It’s not exactly a case of generalized apathy, but the zeal that’s usually apparent around Super Bowl season just isn’t there.
The column of Super Bowl predictions lacks the wide-eyed passion we expect. And to no one’s surprise, some said, “I’ll tell you my prediction if you’ll tell me who’s playing.”
Glad you asked. I’ll tell you: It’s the Green Bay Packers and the Pittsburgh Steelers, both teams having made the Super Bowl trip many times and come out ahead almost as many.
Most pick the Steelers to cart off the Vince Lombardi Trophy; most believe Pittsburgh has too many weapons, including and especially Ben Roethlisberger, the 28-year-old quarterback who has won two Super Bowls.
Let’s move to the prognostications.
There’s no shame in a couple’s rooting for different teams, as in the case of Samson and Christella Vallejos. She works for Amber Care Hospice and thinks that Big Ben will make the difference in a seven-point win for the Steelers.
We hope there’s no marital strife, as Samson differs with her; he says the Packers will take it by 12 points. He’s a fan of some team called the Broncos, and he doesn’t particularly care for either current Super Bowl competitor.
Willie Salas, a retired educator, like several others, isn’t a supporter of either team but expects the Steelers to win. “The first quarter will be close, but in the second quarter, the Steelers will whip butt,” Salas said, eloquently.
Clarence Romero is a paramedic with the Española EMS, and an Oakland Raider fan. He says, “Pittsburgh’s strong defense will give” them a 14-point victory. Clarence added that Pittsburgh’s Troy Polamalu, the NFL’s Defensive Player of Year, “makes offenses nervous.”
Sandra Nepstad, originally from the Minneapolis and Chicago area, says her “intuition” alone leads her to favor the Packers. And she might be right. Has anyone ever heard of men’s intuition?
Werner Muller, a retired Highlands education professor, took a while to remember that it’s the Steelers vs. the Packers on Sunday. Werner’s take: “I’m ‘torn’: as immoral as Roethlisberger is, he still stands a chance of winning.” He expects a six-point victory.
Werner’s a Philadelphia Eagles fan, having been raised in the Pennsylvania area.
West Las Vegas sophomore Marques Lovato is a Dallas Cowboys fan. He chooses Pittsburgh by about 20 points “because they have a good quarterback and they’ve been there several times.”
James “Screech” Saavedra, an Oakland Raiders fan, says “Pittsburgh’s defense is just too much for the Packers.” “Screech,” an exercise tech at the City Recreation Center, also cites strong safety Troy Polamalu as a factor.
Kathel Ochoa, a fourth-year student at Highlands, majoring in athletic training, picks the Packers by 10. “Green Bay’s quarterback, Aaron Rogers,” Ochoa says, “is much more precise than” Big Ben.
Rick Armijo, a Bronco fan and a counselor at Robertson High School, predicts a 21-14 victory for the Steelers. “Pittsburgh has a better defense, and their quarterback’s a winner,” Rick said.
Ray Sanchez, pursuing his master’s degree in sports administration at Highlands University — intelligently — is a Raider fan, but the great Oakland team opted to stay home this year. So what’s Ray’s choice? The Packers by 10 points. And why? Well, because of “Aaron Rodgers’ ability to get out of the pocket and his accuracy in throwing on the run.”
Ray adds that the Packers’ “D” has “extra weapons in A.J. Hawk and Clay Matthews.” Ray expects a 24-13 final score.
“I don’t even know who’s playing,” said Dr. Bob Vander Meer, who does his work in the public eye. The optometrist for Eye Associates huddled with technician Ben Mora to come up with the Steelers-Packers matchup.
The consensus: Vander Meer’s take is “Steelers in a close game — because they always win, even if I intensely dislike them.” Ben’s also going with the Steelers “because Green Bay’s too banged up.”
The question: “Who do you predict will win the Super Bowl?” prompted a detailed discourse from former LVTI president and former State Rep. Samuel Vigil, who’s certainly aware of who’s playing but who has grave concerns over how football at both the college and professional level exploits athletes and has become “a commodity, something to keep the gambling world occupied.”
The arguments he made certainly have merit, but they’re too detailed to express here. I hope to corner him soon and devote an entire column to his concerns.
• • •
Last week’s column ended with a few words that some of us butcher, such as “ath-a-let-ic” and “jew-lery.” Nacho Jaramillo, a local artist, said he finds it grating when people say “arthur-itis.”
Well, I’ve got something to say to Nacho: “Arthur said it is quite cold.”
“Arthur who?”
“Arthur Mometer.”
And at the dinner and silent auction for Samaritan House, held at the United World College ballroom, retired teacher Pat Amai approached me and asked, “Do you like my jew-lery?”
• • •
Heard on local radio Tuesday: “The issue remains contentuous.” That must be a hybrid of contentious and “contemptuous.” So if a debatable matter is particularly odious, it’s contentuous.
And that’s how language grows. Look how successfully Sarah Palin coined a word, “refudiate,” by fusing “refute” and “repudiate.” You betcha!
• • •
Where else but in New Mexico can we have below-zero temperatures almost immediately following tepid conditions?
The National Weather Service predicted temperatures as low as 10 degrees for Tuesday; minus 10 for Tuesday night; 3 degrees Wednesday; and minus 14 Wednesday night.
Think that’s frigid? The weather service reports a minus 14 having been recorded back in December 1990; the coldest February has ever been is minus 21, and an all-time low in Las Vegas was minus-26.