Valuing competitiveness over scoring

Sometimes you have to go against the grain and not play to the crowd but first,
here’s some context to share.

We are three days removed from the New England Patriots’ 13-3 win over the
Los Angeles Rams in Super Bowl LIII in Atlanta on Sunday. With the win, the
Patriots bring home their sixth Vince Lombardi Trophy, tying them with the
Pittsburgh Steelers for the most in NFL history.

Many people have been discussing where the Patriots dynasty ranks in the
annals of NFL history as well as ranking Tom Brady and Bill Bellichick as the
best quarterback and head coach respectively in NFL history. That conversation
is for another day but for now, I shift attention to Sunday’s game being the lowest
scoring game (combined points by both combatants) in Super Bowl history.

The irony is that such a game came in a season that saw scoreboards light up
like a Roman Candle. There were numerous records established but just for
openers Teams combined to score 1,371 total touchdowns, the most in a
single season in NFL history, while the 11,952 total points scored are the
second most in league annals (11,985 in 2013). I could mention several others
but in the interest of space I won’t.

The game that got the attention of most everyone was a late November game
between the Rams and Kansas City Chiefs. The Rams won that game 54-51,
marking the first time in NFL history that a team scored 50 or more points but
lost. Another irony is that including the aforementioned Super Bowl, there were
11 playoff games with only four involving a game in which a team scored 30 or
more points. The theories that are constantly applied to increased scoring is
that each passing year the rules are made to benefit offenses. Later in the year,
however, referees take more of a “let them play” approach in that penalties
which were called early in the season are less likely to get whistled in the
postseason.

The lack of scoring on Sunday drew reactions ranging from “The Super Bowl
sucked! It was boring! Etc.” to “I love an old school defensive battle.” I posted
a reaction on social media, Facebook to be specific, after the game:

“To anyone who says this Super Bowl was boring because it was low scoring,
that is a pretty shallow take. This game was closer to good defense than bad
offense, Granted, there were not a lot of sacks or turnovers. It was good
disciplined defense. You also have to remember that there is a reason why
Bellichick and Rams; defensive coordinator Wade Phillips are among two of
the best defensive minds in NFL history. They have slowed down high flying
offenses before. I could include the likes of Buddy Ryan and Dick LeBeau but
you get the point.”

The reactions I got were pretty wide ranging from “Attaboy, Vince” to “You’re
crazy.” To those who do not share my point of view, I’m not going to try to
convince them. I did not have a rooting interest in this year’s Super Bowl other
than one player from my alma mater (University of Nebraska) was going to
get a ring -- either Rams’ defensive tackle Ndamukong Suh or Patriots running
back Rex Burkhead.

My biggest point is that regardless of sport, I will never base the quality of a
game on how many points are scored. If that makes me batbleep crazy, so be
it. I value competitive games, even if the game is not well-played, more than
points. Unless my team is involved, I’m not going out of my way to stay tuned
for a game where one team leads 45-7 midway through the fourth quarter.
However, if a game is 10-7 midway through the fourth quarter, I am more
likely to stay tuned because I want to find out who is going to win. While I’m
in the minority on the aforementioned 54-51 game between the Chiefs and
Rams, I’ll stay tuned for the same reason.

I hear conversations that ask the question, “If given the choice, do you want a
54-51 game between the Chiefs and Rams or a 10-7 game between the
Ravens and Jaguars?” My argument is, why do I have to choose either? It’s
like asking, would I pick Republican or Democrat? I’m not trying to start debates
but my personal opinion is I choose neither because the former has gone too
far to the right and the latter has gone too far to the left. For me, an ideal
football game is 28-24 or 24-21, I get a mixture of offense and defense. By
no means am I saying that I loved Sunday’s game but since it hung in the
balance for four quarters is enough to keep me intrigued.

In a nutshell, more does not mean better, less does not mean worse.