Relief is spelled 'Fleur-de-lis'

It still has not sunk in. I can't begin to imagine how the city of New Orleans feels right now. I'm still trying to figure out how I feel about it all.

I experienced so many emotions watching that game, and the team I support wasn't even playing. In any event, there were times during Super Bowl XLIV I felt nervous, anxious, angry, happy. These emotions were enhanced, ultimately because I had been drinking for many hours prior to kickoff and watching the season come to an end the way it did brought me so much joy.

But around 48 hours later, after a write off of a day recovering from the party last night, I've had some time to analyze how I really feel about this whole thing.

The most obvious feeling is relief. Three weeks ago, we were down to four teams. Two of those teams I hate. After the Colts defeated the Jets in the AFC Championship, it was starting to look like I was going to have to live out my worst nightmare: A Colts/Vikings Super Bowl matchup.

Luckily, Minnesota has a funny way of messing up opportunities like 1st down on the opposing team's 33 yard line with a trip to the Super Bowl within reach. Nevermind not being able to hit a field goal in that situation, they didn't even get the chance to attempt one. The rest is history, or, for Vikings fans, what appears to have become a recurring reality.

Sunday, there was one last bullet to dodge. Friday's column pointed out all the reasons why I thought the Saints would win.

Watching the game unfold, and now having the day to reflect on it, I can't help but think:

- Why don't teams go for it more often on 4th and goal from three yards out or less? I mean, either you convert and get a touchdown with a huge boost of confidence to your team, or you make the opposing team drive 97 yards on you. Even if you don't convert the fourth down, more times than not you're going to force the team into a punting situation, where you get the ball back with great field position. It's shocking to think that teams don't do this more often.

- Why weren't the Colts more aggressive on the ensuing drive on 3rd down? If you make it, you go into your hurry up offence, and probably put up at least 3 more points on the board before half. So why call a run play? Does it really matter how you get that yard or two? Why do you not put the ball in the hands of Peyton Manning? I'm sure there has to be a play that they could have called better than what they did. Result: Punt, and the Saints come back before half to get three (potential 6 or 10 point swing there).

- Why was I mentioning the brilliant Saints head coach in Friday's column? Because two weeks is a lot of time to prepare for Sean Payton. Needless to say, he had quite the gameplan and was able to adapt better than the Colts' coaches. (We'll revisit this point later on)

- Are we shocked that special teams plays were an important factor in this game? Are we shocked that the Colts' special teams lost the battle? Onside kick successful for the Saints. Then on the kickoff following the Saints field goal to make it 17-16, there was a decision by a Colts' return man to run the ball out for an 11 yard return, as opposed to taking the touchback which would have placed the ball at the 20-yard line. Several plays later, the Colts are on the Saints' 34-yard line. If they had those extra nine yards, the field goal wouldn't have appeared so daunting. Which is a great segway into...

- Why do you attempt a 51-yard field goal in that siutation if you are the Colts? This is another thing that I don't understand. Ok fine, you are trying to 'put points on the board', but at what risk? If you miss, the opposition gets fantastic field position. And what kind of message does that send to your defence? Instead, another special teams play not converted, and your defence is sent back out with a short field to defend. You cannot overlook the importance of field position in the game of football. What happened next? Saints touchdown.

- This led us to the play of the game where Saints' CB Tracy Porter jumped a route by Reggie Wayne turning a poorly thrown pass by Manning into an interception returned for a touchdown. Game. Set. Match. (Side note: This moment produced a "wish I would have thought to say this at that moment" moment, which will be part of next year's preachments by the way. While at home today, the scene from Rocky IV where he cuts Ivan Drago came to mind. In between rounds of the epic bout in Moscow, Duke gets in Rocky's face to remind him after Rocky landed a blow to cut the Russian, "You see! He's not a machine! He's a Man!" Considering the crowd I was watching the game with, if I busted out that line after the interception, it would have been the night's defining moment. Oh well, maybe next time.)

- Aside from this one mistake, Peyton Manning played one hell of a game, and if people are going to blame the outcome on him that would be a shame.

- Drew Brees and Sean Payton are officially on my I'd-buy-them-a-drink-if-I-ever-saw-them list.
Brees to Deacon - "Thanks, but who are you?"
Deacon to Brees - "I'm nobody, dude. Just a very big Chicago Bears fan who appreciates everything you did to the Vikings and Colts fans in the 2009 Season. I just needed to say, thank you. You have no idea the pain and suffering you helped me avoid.

- I'm pretty sure that people are going to finally stop overlooking Drew Brees as one of the elite quarterbacks in the NFL, and Sean Payton as one of the top head coaches in the NFL.


As I just mentioned, to lay the blame on the shoulders of Peyton Manning would be a shame. The fact is that it was a crucial error at the worst possible time, but don't forget all the great plays that he made prior to that point.

In my last column, I warned people to not discount the other phases of the game of football that Manning cannot control from the sidelines. After watching what happened on Sunday, I don't think that I need to do much more convincing.

Manning didn't make Pierre Garcon drop a pass in the first half where he would have been off to the races setting up another Colts score. He didn't make the decision to run the ball on a crucial third and short situation which resulted in the Colts punting back to the Saints yielding great field position. He didn't try to recover an onside kick with his helmet. He didn't make the decision to run back a kickoff to the 11-yard line. He didn't make the decision to kick a 51-yard field goal. He surely wasn't on the field playing defence in a Cover-2 scheme designed to limit the big play, but leave the middle of the field exploitable for Brees and his league-best offence. He didn't come up with the defensive game plan.

Ironically, that same defensive approach was used unsuccessfully against the Colts three years ago in Super Bowl XLI by the Chicago Bears. Definitely a coaching mistake, the Colts used the same conservative approach. It worked early on because Sean Payton knew that facing Manning, he was going to have to take risks. He knew that the Saints would have to find ways to make big plays. When that didn't work and he discovered what the Colts were doing, he adjusted his gameplan, and ironically, that conservative Cover-2 scheme that the Colts killed three years ago was their achilles heel three years later. The Saints built multiple scoring drives, and the Colts never adjusted to the game that was in front of their face. On the game winning touchdown drive, Brees was 8 for 8, completing all 8 passes to 8 different receivers, including the two-point conversion to Devery Henderson.

Did the Colts forget that they were facing Drew Brees and the league's best offence? Did they forget that to get to the Super Bowl, the Saints defeated teams quarterbacked by future hall of famers Kurt Warner and Brett Favre? Someone should have told the Colts that they weren't facing Joe Flacco or Mark Sanchez this week...

Some will call the New Orleans Saints a team of destiny. Some will look back at the NFC Championship game and say that they should not have been in the Super Bowl. I'm sure that New Orleans players will play up the idea of destiny in the media because that's fun to sell and that's fun for story-telling, and considering the work that lies ahead for that city in its rebuilding process, that's a great idea to sell. But this game's result had nothing to do with destiny or fate.

The Colts jumped out to a 10 point lead, and then after that scored only 7 of the games 38 points the rest of the way.

The Saints adjusted better than the Colts did. They played better. They were coached better. They tackled better. They made more plays. They had more engery. They wanted it more.

The looks of both teams on the sidelines could have not been more polarizing. On one side, you had a team with stone-cold looks on their faces, hoping that their quarterback was going to save them. On the other side you had a head coach fist-pumping like a madman, screaming and yelling at his players, all of which looked like a bunch of rowdy high school kids.

The Saints created their destiny through preparation, hard work, and execution.

To suggest this was a team of destiny discounts everything that team, its players, and its city had to endure to get to this point. It would be terribly wrong to do so.

Just like it would be wrong to think that the Colts' ultimate demise was the fault of Peyton Manning. Unforunately, nobody is going to remember the 31 completed passes, the 300+ yards passing, or the touchdown pass to Pierre Garcon. The game's defining moment came from the one mistake he made, and sadly that's all most people will remember.

When talking about the game-sealing interception, Tracy Porter said that he had a good idea about what the play was going to look like because he had seen it so many times on film. That's not destiny. That's film study. That's preparation.

When I look back at everything that I read or watched prior to this game, I've realized that the hate that I thought I had towards Peyton Manning, was really hate for the Colts as an organization and how they have been treated in the media.

That's not to say that I don't understand why the Colts are great for the media to sell. They are a small market team, they have arguably one of the best quarterbacks of all time, and they are compelling. But it's this kind of thing that makes people fall in love without looking at the complete picture of this team. It's another one of the reasons I had no hesitation in picking against them in this game.

Since 2003, the Colts have not recorded more than 4 regular season losses in a single year. They have captured 6 out of 7 AFC South Division titles. Peyton Manning has won league MVP honors a league-best 4 times. Some have the opinion that this is the team of the decade. But what happened in those 7 years?

They made the AFC title game three times, winning twice. On the surface, that looks pretty impressive.

But what about the losses? In three of the four other seasons, they made early exits out of the playoffs in the Divisional round to the New England Patriots (2004), Pittsburgh Steelers (2005), and the San Diego Chargers (2007). Also, they lost to the San Diego Chargers in the Wild Card round (2008). What is noteworthy of the last three: All of those playoff losses were at home to lower seeded teams.

I understand that because this team was more experienced, and because of Peyton Manning's play this year being at an almost 'machine-like' level, people deemed them to be unstoppable.

Without a doubt, this Colts team is built for success, but it's apparent that might be regular season success as opposed to post-season success. In the end, Peyton Manning's playoff record is 9-9 lifetime, and that's going to be a tough number to erase from the minds of people when the "Greatest of All Time" talks arise.

The reality of football is that quarterbacks become glorified for team success because it is highly recognized as the most important position on the field. So if it's fair for the people to attribute a large part of the success of the Colts to the play of their quarterback, so to must a piece of the blame when they lose - fair or not. We can't sit and talk about all the problems with the Colts that Manning can overcome because he's so good at what he does, but he does need to shoulder some of the blame. It might not be fair, but it's the way it is.

The culture of sports places a high value on winning in team sports because the championship is the pinnacle of team achievements. If the game of football recognizes its quarterbacks to be the most important part of championship winning teams, then it must also recognize the quarterback to at least be a 'part' of the failures of teams who do not win championships. It is because of this, the loss on Sunday will be a large blemish on the case built for Peyton Manning as the best ever.

Take Drew Brees, for example. Over the last 5 seasons with the Saints, Drew Brees has put together some very impressive stats, and at the age of 31, there's alot of reason to think that he'll continue to produce at an elite level for years to come.

If I argued that Brees continued to produce at that level for another few years or so, but was without a Super Bowl ring, it would be tough to imagine him getting into the Hall of Fame ten years down the line.

But if I were to pose the same question now that he has won, a lot of people would change their mind and the reason would be that ring.

Now I dont think that one mistake that Manning made will define his entire career. That's just crazy. But it might be the difference between being 'one of the greatest' and being 'the unquestioned greatest' of all time. The game of football is a game of inches, and one or two plays can change a legacy or a career.

Two years ago, if Asante Samuel catches what should have been a sure interception, or if the Patriots sack Eli Manning, or if David Tyree does not make that catch on his helmet, then the Patriots complete a perfect season, go down as the greatest team in NFL history, and Tom Brady and the Patriots become immortal. One or two plays was the difference between 'one of the best' and 'the best'. That same line of thinking has to apply when we now talk about Peyton Manning.

Of course, the people who would argue that Manning is the best of all-time will point out what the rest of his teams looked like. They would argue that Joe Montana played with Hall of Famers at almost every position on the field. They would argue that he never got to play with a defence like the '85 Bears or 2000 Ravens.

But while they would be arguing to make their case for Peyton Manning as the 'best ever' stronger, they would most definitely be making the case for the Colts as a team much weaker. The latter is exactly why I took the stance on the Super Bowl that I did, and I think that it's why I've realized that I don't hate Manning, but I hate the way there is a sense of entitlement among their fans and organization because they have him as their quarterback. If you had to compare this team to another sports franchise, the Atlanta Braves come to mind: Built for success in the regular season, and not enough championships to be considered any better than that.

All the hype that clouded the Colts before the Super Bowl worked against them. People expected the Colts to win. Former Colts' head coach Tony Dungy said they would win easily. You could see in the eyes of the players during media week that they were all buying into the idea that there was nothing going to stop them from winning another Super Bowl because they had Peyton Manning on their side, who was playing for 'more than just a Super Bowl' as one publication put it. Again, I revisit the idea that they had a sense of entitlement.

But that's why they play the games.

Heck, maybe this is what the Colts get for spitting in the face of the football Gods by throwing away their chance at a perfect season. I guess we'll never know.

What we do know is that the world watched the New Orleans Saints come into Miami on the league's biggest stage in the league's biggest game, and showed everyone why they should have been given a lot more respect. Maybe it's because most people don't actually sit down and watch the games. Someone just watching the playoffs would have remembered the NFC Championship and figured there was no way they would beat the Colts.

The thing about sports, is that you actually have to watch the games to have an opinion on these sorts of things. I have to say that from the football that I have had the pleasure to enjoy, Peyton Manning may be the best QB I've ever watched play the game. It's because I can't say that I have a memory of watching Joe Montana outside of the highlights I've seen countless times on the NFL Network. I can't say that I remember the entire careers of guys like Dan Marino, or even John Elway. I can only have on opinion for what I've seen.

And after what I saw on Sunday, it's really hard to sum up the performance of a player by the one mistake he made. Just like it's hard to discount things that a player might do over the course of an entire career because of one pass he threw, or one game he didn't win. Unfortunately, right now Tracy Porter's interception is the memory that is fresh in people's minds. Whether that is fair or not is not for you or me to decide. It is the reality of sports.

In the end, here I am still devoting the majority of this column to what it means for Peyton Manning and the Colts. Perhaps that makes me a hypocrite. I can guarantee that if people are still not talking about the Saints, it doesn't matter to them. They are football's champion and have earned their place in the great history of the NFL as Super Bowl champions. It's something that no person or column written can ever take away from them, and from it there is something that I think we can all take away.

Their Super Bowl victory should be a lesson to us all that in the face of adversity, against all odds, when everyone around you except those that believe in you are telling you what you cannot have, look at what you can accomplish with hard work, preparation, determination, and the drive to fight for what you want.

Destiny? That's talk for losers.

Winners create their destiny.


- Deacon Touchback