2007-02-05 06:05:38 · 10 answers · asked by Scott 1 in Sports ➔ Football (American)
No, I could name five off the top of my head that were a lot worse:
XL..Steelers 21 - Seahawks 10...Awful ref job, blah performance on both sides of the ball by both teams
XXXVII: Buccaneers 48 - Raiders 21...Don't be fooled by the score, it was much worse than it looked
XXXV: Ravens 34 - Giants 7...Collins 4 INT's...worst QB performance ever (in my opinion)
XXXIII: Broncos 34 - Falcons 19...Did anyone really think the Falcons would win this one?
XXVII: Cowboys 52 - Bills 17...nothing needs to be said here
And that's just going back to the 1990s...so I think Super Bowl XLI was not bad at all
2007-02-05 06:27:18 · answer #1 · answered by RichMac82 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Nah, it wasn't the worst played or the most boring but it was no classic. Considering the rain and the two-week layoff, it was a pretty cleanly played game. Only 10 accepted penalties. I didn't see a pass interference call either. Officiating was good too.
The last several Super Bowls before 41 were pretty close. The last blowout was Super Bowl 37 between Tampa Bay and Oakland. You could easily name many of the Super Bowls between 1985 to 1997 (SB 19 to 31) as worse than this one, when the NFC won 13 straight championships.
With that said, the real question is which Super Bowls were exciting to the end??? Much less than those that were not memorable.
2007-02-05 14:19:00 · answer #2 · answered by Frederick S 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It was pretty bad all right. The Ravens-Giants SB was maybe the worse. Last years was pretty bad as well. The rain played a big part in SB 41 but Grossman was the real disaster for the Bears. He single handily killed two potential scoring drives with Pop Warner caliber football. Maybe not the worse SB but one of the worse 3 or 4.
2007-02-05 20:57:14 · answer #3 · answered by The Mick "7" 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I'd say that Super Bowl XLwas worse, partly because of the calls by the refs that practically gave the game to the Steelers, partly because so many of the Steelers fans were so arrogant after the game and partly because of the Seahawks who gave up in the last part of the game when it was obvious they weren't going to win.
2007-02-05 14:32:03 · answer #4 · answered by Elizabeth V 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Definatly not the worst. The Indy defense came back from the regular season with a maligned D, it took Manning 9 seasons to get here and at last he got it, thus taking the criticism off his back about how he could never win the big one.
It remained a tight game till the end... and at first it looked like the Bears had the upper hand but the Colts quickly came back and showed them what their franchise was all about.
In my opinion, one of the greatest Superbowls.
2007-02-05 14:12:37 · answer #5 · answered by Joe H 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Ravens vs. Giants in 2000 season. Only Super Bowl that I didn't watch a play or didn't give a damn about.
2007-02-05 14:09:27 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It'll never be shown in highlight films in the future.
2007-02-05 14:07:50 · answer #7 · answered by Pat 1 · 0⤊ 2⤋
The rain was a big factor.
2007-02-05 14:11:30 · answer #8 · answered by Gypsy Gal 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
SB XXVII was worse
2007-02-05 14:10:04 · answer #9 · answered by Prowler 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The very worst ever!!!! Booooooooo!!!!
2007-02-05 14:10:18 · answer #10 · answered by Tighty 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋