Feb 13, 2023 - 1:51pm
Kellen Winslow was 6'5", 250-lb.
You can go back to the 1980s without having to account for huge player size changes, really. It hasn't changed too much since. Before that, and you need to keep an eye on secular changes in size in the general population.
#193 by RickD // Feb 13, 2023 - 2:52pm
You have Gates and Witten over Gronk?? Presumably because they just kept accumulating yardage stats well into their 30s, while Gronk retired young. Gates only hit 1000 yards twice in his 16-year career. Witten hit it 4 times in 17 years, but I'd take Gronk's top four years over Witten's in a heartbeat. And if TDs are your measure, Gronk is well ahead of those guys.
Winslow was so much earlier (I presume you mean Sr., not Jr.) that it's really hard to look at the stats directly. Kellen Winslow changed how the position was viewed, but he also had a very short career.
Aside from Tony G., who clearly has the best career, statistically, I'm not seeing a strong case for any TE over Gronk. Kelce will probably be there when all is said and done. But the other three? No.
#238 by rh1no // Feb 13, 2023 - 4:42pm
I wouldn't think less of anyone who puts Gronk in their personal top 5. Playing against the Brady/Gronk Pat's was terrifying ... there was a sense of inevitability that Gronk was going to grab a pass six yards over the middle and stiff-arm your entire secondary while rumbling for another 20 YAC. And man, when New Englad was running those 2TE sets with Gronk and Hernandez, I thought nobody besides the Patriots was ever going to win a Super Bowl ever again.
Gronk was also a touchdown machine, but he was often his team's primary receiver, surrounded by guys like Wes Welker, Brandon Lafell amd Danny Amendola. Would his TDs be lower if he had to share touches with, say, Tyreek Hill for 5 years? What would his numbers be like if his QB could rush like Patrick Mahomes or hand off the ball to someone like LaDanian Tomlinson?
Of course, Gronk's tough play and all-purpose usage probably contributed to his shorter career. It's a trade-off. And if you think the trade-off is worth it, you're not alone.
But I think "just ... accumulating yardage" isn't exactly an accomplishment that can be dismissed so easily. It is very tough for football players to stay healthy into their 30's, let alone competitive enough to haul in 700, 800, or 900 yards year-after-year. 1,000 yards is a serious accomplishment, but it's also a bit arbitrary. Gronk may have hit 1,000 yards four times in his career, but he eclipsed 800 yards only one more time ... 802. Kelce has SEVEN 1,000 yard seasons and two more over 850. Gonzalez only had four seasons under 800, and only one of them came after he turned 30.
Worth thinking about.
#223 by FanZed // Feb 13, 2023 - 4:08pm
I'd like to hear more about your thinking re: where Chris Jones ranks among current DTs. Donald is an all-time great, clearly, but after that, it isn't at all obvious to me how they'd rank. Seeing you put Cox ahead of Jones definitely surprises me. Based on what?
#224 by FanZed // Feb 13, 2023 - 4:08pm
I'd like to hear more about your thinking re: where Chris Jones ranks among current DTs. Donald is an all-time great, clearly, but after that, it isn't at all obvious to me how they'd rank. Seeing you put Cox ahead of Jones definitely surprises me. Based on what?
#36 by Aaron Brooks G… // Feb 13, 2023 - 9:20am
Meanwhile, the Cowboys are in their typical state of stalling in the playoffs due to a lack of leadership and vision
I don't think that's true. Much like the late-Davis Raiders, they have plenty of both. The problem is that it's going in the wrong direction.