So anyway, any images, accounts, or descriptions of the game are prohibited without the express written consent of the NFL. But I think that under "fair use" provisions I am allowed to say "it sucked!"
Not really, actually. It was pretty sloppy, that's for sure! But overall it was a pretty decent game of football. Not an epic contest for the ages, but then those are pretty precious rare when it comes to the superbowl.
There seems to be a pretty wide range of reactions to these "big games" anyhow. I thought that Titans-Rams superbowl was a great damn game! But my girlfriend says she was bored stiff, because neither team was one she cared about. There was no hook or story about that confrontation that appealed to her. Well, I agreed with her there - Titans? Rams? In the scheme of things, who cares? But I still thought the game itself was a classic.
So who's the purer fan? Me, because I can watch a game between two teams I could care less about, and still be on the edge of my seat as long as the action on the field is good? Or she, because she has the more emotional approach and cares...needs to care, needs to have something invested in one of the teams on the field, in order to get into the game? Am I just a cold and shallow appreciator of mere procedural excellence, without the imagination to truly immerse my heart in the love of team and the unfolding drama of the individual personalities involved? Or is she a dilettante who can love the game in its dramatic aspects, as long as there's a story on the field that interests her, but lacks an appreciation for the pure fundamentals of the sport?
Well, obviously I'm the purer fan because she roots for the Raiders! But apart from that I think it's a valid question.
No comments:
Post a Comment