Tom E. CurranThe Super Bowl is back in New Orleans for the first time since February 2002, when the Patriots upset the mighty St. Louis Rams. On Tuesday, I asked Marshall Faulk if being back in the Superdome this week conjured up any emotions from that day… “I couldn’t even conjure up the feelings of what I felt after the game. I’m sure I was heartbroken and maybe a little upset…” People in New England, Faulk was told, believe he still shows bitterness over the loss. And a dislike of the Patriots in his role as an NFL Network commentator. “They misunderstand,” Faulk corrected. “Am I over the loss? Yeah, I’m over the loss. But I’ll never be over being cheated out of the Super Bowl. That’s a different story. I can understand losing a Super Bowl, that’s fine . . . But how things happened and what took place. Obviously, the commissioner gets to handle things how he wants to handle them but if they wanted us to shut up about what happened, show us the tapes. Don’t burn ‘em.”

Oh.  Well that clears that up.  To think, all this time I thought Faulk was still butthurt about losing to the Patriots.  I watch him every week and hear the contempt in his whiny voice every time the subject turns to the Pats and I took it to mean he’s still bitter, 11 years later.  But I misunderstand.  He’s over the loss, he’s just not over the cheating.  That would be the cheating that didn’t take place.  That the same commissioner who whacked the Pats of a 1st rounder and $750,000 says didn’t take place.  That the John Tomase, who made up the fucking story in the first place admits didn’t take place.  That cheating.  That’s what had Marshall Faulk “heartbroken” and “upset.”  But bitter?  Never.  Glad he straightened me out.  @JerryThornton1