02-11-2018, 08:03 PM
(02-10-2018, 10:44 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: In '05, the Steelers take out Palmer on the opening play of the playoff game, we only get 3, and then everyone knows what happened at halftime and everything just fell apart.
When they beat the Cardinals in the Super Bowl, the Cardinals were about to go up 14-10 at the end of the first half, which they'd also get the ball back at the start of the second half, but Warner is stupid and throws a slant-route to the center of the field inside the 3 (can you be stupider?), it gets intercepted and returned for a touchdown.
Steelers go up 17-7 instead of down 10-14.
Even so, they still need to score a touchdown in the final minute to win by 4.
So, my question is, are the Steelers really a great franchise or just lucky?
In the case of the Cardinals game, you are making the assumption that if Harrison hadn’t scored, the rest of the scoring in that game would have proceeded identically to the actual outcome. But there’s no way of knowing that. If the halftime score was different then the 17-7 that actually happened, that would’ve set into motion a whole new set of events that would have been independent from the second half we actually got. There’s no way of knowing what kind of turnovers, lucky breaks, or hot streaks might have happened from that point, because it would have been a completely different outcome. So, to say that a different outcome of that play would have “most likely“ resulted in a different final outcome is kind of dicey, because you’re talking about a complete unknown.
As for the Cincy game, I do not deny that Palmer not getting hurt would have greatly increased the Bengals’ chances, but by no means was it a guarantee of a win. The two teams split that year, each winning in the other’s stadium. It is not unreasonable to suggest that the Steelers still had a good chance of winning even if Palmer was healthy.
As to the question of luck, I believe that in this parity-driven age it takes a combination of luck and being good to win a championship. The 1980s saw an era of dominant championship teams that basically blew everybody out in the playoffs. But when is the last time we saw that? These days, almost every Super Bowl winner plays at least one tight game in the playoffs. Those are the types of games that can hinge on just one or two plays.
The point is this: to suggest that a championship team is either lucky or good is a false dichotomy. Most often, they are both. Here’s the difference: when a good team gets a lucky break, it is more likely to help them win, because good teams tend to put themselves in situations where they can take advantage of luck. Bad teams don’t usually get any fewer lucky breaks than good ones, but they are usually in less of a position to take advantage of them, because they’re bad.
