Your coverage of the Super Bowl (Doomsday in the Dome, Jan. 23) was the best anywhere. After seeing all the newspapers the morning after, all with ordinary photographs and articles, I knew only SI could put together a story that would mean anything. Dan Jenkins' writing was great, but I really loved photographer Neil Leifer's super shot of the Superdome. It captured everything, including the emotion on the Dallas sideline. Another tremendous job by the world's best sports magazine!
Dan Jenkins' colorful description of exciting and game-breaking plays was rivaled only by the color in the excellent photographs. The story serves as proof that Super Bowl XII was not at all boring.
Give the Orange Crush some credit. Dan Jenkins seems to think that the only reason the outcome of the Super Bowl wasn't worse for Denver is that Dallas displayed a flamboyant offense that was a little too "cutesy." Because of the turnovers by the Bronco offense in the first half, Dallas could have had 35 points rather than 13. But Denver's defense stopped those drives short of the goal line. Only a super catch by Butch Johnson and a tricky play sent in by Dallas Coach Tom Landry beat the Denver defense in the second half. The Orange Crush was there through the whole game. It was the Denver offense that didn't show up. So much for Broncomania, but cheers for the Orange Crush.
The heck with all the AFC-is-superior-to-the-NFC analyses (Vince, You Wouldn't Believe It, Nov. 21 et seq.). The plain fact is that the NFC Dallas Cowboys were able to steamroll the AFC Denver Broncos and their much-heralded Orange Crush defense, while themselves playing one of their poorer overall games in recent memory.
Penn Yan, N.Y.
Minnesota fans have been irritated, then amused and now bored by your many demeaning references to the Vikings. Despite the fact that the Vikings have won nine division and four conference championships in the last decade, they seem to be singled out for having committed the "sin" of being in one-third of the Super Bowl games to date but never winning. Given the Vikings' total record, it is fanciful, if not deceptive, to imply that the team cannot win the big games.
SHERMAN E. NELSON
Thank you for one of the funniest articles on tennis I've ever read (The Came Normal People Play, Jan. 23). Peter Nord really put my mind to rest. Now when I hit a backhand over the fence or when my lob goes up and comes down three courts away, I simply console myself with the knowledge that I am just a normal human being.
I have been through more than 75 tennis manuals, 19 tennis instructional films and numerous videotapes of lessons given by tennis professionals, but now the heart of the game has been laid bare. Thank you, Peter Nord (and Dr. Henry Ruston). I have done away with my antiquated "improvement" library (which included SI's how-to book). I have also done away with my tennis racket. I have done away with tennis. How soon will a Nord guide to golf be published?
Did Peter Nord enter your editorial offices with a submachine gun and force you to run his article? If you paid for that drivel it was a big ripoff.
C. WINN UPCHURCH
St. Petersburg, Fla.
E. M. Swift's piece on Princeton's dreadful 1-22 hockey team (Practice Didn't Make Perfect, Jan. 16) deserves praise of the highest degree. Living in a city full of "winners," it is refreshing to read of a gutsy, puck-blocking writer who grew from his setbacks. I hope the spirit and camaraderie displayed by the Princeton hockey fans, who continued to back the team despite its losses, may be recalled by the spoiled spectators of this town if we ever have our first big loser.
Aside from the author's humility and wit, what impressed me most was the appearance of that seemingly endemic species, the faithful hockey fan. Would one more win have spoiled those diehard fans? It didn't spoil the fine people of Tampa Bay when the Buccaneers won for a second time.