Chiefs Win Super Bowl LIV

[TanksAndSpartans]

I heard the same about Kyle Shanahan's playcalling on sports radio this morning. Drawing analogies to the SB the Falcons lost to the Patriots. I didn't notice hyper-aggressive playacting in real-time. I didn't think the 49ers were ever really in a position to run out the clock - its easy to say run more, but I'm not sure they really had the running game working. Maybe I would change my mind if I rewatched it.

[sluggermatt15]

Congratulations to the Chiefs! First championship in 50 years.

[RRMarshall]

I agree with the observation that the game flipped on the long pass to Hill. The game had a totally different feeling after that. Funny thing is the ball was a floater, it seemed to hang in the air forever. Hill just stood there waiting for it to come down. Live by the zone, die by the zoom. Anyone else think the two Jimmy G passes swatted at the line of scrimmage in the pivotal 4th quarter were key plays in retrospect?

[Reaser]

I thought it was a fine game, at least the first three, three and half quarters. Glad Andy Reid won so was happy with that.

Only annoyances were when it was clear KC was going to win I said "they're going to give Mahomes a bogus SB MVP and then immediately hype it and him up to ridiculous levels." Which is exactly what happened.

Not surprising, QB's get gifted SB MVP frequently and this isn't the worst one but Damien Williams, Chris Jones, guys that had better games. Would have been a nice surprise if they finally started taking the award serious.

The other thing that was bugging me was Mahomes kept looking for cheap penalties whenever he was touched/grazed and going right to the officials about it. Did it a few times. Then Jimmy G. looked like he tried to pull the classic 'hold the head after getting hit to make it seem like he got hit in the head' move once, too. Soft. Not enough to take advantage of the era throwing downfield to wide-open receivers -Mahomes made two easy throws, Jimmy missed a tougher but still there to be had throw and that was basically what decided the game in the 4Q- but trying to take advantage and even act, whine and cry for penalties for being touched is sad -- Mahomes sliding and Ward standing there and Mahomes goes right to Vinovich like he had been assaulted was most egregious and embarrassing to the sport.

[Ronfitch]

[quote="Reaser"]

Not surprising, QB's get gifted SB MVP frequently and this isn't the worst one but Damien Williams, Chris Jones, guys that had better games. Would have been a nice surprise if they finally started taking the award serious.

Again, we need a "like" button on this forum.

[74_75_78_79_]

Great comments! I was entertained! I did think SF would win. At first I thought it'd be they winning by just over a TD. Then as the pre-game time wound on, I was thinking it'd be by more and more. Not necessarily of SF-over-Mia '84 or Sea-over-Den '13 proportions, but I couldn't help but to think of the former of the two - Marino the big story leading up and he being in his second year in the league; thought of Mahomes (2nd year as a starter) and Chiefs' O being so QB-heavy as well. Was simply going by the old-school adage of the "un-sexy" defense-and-running team (and SF, historically, has had those) besting the 'flashy'-er...and not winning by a little either.

But I was wrong (though correct about the under). Halfway into the 4th, it looked like I'd be right. If SF could just drive down field and chew clock, punch it in to make it 27-10, that had to do it. I think, simply, SF gave them the game. And by game's end (even before so), I was brought back to that first meeting between SF and Seattle. Their D looking stellar but then suddenly allowing quite the points late to lose it. That may have served as a precursor/warning to come.

Not sure I want to be super-quick to judge Garoppolo (who I predicted would be MVP) yet! Yes, that late drive starting at their 15, fair or not, had Montana-eyes all over it! He had so much pressure over him for multiple reasons! I don't know where he goes from here. Maybe this will be seen years to come as the teller that he's not the real deal. But he IS from the School of Belichick/Brady. And Bob Griese, the one who (along with Aikman) I was starting to compare him to as far as not having to throw a lot in his offense but if he "had" to, he easily could...didn't he lose his first SB (VI, his offense scoring just 3 points, mind you)? Yeah, the jury's still out with me.

I'm not 'appalled' by Mahomes getting the MVP. In fact, with the season MVP not being decided until this late (my preference, not until after the SB), I'd like to think it shouldn't have been so unanimous in Lamar's favor being that his team did go one-and-done whereas Mahomes's team...That said, though (now back to strictly this very SB game yesterday), there were quite a few others to be considered and - yes - QBs seem to get too much of the nod. I honestly couldn't tell you who I think should have been the MVP. A few players from either side depending on who would have won. No real 'obvious' shoe-in choice IMO, but Mahomes at least 'one of' the candidates. Yes, the QBs wanting certain calls to be made in their favor especially when you consider what QBs of yesteryear had to go through...but this is a different era like it or not (not) and its all they know, were brought up in. But that's for an all different topic I guess.

I did want the Chiefs to win although I thought they wouldn't. Though they won fair in square and totally deserve it, I still feel that the better team didn't get it done. Either way, it was good to see them in the Super Bowl in my lifetime yet alone WIN it! Glad to see Andy get a Ring but really don't know about the 'he in the HOF or not' debate. I guess most will say that if Cowher is in then so should he; Reid having even more great non-title years than Cowher before finally reaching the top. But then the name Holmgren (another 1-Ring winner) will pop up and, again, perhaps this is for another topic altogether.

The 'flashier' team beating the 'boring' run-and-defense team has happened before. Think of the Rams/Titans. And it was because, as 'flashy' the Rams were going in, they were, of course, more than just passing. They had an elite pure-runner in Faulk as well as he being the best all-purpose back ever. And their defense...not quite like the early-'80s Chargers. It wasn't great, but 'good' enough (just-above-average at worst), and that was enough! KC though not having a Marshall Faulk still had other variables than just Mahomes, and their D which vastly improved from last year were better than that Rams' D. Enough balance in-the-end to at least take just-enough advantage of whatever it was that prevented SF from being at their best when it mattered yesterday.

Question...where was Len Dawson? Did I miss him? Or was he simply at home watching?

[ChrisBabcock]

Regarding MVPs.... How much say do the fans have in it? I am HOPING it is a very small percentage. Also the fact that "fan voting became open" and the end of the 3rd quarter is beyond absurd. I went to the link shown on the broadcast at the end of the 3rd and sure enough, I was presented with a menu of about 10 players each from both teams.

[lastcat3]

Great comments! I was entertained! I did think SF would win. At first I thought it'd be they winning by just over a TD. Then as the pre-game time wound on, I was thinking it'd be by more and more. Not necessarily of SF-over-Mia '84 or Sea-over-Den '13 proportions, but I couldn't help but to think of the former of the two - Marino the big story leading up and he being in his second year in the league; thought of Mahomes (2nd year as a starter) and Chiefs' O being so QB-heavy as well. Was simply going by the old-school adage of the "un-sexy" defense-and-running team (and SF, historically, has had those) besting the 'flashy'-er...and not winning by a little either.

But I was wrong (though correct about the under). Halfway into the 4th, it looked like I'd be right. If SF could just drive down field and chew clock, punch it in to make it 27-10, that had to do it. I think, simply, SF gave them the game. And by game's end (even before so), I was brought back to that first meeting between SF and Seattle. Their D looking stellar but then suddenly allowing quite the points late to lose it. That may have served as a precursor/warning to come.

Not sure I want to be super-quick to judge Garoppolo (who I predicted would be MVP) yet! Yes, that late drive starting at their 15, fair or not, had Montana-eyes all over it! He had so much pressure over him for multiple reasons! I don't know where he goes from here. Maybe this will be seen years to come as the teller that he's not the real deal. But he IS from the School of Belichick/Brady. And Bob Griese, the one who (along with Aikman) I was starting to compare him to as far as not having to throw a lot in his offense but if he "had" to, he easily could...didn't he lose his first SB (VI, his offense scoring just 3 points, mind you)? Yeah, the jury's still out with me.

I'm not 'appaled' by Mahomes getting the MVP. In fact, with the season MVP not being decided until this late (my preference, not until after the SB), I'd like to think it shouldn't have been so unanimous in Lamar's favor being that his team did go one-and-done whereas Mahomes's team...That said, though (now back to strictly this very SB game yesterday), there were quite a few others to be considered and - yes - QBs seem to get too much of the nod. I honestly couldn't tell you who I think should have been the MVP. A few players from either side depending on who would have won. No real 'obvious' shoe-in choice IMO, but Mahomes at least 'one of' the candidates. Yes, the QBs wanting certain calls to be made in their favor especially when you consider what QBs of yesteryear had to go through...but this is a different era like it or not (not) and its all they know, were brought up in. But that's for an all different topic I guess.

I did want the Chiefs to win although I thought they wouldn't. Though they won fair in square and totally deserve it, I still feel that the better team didn't get it done. Either way, it was good to see them in the Super Bowl in my lifetime yet alone WIN it! Glad to see Andy get a Ring but really don't know about the 'he in the HOF or not' debate. I guess most will say that if Cowher is in then so should he; Reid having even more great non-title years than Cowher before finally reaching the top. But then the name Holmgren (another 1-Ring winner) will pop up and, again, perhaps this is for another topic altogether.

The 'flashier' team beating the 'boring' run-and-defense team has happened before. Think of the Rams/Titans. And it was because, as 'flashy' the Rams were going in, they were, of course, more than just passing. They had an elite pure-runner in Faulk as well as he being the best all-purpose back ever. And their defense...not quite like the early-'80s Chargers. It wasn't great, but 'good' enough (just-above-average at worst), and that was enough! KC though not having a Marshall Faulk still had other variables than just Mahomes, and their D which vastly improved from last year were better than that Rams' D. Enough balance in-the-end to at least take just enough advantage of whatever it was that prevented SF from being at their best when it mattered yesterday.

Question...where was Len Dawson? Did I miss him? Or was he simply at home watching?

The biggest difference between those teams you mentioned that had leads in the SB and this years Niners team is that those teams had QB's that could seal the deal. The '19 Niners didn't. If say the Niners had Russel Wilson as their qb they probably would have been up by three touchdowns in the fourth instead of just ten points. THe Niners definitely have a good enough overall team to win Super Bowls without an elite qb but they still need a pretty darn good qb. Jimmy G I think is just average at this point in his career.

[Jay Z]

I heard the same about Kyle Shanahan's playcalling on sports radio this morning. Drawing analogies to the SB the Falcons lost to the Patriots. I didn't notice hyper-aggressive playacting in real-time. I didn't think the 49ers were ever really in a position to run out the clock - its easy to say run more, but I'm not sure they really had the running game working. Maybe I would change my mind if I rewatched it.

They ran 22 times for 141 yards. Samuel was 3 for 52. If you take that out, take Garrapolo out (2-2) you have 17 for 87 from the RBs. Which is still more than 5 yards a carry.

The Niners in the regular season ran more than they passed. Rare in today's game, but they did it. Not in the SB. Granted that Garrapolo was having success passing too. Not long stuff, but they moved the ball. Hence no punts until the 4th quarter.

What more do you want than a 10 point lead and the ball at that point in the game? The Mahomes to Hill 3rd and 15 play, apparently that was set up by prior plays where they ran a different pattern. Still terrible coverage. Mahomes had dropped back 15 yards, it was clearly a designed play from the snap. There is nothing preventing Shanahan and the 49ers from doing the same, having something left in the basket, some play that you have set up that you can reach for. It seemed like the Niners went into a shell and had nothing. That's on the coach. You want to have 10 points and the ball, sure the Chiefs might have punches left. You take those and respond and get through the end of the game. Even if you are down in talent, well the 2001 Patriots were not a talented team, you can coach to that, prepare for that. The Niners were really not down in talent across the board anyway.

People are trying to explain Shanahan away, but I don't think I can do that.

[lastcat3]

Lol, I think the Chiefs are building up some locker room material already for next year. A lot of fans and media have been saying that the 49ers lost the game more than the Chiefs won it. It is an interesting situation though. I think this might be the first Super Bowl where people would have considered the team that lost the game to have been the superior team throughout the majority of the game.