Premature Tweet-ulation

There were reports that Packer Clay Matthews had won Defensive Player of the Year.

Those reports were apparently erroneous, as Pittsburgh safety Troy Polamalu won it, instead.

I suppose you're expecting a post full of bitterness about the tease of Matthews winning, only to have Polamalu, who plays for the Packers' Super Bowl opponent.

Not only am I not bitter about the early reports, but it doesn't bother me at all that a guy who is probably not even the best defensive player on his own team won the league-wide award.

The problem with awards like this is that there really isn't any set criteria. It's a major issue if it's decided that these awards really matter.

If you think they do, you should want some sort of criteria in place, so the voters don't have to base their decisions on things like "They lost to the Jets when he was hurt."

Of course, that's a more well-informed decision than "The other guy is buddies with Brian Cushing, and look what happened to him."

No, I don't know that it was a factor. But I know that a lot of the AP voters felt Cushing was undeserving of the Defensive Rookie of the Year award after they found out he was caught using a banned substance during the season in which he won.

And I know Matthews and Cushing aren't exactly strangers.

I also know that dumber theories have worked their way into votes like this in the past, so it wouldn't surprise me one bit.

In the end, it's pretty funny that some tweeted the wrong result to the voting. Given how close it was, I wonder if some sort of exit polling was the reason for the incorrect information getting out there. If so, it's very refreshing to see that major news networks aren't the only ones who can screw up exit polling.

Let's face it, that's how Polamalu won.

(Oh, and how can you not love that hair?)

'Who Dat?' Done It

As odd as it is to write, the New Orleans Saints are Super Bowl champions.

Good for them, I say.

It wasn't a fluke, either. The Saints fell behind 10-0, but it was almost like a rope-a-dope maneuver. From that point, New Orleans owned the show, outscoring Indianapolis 31-7 and clearly establishing themselves as the better-prepared team, along with being the better team.

There are many ways to emerge victorious in a one-game playoff. It's part of why playoffs are a bit of a misnomer when it comes to determining the best team in a given sport. However, there is no questioning a team that dominated virtually from start to finish, and then beat three future Hall of Fame quarterbacks in very different ways to win a championship.

(Think about it. The Saints jumped all over Kurt Warner and the Cardinals, running up points like crazy and then coasting through most of the second half. They practically broke Brett Favre in half in the NFC title game. While they didn't hit Peyton Manning much, they rattled the hell out of him mentally and confused him like he hasn't been confused in a long time.

Yes, I know I picked Indianapolis. If I had it to do over again, I'd pick the Colts, too. Not to pat myself on the back, but at least I got part of the equation right.

Turnovers. Special teams. Fundamentals. These things don't always decide games. But they're usually a good starting point. And they're terribly hard to predict. ... it's so hard to say that one team or the other will win the battle of "little things" in a game like this.

The Saints won the battle.

I had a feeling before the game that something like this would happen. Sean Payton made clear his message to his team throughout the week, and he made clear during meetings with the CBS broadcasters that he would not let his team get caught playing passive, not-to-lose football.

They were going to be the aggressors, and in doing so, the Saints made up a new blueprint for success in the NFL.

New Orleans treated this like a hockey game, really. They wanted to initiate from the start, but they also knew they weren't going to bash Manning around like they did to Favre. Instead of initiating a physical assault on Manning, they initiated a mental one. Read Dan Graziano, FanHouse colleague, on the Saints' plan.

You have to go back to Monday, Jan. 25, the day after the Saints beat the Vikings to claim the NFC title. In a meeting with his coaches, Saints head coach Sean Payton was discussing the idea that they would do well to encourage the Colts to run.

"You guys can't be upset," Payton said to defensive coordinator Gregg Williams, "if they have 100 yards rushing."

Williams, who agreed with the sentiment, went a little harder.

"We can't be upset if they have 200 yards rushing," Williams said.

So a couple of days later, Payton addressed the defense in a team meeting and hedged.

"You guys can't be upset if they get 150 yards rushing," he said.

So a multi-faceted game plan developed, and one of its key facets was a shift to a 3-4 alignment for the first quarter so the Saints could cover the Colts' receivers deep and invite them to run the ball up the middle.

"We tried to invite them to run as much as they would do it," Williams said late Sunday night, when it was all over.

The Colts did. They racked up 66 rushing yards in the first quarter and raced out to a 10-0 lead that might have had Saints fans panicked but was pretty much along the lines of what Williams had been expecting. As long as the score didn't get out of hand, he knew he could stick with the amoeba game plan, which called for a switch back to a 4-3 alignment for the second quarter and then a ton of shifting looks in the second half.

"You can't beat Peyton Manning if you don't keep changing what he's looking at," Williams said.

That last quote is the money shot from this game. You can read 3,000 more words on the Super Bowl, and none of them will be as significant as those 14.

Finally, someone had the guts to change defensive looks, possibly allowing themselves to be singed for a time, because they knew they couldn't afford to get into a pattern.

I'm not about to say that this is the downfall of the Colts or of Manning. He's an elite quarterback, and he will be enshrined in Canton someday. He will have more chances to win rings, and he will likely hoist the Lombardi Trophy again.

But he met his match -- for at least one night -- in Williams. He met his match with an opponent who refused to sit back and play passively, allowing Manning to dictate matchups and tempo for four quarters. He met his match with an opponent who refused to allow Manning to adjust, because Williams was prepared to be the initiator in the mental game during the second half.

Payton, however, gets the award for aggression. It's one thing to see a hole in a team's kick return game that can be attacked by an onside kick. It's another to 1) have enough faith in your kicker (who had never tried an onside kick), 2) have enough faith in a defense that was beaten regularly in the first half to make a stop if necessary, and 3) have the guts to make the brashest Super Bowl play call in years.

The guts of Payton, the confidence and swagger of Williams, and the talent of guys like Brees, Tracy Porter, and -- yes -- Thomas Morstead made this team unbeatable on this night.

Even for a guy like Manning, who is used to having nights like this go his way. This time, Manning found an opponent who refused to let him win, no matter what he could have tried.

Let's see how many teams follow the blueprint, because it's not a popular path to choose.

NFL teams aren't known for ruthless aggression from a standpoint of strategery. They prefer to do what everyone else does, and play this bland, conservative style of football, hoping the other teams screws up.

Since guys like Manning rarely screw up, teams who play the Colts conservatively are ripe for the picking. But the Saints clearly saw things on film in the AFC title game, when the Jets bottled the Colts up until the two-minute warning of the first half.

Where the Jets went wrong, though, is that they had no answer once Manning figured them out. They didn't have anything to throw at him, because he had seen it all and had a way to beat it.

Williams, as noted by Graziano, knew going in that they had to be constantly changing looks, the way the Saints do on offense.

By turning his defense into an offense, Williams held the key to a Super Bowl win for a franchise -- and a city -- that will revere it like no other.

Super Bowl XLIV: All About the Quarterbacks (Maybe)

There aren't many things in the world harder than penning a Super Bowl preview and coming up with something original.

After two weeks of storylines, press conferences, hype, overhype, and more overhype, the game is Sunday in Miami. Instead of sitting here talking about things you've already read about, let's try to keep it relatively simple.

The little things are always important in a football game.

Turnovers. Special teams. Fundamentals.

These things don't always decide games. But they're usually a good starting point. And they're terribly hard to predict.

The Green Bay Packers were plus-28 in turnover ratio this season. They lost their only playoff game this year -- at Arizona -- largely because they were minus-two in the game. Who could have seen that coming?

The Chicago Bears had an game-opening kickoff return touchdown by Devin Hester in the Super Bowl three years ago. They were then thoroughly dominated by Indianapolis and lost 29-17, despite making the only truly significant special teams play of the game.

Whoda thunk that Kurt Warner -- future Hall of Famer -- would throw the dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb pass he threw to James Harrison that turned Super Bowl XLIII on its ear before halftime? Warner knew better, and he threw it anyway, costing his team points and causing a huge shift in momentum before halftime.

These things happen in playoff football games, and it's so hard to say that one team or the other will win the battle of "little things" in a game like this.

Myth: Quarterbacks decide this game.

What if they don't? What if the defenses pick up their play and change the way it's played?

You're telling me you don't think Gregg Williams can pull a rabbit out of his hat and at least slow Peyton Manning down long enough to make him think a bit?

Same for the Colts and Drew Brees. It's crazy to think a defense that stiffened like it did during the AFC Championship could be helpless against an offense that has been notorious for slow starts on the road (Miami and Washington this season come to mind). Oh, and Brees didn't exactly light up the Vikings, especially in the second half, when they were held under 100 yards.

It's just as likely that guys like Joseph Addai, Donald Brown, Pierre Thomas, and Reggie Bush will have a huge say in how the game plays out.

No need to oversimplify things. Brees and Manning are big-time quarterbacks, and the offenses are both keyed by the passing game. Both teams, however, have proven they can run the ball, and one-dimensional offense isn't likely to win the game.

The game is better with the week off.

Having watched a couple Super Bowls where the teams didn't have an off week ahead of it, I believe pretty strongly that the overall quality of play is better when you have that extra week. Most teams will build their game plan at home during the bye week, then fly to the game site Sunday or Monday before the game.

Practices happen in the host area, but neither team is doing a ton to tip their hand, because each team has a pool reporter assigned to their workouts (closed to the public). The game plan has been in place, everyone knows what is going to happen, and it's all about mental preparation and blocking out all the distractions for the game.

When you don't have the off week, you accelerate everything. In some respects, it could be a better game if you don't give coaches an extra week to overthink everything. Without the extra week, coaches are more inclined to do what got them to the Super Bowl, instead of trying to re-invent the wheel.

But you need the right coaches and players to make the short week work. With media obligations, family and friends begging for tickets, and having to get to the host city early in the week, there is a lot going on outside of the preparation. For many teams, it's proven to be too much to deal with in recent years.

Stick with the week off, NFL. The quality of the game is more important than the oversaturation of coverage that is produced when you have the off week.

The Colts are the better all-around team and will win.

It busts me up, because I want the Saints to win. But Bill Simmons probably said it best.

How dumb will you feel in the fourth quarter, with the Colts leading by 10 and driving for another score, if Manning has the New Peyton Manning Face going? Would you be kicking yourself? Would you be saying, "Why did I go against Manning? What was I thinking?"

Let's not be That Guy. Manning is better than Brees. Reggie Wayne, Pierre Garcon, Austin Collie, and Dallas Clark are better than Devery Henderson, Marques Colston, Robert Meachem, and Jeremy Shockey. The Colts are better on defense, even if Dwight Freeney is limited or sidelined.

Oh, and Manning is better than anyone on the field for either team.

If you're in doubt about a game, you look at who has the better players. You have to love the story of the New Orleans Saints, but how can you argue they have better players? That's insane, and it's wrong.

Colts win.

Stunner: Champ Isn't Always 'Best Team'

As you may have heard, Sunday is the Super Bowl.

(You'll notice that I have avoided saying much since the Packers were eliminated. I also didn't say a word about the Vikings being eliminated. It's partially by design. I figure that I'm not in Miami, and you're getting plenty of Super Bowl coverage elsewhere. I'll break down the matchup and throw out a prediction while I'm in Houghton this weekend.)

As the Colts and Saints prepare to lock horns, fans are left to marvel at the sight of No. 1 seeds advancing out of the respective conferences. It doesn't happen often.

Parity in sports is a hot-button subject. In the NFL, the objective these days is more to just get in the playoffs than it is to have a 14-2 season. Other sports, while still leaning toward the favorites, have had their moments.

Of course, it helps that other pro sports feature best-of-seven series in the playoffs. The format tends to tilt in favor of the superior team, since it's pretty hard to be an inferior team and win four of seven games.

If you do, it's probably because you deserve it, no matter your status in the regular season. After all, you just won four out of seven (or fewer) games against a good team. It's not a one-and-done fluke. It's more of the real deal.

For the NFL, a study confirms what most of us have known for many, many years.

The best team doesn't always win.

To quantify this, consider an alternate universe in which the NBA adopted the NFL’s format for the regular season and playoffs. Neil Paine of Basketball Reference constructed an approximation of such an NBA season, aligning teams to match as closely as possible the NBA’s 30-team league with the NFL’s 32-team league. With 16 games to go around, there aren’t enough games for every team to play every other one, like in the NFL — so, for instance, the Lakers don’t play the Cleveland Cavaliers in this alternate reality. Then Paine simulated 10,000 such NBA seasons, using teams’ stats through last Tuesday’s games to estimate their strength and therefore their likelihood of winning each game.

In these seasons, the usual suspects tend to finish on top. The Cavs win the “Super Bowl” 19.6% of the time, followed by the Lakers at 19.4% and the Celtics at 12.1%. The Hawks, Nuggets, Spurs, Jazz and Magic all also have at least a 6% chance of winning it all. However, some losing teams win in more than one of these simulated seasons, including the 76ers, the Clippers and the Kings.

Before this NBA season, Paine ran similar simulations, using the actual NBA season structure, and found that the best team has about a 48% chance of winning the title.

I've said this before, and I'll say it again.

Playoffs aren't designed to figure out which team is the best. They're designed for drama, television ratings, and revenue.

The only way for the best team to win the championship every year is to adopt the "everyone plays each other twice" system used by -- among others -- the English Premier League.

It will never happen. Instead, fans in the States have always enjoyed playoff competition, and they're not at all concerned about proving who the absolute best team is. That's why college football gets so much crap from American sports fans, after all.