PDA

View Full Version : Here We Go Steelers



Krusty
02-04-2006, 09:39 AM
As a diehard member of the Steelers Nation for 33 years, Sunday will be that day which every NFL team's fans yearn for. And for the Black & Gold that has been 10 years since our last Super Bowl appearance, and 26 years since we hoisted the Lombardi Trophy. Hopefully this year we get that one for the Thumb.

The experience of Sunday is what I hope every one of our Reds devoted fans can yearn for within the next five years. I think we are on the right track with Castanelli as the boss but having a competent GM to make the key moves will be the key.

Anyways, the beer has been chilling for a week and half. The food will be brought in Sunday. The Black & Gold jerseys are hanging ready to be worn. The war paint is ready to be applied.

Folks the only thing better than this is a Reds world champion.

The Black & Gold will make sure the Super Bowl stays in the AFC.

God Bless.

max venable
02-04-2006, 09:40 AM
Just curious...how does someone become a Reds fan AND a Steelers fan? It just seems like an odd combination to me.

Krusty
02-04-2006, 09:51 AM
Just curious...how does someone become a Reds fan AND a Steelers fan? It just seems like an odd combination to me.

Actually, I have been a Reds fan since 1969. I was conceived a Steelers fan on the Inmaculate Reception back in 1973. I have been to Cincinnati five times. I finally attended my first Steelers this season.

The Reds are my passion and love. The Steelers are my religion. Together they have made me one hell of a sports fan.

macro
02-04-2006, 09:55 AM
Folks the only thing better than this is a Reds world champion.


Krusty, we have our differences when it comes to football, but I really like this part of your post. On this, we agree. And by the way, I'm going to go ahead and confess that a large part of my disdain for the Steelers is rooted in jealousy. Well, that and they have seemed to always have gritty, rough-cut, smash-mouth players that were easy for fans of other teams to dislike. Those kinds of players make for a good football team, though, and the Bengals would be well-served to have more of them. I'm sure that making sure that Bengals fans love them is pretty low on the Steelers priority list.

I'll always root for whatever team is playing the Steelers, unless a Bengals playoff spot hinges on a Pittsburgh win, but I respect what the organization has done in the past thirty years. The Rooneys have done things right and their national following is impressive.

So, all I can say is "Good luck tomorrow, Steelers. Go out there and break a leg." Oops, did I say that?

:redface: :evil:

redsfan30
02-04-2006, 10:24 AM
Krusty,

I'm very happy for you getting this chance. I can only compare it to the days leading up to the Fiesta Bowl in 2003 with Ohio State only I'm sure this is magnified just a wee bit more than that was. I wish you and your team luck tomorrow night.

That being said, for the past week and a half, I've been in the Steelers camp. But I've just tired of hearing Jerome Bettis this, Jerome Bettis that. I'm tired of Joey Porter (I really wish some group would just take him to a dark alley and beat the living hell out of him and make him shut his mouth). I'm tired of Sean Salsbury's wood for Ben Roethlisberger.

The past 2 or 3 days have swayed me into the Seahawks corner. I'm still predicting a win for the Steelers, but it's going to be awful hard to cheer for them. All my hatred for individual Steelers (mainly Joey Porter) isn't even taking into account what they did to my Bengals.

Did I mention I hate Joey Porter.....

So Krusty, enjoy the game and root like the dickens for your team. But I just can't bring myself to pull for the Steelers.

Dom Heffner
02-04-2006, 10:25 AM
Krusty, you are wonderful, but hopefully the Steelers get trounced. I'd love for the Lombardi trophy to stay with the AFC any year but the year the Steelers are playing.

If I hear one more thing about Jerome Bettis- who is only a role player at best- I'm going to puke. I don't care about his family's party, or anything else about him for that matter. They guy hasn't even been a factor this season and all we hear about is the bus, the bus, the bus.

One thing that has turned me off about the sports media in general is the way they force their love of a player on the audience. I hope Brett Favre retires because I'm so tired of hearing of how I have to love the guy. Because of him, the Packers are always on Sunday or Monday night football and we have to listen to Dan McGuire go on and on and on about guys like Favre- and I can see it's already happening with Roethlisberger.

I have a feeling they are going to kill the 'Hawks, though, so you should have fun celebrating the victory. I'll have to then look forward to 6-8 months of Steelers trash talking from some of my friends.

redsfan30
02-04-2006, 10:42 AM
They guy hasn't even been a factor this season and all we hear about is the bus, the bus, the bus.
My main problem is Willie Parker does all the dirty work but never gets chances to finish off what he started. Parker went over 1200 yards this season but only has 4 touchdowns to show for it while Bettis didn't even break the 400 yard mark but has 9 touchdowns.

Willie Parker did all the work this season while the media made Bettis out to be the workhorse.

I respect Bettis. But I'm just tired of the media making him out to be God.

Yachtzee
02-04-2006, 12:15 PM
I just haven't been into the playoffs this year, at least not since the second offensive play for the Bengals game. Ever since Carson Palmer got knocked out, I've felt like the Bishop in "Caddyshack" after he gets struck by lightning. Fifteen years of no playoffs and then this? It's just a bit hard to take. I didn't watch any of the playoff games that came after it, and I've been avoiding all the Super Bowl coverage like the plague. Better just to stick to XM 175 to get pumped up for baseball season.

Krusty, as I told my brother-in-law, I'm happy for you that your team is in the Super Bowl, and I will watch the game. But I will be rooting against the Steelers with every fiber of my being. Once the game is over, I will let it go in order to enjoy the upcoming baseball season.

captainmorgan07
02-04-2006, 12:24 PM
as a cowboy fan and the rest of my family being steeler fans i havetaken crap and ran my mouth for the last 2 weeks so i hope the seahawks win in a good game and a well played superbowl

GIK
02-04-2006, 12:27 PM
Charlie Batch must NOT get a ring in Detroit...blasphemy!

Go Seahawks. :)

RFS62
02-04-2006, 12:28 PM
Krusty, I love ya man.

But I'm a Browns fan. Unless you're playing the Ratbirds, I'm prohibited by law from rooting for you.

Redsfaithful
02-04-2006, 01:31 PM
I'm pretty much positive that the Steelers are going to win, but I'll be rooting hard for the Seahawks. They've easily become the team I hate the most in all of professional sports (previously: Baltimore Ravens).

WVRed
02-04-2006, 03:44 PM
Krusty, you are wonderful, but hopefully the Steelers get trounced. I'd love for the Lombardi trophy to stay with the AFC any year but the year the Steelers are playing.

If I hear one more thing about Jerome Bettis- who is only a role player at best- I'm going to puke. I don't care about his family's party, or anything else about him for that matter. They guy hasn't even been a factor this season and all we hear about is the bus, the bus, the bus.

One thing that has turned me off about the sports media in general is the way they force their love of a player on the audience. I hope Brett Favre retires because I'm so tired of hearing of how I have to love the guy. Because of him, the Packers are always on Sunday or Monday night football and we have to listen to Dan McGuire go on and on and on about guys like Favre- and I can see it's already happening with Roethlisberger.

I have a feeling they are going to kill the 'Hawks, though, so you should have fun celebrating the victory. I'll have to then look forward to 6-8 months of Steelers trash talking from some of my friends.

I'm getting sick of Joey Porter, honestly. The more I hear him trash talk, the more I hope somebody cleans his clock.

On a side note, i was watching a rookie special on ESPN2 last night with Cadillac, Orton, and Odell Thurman, and they were showing similar clips of Odell and Ray Lewis, and I have to admit, the similarities are noticeable.

Krusty
02-04-2006, 04:22 PM
Doesn't every team have a player that you could wish that would shut his mouth.

Give Bettis his due. This is it for him. He had a fabulous career that will get him in the Hall of Fame. So you have to stomach the praise the last two weeks. The man has earned it.

I just hope the Reds new ownership can be someone like the Rooney family and how the Steelers run their franchise....one with stability and one which players enjoy playing for. That usually translates into winning seasons.

WVRed
02-04-2006, 04:40 PM
Doesn't every team have a player that you could wish that would shut his mouth.[/B]

We have that, his name is Chad Johnson.

alex trevino
02-04-2006, 10:28 PM
But don Hefener haven't you heard? Jerome Bettis is from detriot! Thats his home town! This his last game before he retires and the superbowl is being played in his hometown! :deadhorse

Krusty
02-04-2006, 11:24 PM
I hate to say it but a Super Bowl win might be better than sex.

GIK
02-04-2006, 11:33 PM
I know you're feeling giddy, Krusty, but let's not get crazy. :)

alex trevino
02-04-2006, 11:39 PM
I hate to say it but a Super Bowl win might be better than sex.


Depends who is involved in each of those activities :evil:

Dom Heffner
02-04-2006, 11:52 PM
I hate to say it but a Super Bowl win might be better than sex.

Better hope not, or a loss could feel like a priapism.


But don Hefener haven't you heard? Jerome Bettis is from detriot! Thats his home town! This his last game before he retires and the superbowl is being played in his hometown

I know, and he probably gives his money to charities and is just a great big old snuggle bunny at heart.

This is all good and great, but he doesn't even start. He is a non-factor, a non-issue, and a has been.

Nice guy, great career, but this is like somebody putting the spotlight on Cris Collinsworth in Super Bowl XXIII.

I wish they would obsess on someone who deserves it this year, that's all I'm saying.

400 yards is nothing to get excited about, and even I could punch it in from the one.

The Steelers have Tiki Barber-ed Willie Parker.

macro
02-04-2006, 11:56 PM
Speaking of the Steelers, has anyone seen these?

http://deadspin.com/sports/nfl/its-good-to-be-big-ben-151809.php

alex trevino
02-05-2006, 12:02 AM
Speaking of the Steelers, has anyone seen these?

http://deadspin.com/sports/nfl/its-good-to-be-big-ben-151809.php


You would think Lee Steinberg would have hooked Ben up with better looking women...then again, they may have looked good in his state :beerme:

savafan
02-05-2006, 01:48 AM
www.steelerbaby.com

max venable
02-05-2006, 09:01 AM
Speaking of the Steelers, has anyone seen these?

http://deadspin.com/sports/nfl/its-good-to-be-big-ben-151809.php
There's another reason I'm glad Carson is our guy.

Krusty
02-05-2006, 09:05 AM
Speaking of the Steelers, has anyone seen these?

http://deadspin.com/sports/nfl/its-good-to-be-big-ben-151809.php

So the pictures were posted on the site Wednesday. Which, probably means the party was either Monday or Tuesday. That is enough time to sober up for today's game.

RFS62
02-05-2006, 09:41 AM
So the pictures were posted on the site Wednesday. Which, probably means the party was either Monday or Tuesday. That is enough time to sober up for today's game.



Yeah, it's hard to imagine a 24 year old rich athlete partying with young babes.

Broadway Joe, anyone?

Krusty
02-05-2006, 10:11 AM
Yeah, it's hard to imagine a 24 year old rich athlete partying with young babes.

Broadway Joe, anyone?

Wish I could go back in time and be in Rothlisberger's shoes.

deltachi8
02-05-2006, 02:01 PM
party after the indy game.

i looked the same when i was 23, just a bunch shorter and with more "appearance challenged" females.

WVRed
02-05-2006, 04:09 PM
Yeah, it's hard to imagine a 24 year old rich athlete partying with young babes.

Broadway Joe, anyone?

Broadway Ben has a good ring to it.

I know several Steeler fans who are high moral that I can't wait to show those pictures to.

traderumor
02-05-2006, 05:03 PM
I have always hoped for a close Super Bowl to make things exciting, but today I am hoping for the Seahawks to put a drubbing on the punks in the vein of the '85 Bears 52-10 pasting of the Pats. Just an embarrassing anihillation that will make the Bus warm up early.

deltachi8
02-05-2006, 10:08 PM
I have always hoped for a close Super Bowl to make things exciting, but today I am hoping for the Seahawks to put a drubbing on the punks in the vein of the '85 Bears 52-10 pasting of the Pats. Just an embarrassing anihillation that will make the Bus warm up early.

there is always next year

traderumor
02-05-2006, 10:15 PM
there is always next year
Hey, but the Steelers did live up to the punks reputation. Constantly woofing in guys' faces isn't befitting of a champion. But then that Seahawk Dlineman made a well deserved hit on the umpire. More crappy refereeing from the NFL.

cinredsfan2000
02-05-2006, 10:31 PM
More crappy refereeing from the NFL.

Couldnt agree more Seattle got beat by the refs certainly not the steelers :mooner: :thumbdown

GIK
02-05-2006, 10:42 PM
Congrats, Krusty.

kyred14
02-05-2006, 10:46 PM
Worst. Officiating. Ever.

The play that sticks out the most was the Seahawks play where a completed pass to the 1 was brought back by a hold. Not only wasn't there a hold, TWO steelers were offside. Then Hasselbeck makes a tackle below the waist, but got flagged for block below the waist. Downright pathetic that the NFL decided their "champion" before the game.

BTW, I'm a Packer fan with no bitterness toward the wild card game.

Johnny Footstool
02-05-2006, 10:52 PM
Congrats to the Steelers for capitalizing on three phantom calls (Jackson's offensive pass interference, Rothlisberger's touchdown, and the holding call that turned a first and goal at the two into a first and twenty from the thirty). Gotta hand it to them, they took what the refs gave them and ran with it.

deltachi8
02-05-2006, 10:54 PM
Sour grapes makes some sweet wine....

BoydsOfSummer
02-05-2006, 10:58 PM
Well, that sucked.

pedro
02-05-2006, 11:01 PM
Hey, the breaks didn't go the Seahawks way, but they still choked IMO. They may have dominated the game but that doesn't change the fact that they just couldn't get it done.

And hats off to the Steelers. They stuck to their gameplan and it worked. Good for them.

Johnny Footstool
02-05-2006, 11:06 PM
Like I said before, three phantom calls.

Especially ironic considering how the Steelers players and fans cried like babies at the officiating in the Indy game.

kbrake
02-05-2006, 11:20 PM
Not even close to a Bengals fan, I actually wanted them to lose the wild card game because I was sick of hearing how great they were. However, that Super Bowl was the biggest joke ever. Seattle got completely robbed and the NFL didnt even make it look good. I cant wait to hear Joey Porter come out and say that the refs gave them the game because everyone wanted to see the bus win. The NFL just went down the same road as the NBA people are going to be calling this crap fixed. I am not saying that, I am hoping it was just one real bad game. If that is the best the NFL has to offer on refs then they are in deep trouble. Couldn't have cared less who won this game, just a really dissapointed football fan.

Fil3232
02-05-2006, 11:42 PM
Sour grapes makes some sweet wine....


Come on. You gotta call this one as you see it. And what I saw were about three or four terrible calls that completely determined the outcome of the game. The Jerome Bettis storyline coupled with the history of the Steelers was just too much for the NFL to ignore. Real easy seeing Pittsburgh getting all the breaks in this game. A shame too, cuz I think the Seahawks outplayed them. Probably the most boring Super Bowl of my lifetime (22 years).

macro
02-05-2006, 11:43 PM
It looks like it's not just Bengals fans that feel that Pittsburgh got a lot of help from the zebras...

http://forums.espn.go.com/espn/thread?forumID=821&start=0&threadID=3134345&sortBy=null

deltachi8
02-05-2006, 11:56 PM
Nothing completely determined the outcome of this game. Matt Hassleback remembered he was Matt Hassleback. Poor clock management. Red zone inefficiency. Dropped passes. Missed field goals.

Alexander was having success running, yet the Seahawks wanted to play pitch and catch.

Bas calls? The Hasselback penalyty was bad, but had no effect. El's TD Pass would have been 15 yards longer. The TD run? Too close to call. Who is to say if its 4th down He dowsnt run it in there? You dont know. Jackson did push off, there was holding on the other play.

max venable
02-06-2006, 12:01 AM
I don't believe for a second that NFL games are rigged. There's too much at stake for them to do that. Plus, if they were, wouldn't we have someone who's blown the whistle by now.

Of course the games aren't rigged. If they were, why watch? It'd be like pro wrestling.

Fil3232
02-06-2006, 12:14 AM
Jackson's 1st Q P.I. call was pure garbage. Push-offs happen all the time. Hell, Hines got away with a worse push-off in the second half that wasnt called. Seattle going up 7-0 doesnt change the nature of the game? The two crucial holding calls on Seattle were suspect at best. Again, Taking what most likely was a 17-14 4th Q lead away from Seattle didn't change the otucome of the game?

The refs failed to call the game both ways, which is a shame. In the biggest, most-watched game of the year the zebras turned in a real screw-job. Where was Steady Eddie Hochuli?

Caveat Emperor
02-06-2006, 12:50 AM
Like I said before, three phantom calls.

Especially ironic considering how the Steelers players and fans cried like babies at the officiating in the Indy game.

The only "phantom" call was the one holding call which looked, to me, like the player fell down. The offensive P.I. call is going to get thrown EVERY time when you extend the arms to contact the DB going parallell to the goal line. The official has a dead-on view of what is going on and sees the WR creating separation. WRs/DBs get away with pushoffs all the time, but the majority that don't get flagged are when the players are going vertical and the official is trying to (simultaneously) watch the sidelines and feet, watch the ball and watch for possession. On the call in the Super Bowl, the official had none of those responsibilities and could easily concentrate on the whole play.

It was an entertaining game, on the whole. I'm glad to see Bill Cowher win a Super Bowl -- he's a tremendous class act.

GAC
02-06-2006, 04:45 AM
The officiating, though suspect at times, did not, IMO, cost Seattle this game.

Their own miscues did. So Holmgren can't whine too much IMO. Holding penalties that killed key drives, dropped passes (especially 3 passes by Stevens). He got a lucky call too in the 2nd quarter because that was a reception, and then a fumble. Even Madden stated that.

I'm sure "Fake-39 Toss X-Reverse Pass" will be remembered by Holmgren for quite some time. I can't believe they allowed themselves to get burned on that play. That, and the 75 yd TD run by Parker, is what did Seattle in.

Seattle's defensive scheme did an excellent job the entire 1st half. But their offense could not capitalize. And Holmgren's coaching, IMO, went down hill after that.

At first, I didn't think Ben got in on that TD either. But when watching it again, and while he was in the air, the ball appears to touch the plan before the defender knocked him back/down. Either way, there wasn't enough evidence to cause the officials to overturn the call on the field. That is the rule.

Roethlisberger, who completed just 9 of 21 passes for 123 yards, with no touchdown passes, and two interceptions, finished with the lowest QB rating ever for a SB winning QB (22.6). But he also turned some key plays when he had too. But I'm sure that QB rating is not weighing on his mind this morning. ;)

GAC
02-06-2006, 06:16 AM
On a further note....

I thought the Stone's halftime performance was terrible. Of course, I couldn't name you one song written by them in the last 20+ years. Tatto You was probably the last album of theirs I know anything about.

Anyone notice Mick's little "self censoring" job during Start Me Up? ;)

Krusty
02-06-2006, 08:05 AM
Congrats to the Steelers for capitalizing on three phantom calls (Jackson's offensive pass interference, Rothlisberger's touchdown, and the holding call that turned a first and goal at the two into a first and twenty from the thirty). Gotta hand it to them, they took what the refs gave them and ran with it.

Listen, while I'm basking in glory right now let me set you straight. The officiating sucked. No doubt but did it cost Seattle the game? If you watched the game you would seen that Willie Parker's 75 yard run along with Randal El's pass to Hines Ward did more damage than the officiating. Heck Seattle got back into the game when it was 14-10 when Herron picked off Roethlisberger's pass near the end zone.

Then you had the Steelers eating the clock towards the end. But give credit to the Steelers defense for bending but not breaking. To hold a offensively potent Seahawks team to 10 points is an accomplish.

But to say the Steelers conspired with the refs? Now that is a sore loser.

savafan
02-06-2006, 08:58 AM
The officiating most certainly cost the Seahawks the game. First, the offensive pass interference call in the endzone would have been a touchdown. There is no way that was pass interference, and every one of the commentators watching the game said the same thing. Roethlisberger's run that resulted in a touchdown when the ball didn't even break the plane of the endzone. It was reviewed, and they still didn't get it right, because the review official is notorious for not overturning calls. Hasselback's block below the waist on the guy who had the ball...c'mon.

One bad call against a team I can see, but when every bad call goes against the same team, something smells rotten.

NJReds
02-06-2006, 09:00 AM
The Seahawks made way too many mistakes to whine about officiating, and I thought the Steelers would win this game, anyway, but...

The officiating has been awful all year long. This game was just the icing on the cake.

- The official that called Big Ben's dive near the end zone a TD was first marking the ball short and then for some reason changed his mind.

- The pass interference that nullified a TD was a bad call, but when the WR extended his arm it does justify the laundry.

- The phantom holding call that nullified what would've been 1st-and-goal at the 1-yard line, which would've set up the Seahawks to take a 17-14 was a flat out awful call. But at that point I expected a flag anytime the Seahawks did something positive.

The league really does need to address it's officiating and how they're going to take steps to improve their performance.

savafan
02-06-2006, 09:07 AM
Sure, the Seahawks may have made some mistakes, but every time they were driving and about to score, or did score, there was a bad call by the officials to break their momentum.

GAC
02-06-2006, 09:14 AM
Sure, the Seahawks may have made some mistakes, but every time they were driving and about to score, or did score, there was a bad call by the officials to break their momentum.

I don't think those holding calls were all bad calls. At least not when they showed the replays. And were the dropped passes by Seattle receivers Pitt's fault? Or the fact they allowed themselves to get burned on two plays for TDs?


Roethlisberger's run that resulted in a touchdown when the ball didn't even break the plane of the endzone. It was reviewed, and they still didn't get it right, because the review official is notorious for not overturning calls.

There wasn't enough conclusive evidence to overturn the call on the field. That is the rule. I've watched several sports shows this morning review/show that play, and even they themselves cannot agree. So the refs, IMO, made the right call.

savafan
02-06-2006, 09:20 AM
Where is the Super Bowl played at next year, and what veteran Browns players nearing retirement are from that city? ;)

NJReds
02-06-2006, 09:26 AM
Roethlisberger's run that resulted in a touchdown when the ball didn't even break the plane of the endzone. It was reviewed, and they still didn't get it right, because the review official is notorious for not overturning calls.

I didn't think they'd overturn because it was "too close to call." But I did have a problem with the official who first ran in to spot the ball short, and then changing his call to TD.


One bad call against a team I can see, but when every bad call goes against the same team, something smells rotten.

The Steelers could've said the same thing when they played Indy. But they overcame the bad calls. The Seahawks didn't.

savafan
02-06-2006, 09:33 AM
The Steelers could've said the same thing when they played Indy. But they overcame the bad calls. The Seahawks didn't.

Oh, I agree that there was something rotten going on in that game too. Thing is, neither team should have to overcome those bad calls, the game should be decided by the players, not the officials. That was more like Wrestlemania than the Superbowl.

It was obvious in the Indy game that the plot line was going to be all warm and fuzzy about how the game's greatest QB was going to lead his team to the promised land and help his grieving coach to a title. That didn't work out, so the plot line became Bettis needing to end his career with a championship in his hometown. A Seattle victory wouldn't have delivered any feel good stories.

Johnny Footstool
02-06-2006, 09:36 AM
Listen, while I'm basking in glory right now let me set you straight. The officiating sucked. No doubt but did it cost Seattle the game? If you watched the game you would seen that Willie Parker's 75 yard run along with Randal El's pass to Hines Ward did more damage than the officiating. Heck Seattle got back into the game when it was 14-10 when Herron picked off Roethlisberger's pass near the end zone.

Then you had the Steelers eating the clock towards the end. But give credit to the Steelers defense for bending but not breaking. To hold a offensively potent Seahawks team to 10 points is an accomplish.

But to say the Steelers conspired with the refs? Now that is a sore loser.

I don't think they were "conspiring" with the refs at all. The Steelers, to their own credit, took advantage of some extremely poor officiating and capitalized on the opportunities.

But you can't deny that the referees took at least 10 and possibly 14 points out of Seattle's pocket on nonsense pass interference and holding calls that are NOT enforced on every play -- not in the regular season, and not in this game.

And they handed Rothlisberger a charity touchdown -- special thanks to the side judge for waiting a good three seconds before deliving his delayed on-field ruling. Granted, the Steelers probably would still have come away with points, but might have settled for a field goal.

The game would have been much more interesting if the outcome had been decided by the two teams on the field.

BTW - I also think it's rich that Steeler fans are willing to make excuses for the refs in this situation after all the sour grapes over the Indy game. After that game, it was "the refs wanted Indy to win!" Now it's "we earned this victory!"

max venable
02-06-2006, 09:40 AM
You guys sound silly blaming the refs. It's like saying the refs cost Miami the 2002 national championship vs. Ohio State...yeah right. :evil:

savafan
02-06-2006, 09:47 AM
Anyone notice Mick's little "self censoring" job during Start Me Up? ;)

For the record, that wasn't "self censoring".

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11193993/

NEW YORK - They may not have flashed any body parts — except for Mick Jagger’s well-toned stomach — but the Rolling Stones made ABC glad editors were on duty for the Super Bowl halftime show.

Two sexually explicit lyrics were excised from the rock legends’ performance Sunday. The only song to avoid the editor was “(I Can’t Get No) Satisfaction,” a 41-year-old song about sexual frustration.

In “Start Me Up,” the show’s editors silenced one word, a reference to a woman’s sexual sway over a dead man. The lyrics for “Rough Justice” included a synonym for rooster that the network also deemed worth cutting out.

ABC was the first network to impose a five-second tape delay on the Super Bowl, although it said the changes to the Stones’ show were made by the NFL and its producers. The sensitivity no doubt reflects a lingering reaction to Janet Jackson’s infamous wardrobe malfunction two years ago.

The Stones probably didn’t mind, either. It brought a little rock ’n’ roll danger to the ultimate “safe” gig and — if they’re lucky — it distracted attention from their mediocre show.

Jagger, at age 62, is still a force of nature, strutting and dancing across a stage designed as a replica of their famed wagging tongue logo. The band’s performance felt ragged — they seemed just warming up during the opening “Start Me Up,” and a three-song set affords no such luxury.

The Stones chose three tough rockers, including the best song from their well-received recent album and one of their most enduring hits.

“Here’s one we could have done at Super Bowl I,” Jagger wryly said in introducing “Satisfaction.”

It was their best, most energetic effort, and ended with Jagger blowing a kiss to the audience. But unlike U2’s performance four years ago at the Super Bowl, their set was not an example of a band at its peak rising to the majesty of the event.

Some in Detroit felt the city’s rich musical history was snubbed when the Stones were selected, even if the Super Bowl had Motown-themed halftime shows twice in the past 25 years. This year’s Motown tribute came before the game.

Stevie Wonder was the centerpiece, singing a medley of his hits with the help of John Legend, Joss Stone and India.Arie.

It was a typical monument to excess, with a stage more crowded than a train station at rush hour, and was marred by microphones that occasionally malfunctioned. Brightly clad dancers hoofed it incongruously when Wonder sang a portion of his angry ghetto tale “Livin’ for the City,” at one point pretending to fight each other.

Most importantly, the medley format did a disservice to the musicians. They rushed through the songs as if at a fast-food service line. With hours of meaningless pregame hoopla, couldn’t they be given five minutes more to finish a few songs?

The National Anthem offered a particularly odd partnership — Aaron Neville and Dr. John (in a tribute to hurricane-ravaged New Orleans) with Detroit favorite Aretha Franklin. Neville sang half of the song in his feathery-soft voice, then was never heard from again when Franklin blew the dome’s roof off.

She barely needed a microphone.

gonelong
02-06-2006, 10:06 AM
The officiating sucked. No doubt but did it cost Seattle the game?

We'll never know now. I was kind of hoping the officiating crew would allow the Steelers and Seahawks to decide it themselves.

As a fan, I feel a bit cheated. It wasn't just one bad call, that I can live with. You just can't ask a team to overcome 2 or 3 calls that end up taking points (or likely points) off the board.

GL

savafan
02-06-2006, 10:09 AM
http://www.slate.com/id/2135435/nav/tap1/

Stealers
How the referees handed Pittsburgh the Super Bowl.
By Robert Weintraub
Posted Monday, Feb. 6, 2006, at 3:11 AM ET

A media meme emerged late in the long, two-week march to the Super Bowl: Since everyone had basically handed the game to Pittsburgh, Seattle was sure to shock everyone and win. Unfortunately for underdog lovers, no one briefed the refs about this scenario. Remember all that screaming about the Troy Polamalu pick that wasn't against the Colts a few weeks ago? Well, the Steelers got so much payback last night that I'm sure Steelers fans have found it in their hearts to forgive the men in black and white.

Four critical calls stood out. A rinky-dink offensive pass interference flag wiped out an early touchdown pass from Matt Hasselbeck to Darrell Jackson, forcing Seattle to settle for three instead of seven. When Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger lunged for the goal line near the end of the first half, replays indicated a close play but a clear stop by the Seahawks. Nope—touchdown, Steelers. Then came the pivotal double shot that ended all hope for Seattle. With the Seahawks trailing 14-10, a phantom holding call negated a completion that would have given Seattle first and goal at the one yard line. Three plays later, Hasselbeck was picked off by Ike Taylor, a mistake he partially made up for by tackling the Steelers CB. Sadly for Seattle, tackling now brings a 15-yard penalty—the zebras somehow called Hasselbeck for a "block below the waist." The last call set up Pittsburgh for the clinching score.

Even John Madden, as reliable an apologist for the NFL as there is, started questioning the calls. The videogame pitchman sounded especially miffed after the phantom hold/illegal tackle sequence. He wasn't quite as persistently loud and angry as Billy Packer in the 2001 NCAA basketball finals, sounding off on a series of laughably pro-Duke calls. But this was eye-opening stuff coming from the usually see-no-evil Madden.

Before I start sounding like some embittered Seahawks fan—for the record, I'm an embittered Bengals fan—let's go through Seattle's flurry of mistakes and near-misses. Several key drops by Jerramy Stevens, who the bored media (and the bored Joey Porter) inexplicably cast as Terrell Owens after an innocuous "we'll win" comment. Two bombs caught just out of bounds by Darrell Jackson, who might have been MVP but for a few inches. Grant Wistrom tripping over his own feet rather than sacking Roethlisberger on a third-and-28 heave to eventual MVP Hines Ward.

Give the Steelers some credit. For sublime blocking on Willie Parker's record TD run. For Chris Gardocki's excellent punting. For speedy pursuit from the linebackers that kept Shaun Alexander to a quiet 95 yards. And, of course, for continuing their remarkable streak of successful trick plays. For at least one play every game—when Antwaan Randle El flicks a perfect pass downfield as the defense reacts just a few seconds too late—the Steelers look like the boldest, smartest team that's ever laced them up. As for those other 100 plays ...

Maybe Randle El should have played quarterback the whole game. Ben Roethlisberger played like he knew the game was fixed, completing a mere nine passes for 123 yards and throwing a critical interception when a touchdown would have iced it. He also got clobbered during that Kelly Herndon interception return, a sad irony after his memorable, game-saving tackle against Indy.

Then there was the Most Valuable Backup. It may not be Jerome Bettis' fault that he became the centerpiece of this storyline-deprived Super Bowl. Nevertheless, his self-absorption was astonishing. First, Das Bus turned the player introductions into a dig-me moment, waddling out a few seconds ahead of everyone else. Unfortunately for him, ABC missed the memo, and its cameras stayed on the team. Four hours later, Bettis turned the Lombardi Trophy presentation—which was held atop a bizarre, teacup-shaped, UFOlike structure—into a self-love session, essentially saying the team won it all for the glory of Jerome.

Seattle's role as afterthought to the pre-ordained Pittsburgh coronation was confirmed when ABC didn't even bother with the traditional losing-coach interview. But perhaps Seattle brought this on themselves by coming out of the tunnel to The Verve's "Bittersweet Symphony." Note to the Seahawks: That's probably not the best choice of pump-up tunes. Next time, why not just play Beck's "Loser"?

Also absent was any mention of the industry gossip that Madden and Al Michaels will be reunited at NBC next season. Michaels is expected to weasel out of the contract he signed with ESPN to broadcast the cable network's Monday Night Football package—apparently, Sunday night is now the bigger stage. My favorite moment of the broadcast came at the very end, when the two glumly shook hands in a bit of network blazer kabuki, as though they would never see each other again. Here's hoping that when the long-lost pals meet again to call the Super Bowl for NBC, the officiating won't be the only thing worth talking about.

Robert Weintraub, a freelance TV producer/writer based in Atlanta, writes about sports media for Slate.

traderumor
02-06-2006, 10:12 AM
Nothing completely determined the outcome of this game. Matt Hassleback remembered he was Matt Hassleback. Poor clock management. Red zone inefficiency. Dropped passes. Missed field goals.

Alexander was having success running, yet the Seahawks wanted to play pitch and catch.

Bas calls? The Hasselback penalyty was bad, but had no effect. El's TD Pass would have been 15 yards longer. The TD run? Too close to call. Who is to say if its 4th down He dowsnt run it in there? You dont know. Jackson did push off, there was holding on the other play.

Strawman. Of course we don't know if things would have turned out any differently because the calls were made the way they were. However, it is certain that a whole new set of variables kick in if the CORRECT call were made in the first place. That seems to be the egg on the officiating crew's face, is that they had about 5 close calls and didn't get a one of them right.

And just like it is a disaster when the championship game turns into a blowout, the league has some soul searching to do about its officiating and some of the rules monsters they have created with the advent of instant replay, like "making football moves" and crap like that. If that is what looking at a call to try to get it right, and still failing at times even with the replay (i.e. Rothelberger was about a shot of whiskey distance away from the goalline), then lets just go back to accepting that refs screw up calls and play football without all these stoppages that often yield no fruit, except perhaps more commercials...ah, I may have hit on something there.

GAC
02-06-2006, 10:15 AM
If Mick can't get no satisfaction at age 62.... he never will. ;)

NJReds
02-06-2006, 10:15 AM
We'll never know now. I was kind of hoping the officiating crew would allow the Steelers and Seahawks to decide it themselves.


You nailed it. That's exactly how I felt as a non-partisan football fan; cheated because the officials didn't let the teams decide the game on the field. It's one thing to have a few bad calls -- but when they're all stacked against one team it looks really bad for the NFL, IMO.

Yachtzee
02-06-2006, 10:16 AM
I don't honestly believe that the fix was in, but the refs definitely suffered from what I call "Maddux-Glavine Syndrome." I think that in their mind, the refs felt the Steelers were the better team. When they missed calls, they missed them in favor of the Steelers, when they went ticky-tacky, it went against the Seahawks. They give the "good" team the benefit of the doubt. Seriously, Hines Ward had a push-off that was way more blatant than Jackson's, yet it wasn't called. My friend called that penalty "Illegal touching a Steeler." Phantom holding penalties against the Seahawks. And I believe that the side judge called the TD on Big Ben's "second effort" to get the ball over the line after he was down.

Sure, the Seahawks should have just kept chugging and overcome. But at some point, when the calls are going against you, it messes with your psyche. I think the NFL needs to get professional refs and work harder to improve impartiality. Maybe I'm wrong, but I'd like to see stats kept on missed/blown calls and see how often they favor the "favorite." Maybe an NFL Questec system is in order.

savafan
02-06-2006, 10:17 AM
As a fan, I feel a bit cheated. It wasn't just one bad call, that I can live with. You just can't ask a team to overcome 2 or 3 calls that end up taking points (or likely points) off the board.

GL

I feel cheated as well. I could have watched the Puppy Bowl on Animal Planet. At halftime I should have started watching Titanic, that would have put me in a bit more suspense than the "game" did.

savafan
02-06-2006, 10:19 AM
Seriously, Hines Ward had a push-off that was way more blatant than Jackson's, yet it wasn't called.

Ward had about 10 push offs. And let's not forget the block below the waist that Roethlisberger made on the Randle El touchdown pass play.

gonelong
02-06-2006, 10:20 AM
I feel cheated as well. I could have watched the Puppy Bowl on Animal Planet.

My toddler laughed his head off at the puppy bowl. He was really digging the water bowl cam.

GL

deltachi8
02-06-2006, 11:29 AM
::edit::

not worth the argument anymore.

kbrake
02-06-2006, 11:42 AM
Steeler fans this is not an arguement. This game was a joke and if you can not see and admit that well thats just sad. I dont even care about the Big Ben TD could have gone either way. But that 4th qtr holding call on the Seattle pass to the one yard line? Come on Steeler fans you know that was not a penalty. PHANTOM FLAG. Darrel Jackson if your going to call that pass interference in the Super Bowl your not a grown up. I just gave you 14 points and you want to claim the refs did not cost Seattle this game. Get Real.

deltachi8
02-06-2006, 11:46 AM
While I pick out my Steeler Championship Hat, maybee this can make you guys feel better:

http://img427.imageshack.us/img427/6245/ref10kj.th.jpg

Have fun.

Pitchers and Catchers report soon.

kbrake
02-06-2006, 11:51 AM
Thats nice Deltachi, like I have said before I am not even close to a Bengals fan I was just real mad at how bad I thought the refs were. I have no personal grudges agaisnt the Steelers like it appears some others do. Funny picture.

Caveat Emperor
02-06-2006, 11:52 AM
Darrel Jackson if your going to call that pass interference in the Super Bowl your not a grown up.

I would bet any amount of money I own (which isn't much, but that's not the point) that had that NOT been called, you would've heard the following in the replay commentary both during and after the game:

"Darrell Jackson got away with a bit of a push-off"

The call was made technically correct: the wide reciever used his hands to create separation from the defensive back and impede his ability to get in position to make a play on the ball. As I said in my earlier post, the positioning of the players in the field, coming across the field of vision for the referee standing in the back of the endzone, made this a VERY easy call for the official to make.

You cannot argue correctness of call, you can only argue that, in the Super Bowl, that kind of call should just be let go (which I think is something of a valid argument).

Maldonado
02-06-2006, 11:54 AM
"Sure, the Seahawks should have just kept chugging and overcome. But at some point, when the calls are going against you, it messes with your psyche. I think the NFL needs to get professional refs and work harder to improve impartiality. Maybe I'm wrong, but I'd like to see stats kept on missed/blown calls and see how often they favor the "favorite." Maybe an NFL Questec system is in order."

I think this would be a very interesting study. This of course has been an issue in baseball for years, as it's assumed that pitchers like Clemens and Johnsons get the questionable calls over 90% of the time.

savafan
02-06-2006, 11:55 AM
We still haven't even touched on the attempted bad call of Hasselbeck fumbling the ball after being pushed to the ground. The official was even standing on the side of Hasselbeck's body where the contact was made. Thank God that one was reversed on review.

deltachi8
02-06-2006, 11:59 AM
Dont forget about he Refs turning on the air conditioning to create a breeze just before two of the three field goal attempts by Brown. They must have forgotton on the one he made.

Caveat Emperor
02-06-2006, 12:04 PM
We still haven't even touched on the attempted bad call of Hasselbeck fumbling the ball after being pushed to the ground. The official was even standing on the side of Hasselbeck's body where the contact was made. Thank God that one was reversed on review.

Now this is really grabbing at straws -- Hasselbaeck was bailed out on that one because somebody happened to make slight contact with him as he was beginning to stumble towards the ground.

And, this isn't any major conspiracy -- NFL referees have become bad with the "slow whistle" in order to avoid having a play become unreviewable due to stoppage of the play. That's a leaguewide policy I take issue with, because it places the burden on one team to use one of their limited challenges to correct a call that obviously should've been blown dead as an incomplete pass or down by contact.

Cedric
02-06-2006, 12:09 PM
Worst super bowl champion of all time.

Sour grapes? Yep.

Still true though.

savafan
02-06-2006, 12:10 PM
Now this is really grabbing at straws -- Hasselbaeck was bailed out on that one because somebody happened to make slight contact with him as he was beginning to stumble towards the ground.



Slight contact? Looked like a push to me.

Cedric
02-06-2006, 12:11 PM
That game was an example of the sad state of the NFL product. The salary cap has been the death blow to great football.

RFS62
02-06-2006, 12:15 PM
We still haven't even touched on the attempted bad call of Hasselbeck fumbling the ball after being pushed to the ground. The official was even standing on the side of Hasselbeck's body where the contact was made. Thank God that one was reversed on review.


Wow, an "attempted bad call" that was thwarted, perhaps by Jack Bauer?

Are you guys listening to yourselves?

Sava, tell me you're really not Oliver Stone.

deltachi8
02-06-2006, 12:17 PM
Slight contact? Looked like a push to me.

Na, Foote's hand was blocked into Hassleback.

deltachi8
02-06-2006, 12:20 PM
That game was an example of the sad state of the NFL product. The salary cap has been the death blow to great football.

Yes, because without a cap, we can look forward to The Cowboys, Redskins and one or tow other huge revenue teams running the NFL.

Cedric
02-06-2006, 12:21 PM
The great thing about the NFL is nobody cares two weeks after the super bowl. It's about the draft and onward to the future. It's time for the Bengals to prove who the better team was and is. We have the better Qb, the better coach. We just need to get as dirty as the Steelers.

They are a sad team to watch. They are the lowest of low on the class scale. They ridicule and taunt players with 3 seconds left in the super bowl.

savafan
02-06-2006, 12:22 PM
Sava, tell me you're really not Oliver Stone.

Having watched that game, I can't say that I viewed an honest contest.

Cedric
02-06-2006, 12:22 PM
Yes, because without a cap, we can look forward to The Cowboys, Redskins and one or tow other huge revenue teams running the NFL.


Yep, that 49ers and Cowboys dynasties were made by money and not amazing draft choices. Did you just start watching football last week ? I'd point you to the greatest trade in sports history, Herschel Walker. I doubt it would do you good though lol.

How much did the 49ers sign Jerry Rice, Joe Montana, Roger Craig, John Taylor, Ronnie Lott, and Brent Jones for?

Get a clue dude. Football today is a watered down joke. I'll still watch it, but I'm not gonna sit here and say great teams win the game much anymore.

That's why somewhere deep down I at least respect the Patriots and the Steelers organizations, if not their players. But these teams face no competition anymore. It's sucky vs major sucky.

NJReds
02-06-2006, 12:24 PM
They ridicule and taunt players with 3 seconds left in the super bowl.

In light of his comments this week, Stevens deserved to be taunted and ridiculed after his sorry performance. It's football, not a chess match. Taunting goes on all the time.

westofyou
02-06-2006, 12:26 PM
Get a clue dude.

Let Go....

RFS62
02-06-2006, 12:26 PM
Having watched that game, I can't say that I viewed an honest contest.


So, how did they pull it off?

Was there a meeting where they accepted their assignment to steer the Super Bowl?

How far does the conspiracy extend?

Cedric
02-06-2006, 12:26 PM
Actually Joey "gangsta shoot me in the ass" Porter totally made a joke of media week again. Yeah, he deserved to be taunted and disrespected for saying he hopes to win the title this year. Steeler fans and players talk so much crap but they can't handle hearing it from anyone else without threatening to injure people or really injuring them (Carson)

Doc. Scott
02-06-2006, 12:26 PM
I always look forward to the Super Bowl every year.

Why?

It means baseball is just around the corner.

savafan
02-06-2006, 12:27 PM
The final straw was when the refs let Big Ben call a timeout after the play clock expired. They weren't even trying to hide it.

Cedric
02-06-2006, 12:27 PM
Let Go....

You the moderator? I think I'll make my points when I see fit.

westofyou
02-06-2006, 12:29 PM
You the moderator? I think I'll make my points when I see fit.No I'm not... but are you being kind of a jerk?

I'll make my points too Cedric.

savafan
02-06-2006, 12:30 PM
So, how did they pull it off?

Was there a meeting where they accepted their assignment to steer the Super Bowl?

How far does the conspiracy extend?


I don't know, but the officials handed that game to the Steelers, and you could see it on Mike Holmgren's face that he figured out what was going on at halftime.

Cedric
02-06-2006, 12:31 PM
I apologize for saying "get a clue."

I'll have to start watching your threads for the constant sarcastic remarks you give.

savafan
02-06-2006, 12:32 PM
Please don't turn this into another pissing match just to get the thread closed.

westofyou
02-06-2006, 12:33 PM
I apologize for saying "get a clue."

I'll have to start watching your threads for the constant sarcastic remarks you give.
I look forward to it.

Cedric
02-06-2006, 12:33 PM
It's not gonna get closed Oliver. :) jk

Chip R
02-06-2006, 12:33 PM
It looked to me that Roethlisberger had the ball over the plane of the goal line while he was still in the air. When the ball was on the ground it was short of the goal line but since the ball had already crossed the goal line it's still a TD. Of course I wasn't watching the game with black and orange glasses either.

westofyou
02-06-2006, 12:33 PM
Please don't turn this into another pissing match just to get the thread closed.

There are already yellow stains on this thread, wouldn't you say?

Cedric
02-06-2006, 12:34 PM
The Ben rushing td seemed legit to me. Even still the way the play was ruled by that official was absurd.

savafan
02-06-2006, 12:36 PM
The Ben rushing td seemed legit to me. Even still the way the play was ruled by that official was absurd.

Running in to spot the ball short of the goal line and then changing his mind when Ben gave him puppy dog eyes and scooted the ball across the white line while laying under a pile of Seahawks? Yeah, that was absurd.

traderumor
02-06-2006, 12:45 PM
It looked to me that Roethlisberger had the ball over the plane of the goal line while he was still in the air. When the ball was on the ground it was short of the goal line but since the ball had already crossed the goal line it's still a TD. Of course I wasn't watching the game with black and orange glasses either.At one point, Roth got his shoulders out, but his arms were pushed back and he never got the ball advanced across the plane--until he put it across while down. The ref saw the same thing, then for some inexplicable reason decided he saw something else, for all I know he was ok with the ball crossing the plane after he was down. Hard to tell, but it had nothing to do with me being a Bengals fan, just watching the game as a fan. Not all fans are incapable of watching a game that their team is not involved in without bias :rolleyes:

captainmorgan07
02-06-2006, 12:53 PM
horrible officiating if that's pass interference on jackson micheal irvin woudl be the most penalized man in nfl history and so would every other great reciever

deltachi8
02-06-2006, 12:56 PM
You stay classy, Cedric.

deltachi8
02-06-2006, 12:58 PM
There are already yellow stains on this thread, wouldn't you say?

depends on the color galsses someone wears or something. I dunno. I'm clueless or something.

Roy Tucker
02-06-2006, 12:59 PM
I think when Ben fell towards the goal line, he hit a grassy knoll.

kbrake
02-06-2006, 01:01 PM
Caveat yeah technically that was pass interference but to take away a TD on that? Come on that is real weak.

Tony Cloninger
02-06-2006, 02:27 PM
Myopia..... usually a word associated with Raider fans.
Now becoming the norm for Steeler fans....... Yes they won and the Parker run and Randal-El throw were good plays. But to bury your head in the sand about the bad holding call and the so called "block" by MH is just Myopic. It's like you are pulling a Dan O'Brien.
You don't see what is in front of you....despite the fact that everyone else does.

That is the only play i will question. The BenR TD..... the push off.
Those i can deal with. But then that holding call and the "block"?? How
can a player who is now playing defense be accused of a low block...who is he trying to even block when he is now playing defense. It was so obvious he was trying to tackle the guy.

The refs cannot help themselves in making calls that defy logic. They do this
in all the games. But usually it goes bad for both teams. Rarely does it go like this game.....all for 1 team and all at the most critical times.

savafan
02-06-2006, 02:53 PM
Also, I could have swore that Randle El fumbled that punt return, but the officials whistled it dead.

http://i1.tinypic.com/nbayx5.jpg

savafan
02-06-2006, 02:53 PM
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/sports/football/13801313.htm

BY JASON WHITLOCK
Kansas City Star

DETROIT - What crime-ridden, boarded-building, automotive-industry-ravaged, snowy Detroit couldn't do, an NFL officiating crew pulled off with relative ease in front of plenty of bored-silly football fans inside beautiful Ford Field.

Sports' and television's most indestructible beast - the Super Bowl - met its match in the 40th playing of the game the world stops to watch.

The inevitable finally happened. A group of middle-aged executives trying to keep pace with a group of highly trained 20-something athletes destroyed America's sports holiday.

Pittsburgh's one-for-the-thumb Super Bowl will be remembered as the game when physically overmatched referees and heads-buried NFL executives flipped non-Steelers fans an XL middle finger.

The Steelers shook off a terrible first quarter and whipped the Seattle Seahawks 21-10 in Super Bowl XL.

Pittsburgh coach Bill Cowher, after a 14-year pursuit, secured his long-overdue first title. Receiver Hines Ward won the MVP award with a five-catch, 123-yard, one-TD performance. The Bus, Jerome Bettis, contributed a couple of big plays in his Super Bowl homecoming. And Ben Roethlisberger, the boy-wonder QB, overcame a couple of critical mistakes with a few all-heart runs and throws.

The Seahawks did what they could to help the Steelers, too. Jerramy Stevens, called out by Pittsburgh linebacker Joey Porter during pregame hype, dropped enough Matt Hasselbeck passes that FBI investigators would be negligent for failing to interrogate Stevens today. His third-quarter TD catch has to be considered a smokescreen, clutched with two hands to fool people suspicious of a point-shaving scandal.

Seattle coach Mike Holmgren's end-of-the-first-half play-calling and clock management also contributed to Pittsburgh's victory. Trailing 7-3 and having moved the ball to the Pittsburgh 40 with 48 seconds on the clock, the Seahawks wasted a good 30 seconds as Hasselbeck flapped his arms, shouted directions and impersonated Peyton Manning at the line of scrimmage. If not for a Pittsburgh timeout, it appeared the Seahawks were going to take a delay-of-game penalty or try to run out the entire clock.

Eventually, Holmgren sent Josh Brown out to attempt a 54-yard field goal - which Brown missed - and walked into the Seattle locker room with one timeout in his pocket.

But make no mistake about Super Bowl XL, the performance of referee Bill Leavy and his crew overshadowed Pittsburgh's heroics and Seattle's blunders.

Paul Tagliabue's league has an officiating crisis. Bogus, inconsistent flag-throwing and rule-interpreting is making the national pastime difficult to take seriously. So far, only Joey Porter has demonstrated the necessary courage to address what we all see.

Many of these part-time, 50-year-old referees don't know what they're doing and can't keep up with the action.

Porter fumed when the refs nearly stole Pittsburgh's playoff victory over Indianapolis by overturning a Troy Polamalu interception.

Porter probably won't address the first-quarter touchdown that Sunday's referees stole from the Seahawks. Hasselbeck avoided pressure and hit Darrell Jackson in the back of the end zone with a beautiful strike. The Pittsburgh cornerback immediately turned to back judge Bob Waggoner and begged for an offensive pass-interference call. After a couple of seconds of thought, Waggoner granted the Pittsburgh request and erased Seattle's hard-earned touchdown.

The Seahawks settled for a field goal. Had they not been robbed of the four points, they would have ended the game with the ball and the opportunity to drive for a game-tying touchdown.

Seattle was victimized by two other questionable first-half calls_including the 1-yard TD run the refs awarded Roethlisberger when he seemed a few inches short of the goal line_but the final backbreaking call helped set up Pittsburgh's game-icing, reverse, wide-receiver-pass-to-Ward touchdown early in the fourth quarter.

Ike Taylor intercepted Hasselbeck deep in Pittsburgh territory. Hasselbeck stopped Taylor at the Pittsburgh 29 with a perfectly executed form tackle across Taylor's knees. The refs flagged Hasselbeck for illegally "blocking" Taylor across his knees and gave the Steelers 15 additional yards.

The Seahawks justifiably can complain that Sunday's one-sided officiating disrupted their offensive rhythm and undermined their focus. The officiating had to creep inside their head.

And NFL fans need to acknowledge that there's something terribly wrong with professional football. This year's playoffs were horrible. Sunday's Super Bowl stands as an appropriate symbol of the 2006 playoffs_boring and poorly officiated.

We are too technologically advanced, and the NFL is overrun with too much money to put up with the kind of officiating errors that are ruining the pro game. The league needs younger, full-time referees on the field and a three-man officiating team sitting in the press box supervising what is called on the field. All calls - including ones like the offensive pass-interference call that killed Seattle - should be subject to quick review and overturning.

You don't need an official on the field to stick his head underneath a blanket draped over a camera to review calls. Those decisions can be made in a press-box suite. Instead of stopping the game for commercial timeouts on nearly every change of possession or when a coach just wants to stop the clock, the game should go to a commercial timeout whenever a critical penalty needs to be reviewed in the booth.

Also, the officiating crew should be forced to address the media and defend their decisions. It's ridiculous that the media are allowed to confront players, coaches, executives and owners, but the guys who can easily change the course of a game with one questionable decision are pretty much off limits.

Bill Leavy and his crew ruined Super Bowl XL. Am I the only one who would like to hear them defend their incompetence?

savafan
02-06-2006, 03:01 PM
Hmmm....


http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=AgFWFYcC35iUHcsB29bYiII5nYcB?slug=dw-winnerslosers020506&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

Loser: Sports Illustrated cover jinx
But only barely. The magazine screwed up when it started selling its "Steelers Championship Package" on its website before the game even started. If you typed in "www.sipittsburghoffer.com," up came an order form for all sorts of Steelers championship junk. But there was no such Seattle package. In fact, when you typed "www.siseattleoffer.com," the Pittsburgh one came up.

The Jinx looked alive when Kelly Herndon was streaking down the sidelines the other way with a Ben Roethlisberger pass. Fortunately for whoever made the error, the Steelers hung on. And the magazine got some free publicity.

savafan
02-06-2006, 03:07 PM
http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/5310192

Kevin Hench / FOXSports.com
Posted: 2 minutes ago

This is the space where I get to crow about the frightening precision of my Super Bowl prediction.

Where I get to remind everyone that I guaranteed the Steelers would win the title after they beat the Colts. That they were the only championship-caliber team among the final four. That they would dismantle the Broncos in Denver and waylay whomever the NFC sent at them.

This is the space where I get to wag a finger at my colleague Ian O'Connor, with whom I'd waged a dueling columns battle of opposing prognostication. He picked the Seahawks and made a very strong case for them.

This is the space where I get to say, I told ya so. But I won't. I can't.

I've never felt so empty being right. I feel dirty. I wish I'd been wrong. The Steelers did not deserve to win this game. They were not the better team. O'Connor was right. Seattle was the better team.

So, Paul Tagliabue, how does a team lose when it outgains an opponent by 57 yards, controls time of possession and wins the turnover battle?

Like a crazed CIA analyst running through the halls of Langley screaming into open offices about some impending calamity, I've been shrieking hysterically about the terrible officiating in the NFL and warning that some day the brutal calls were going to affect the outcome of the Super Bowl.

That some day was Sunday.

Every single questionable, marginal or outright bad call went against the Seahawks.

Their first three big plays were all wiped out by penalty calls. On their second drive, Darrell Jackson caught an 18-yard pass on 3rd-and-6 that would have given Seattle a first down at the 23. But Chris Gray was called for holding James Farrior. When Farrior pushed upfield, Gray did hook him with his right arm, and Farrior went down. When referee Bill Leavy flagged Gray, it was a bad omen for the Seahawks. Instead of being on the edge of the red zone, they came away without any points.

On their third drive, the Seahawks looked to take a 7-0 lead when Jackson separated from Chris Hope in the end zone and Matt Hasselbeck delivered a perfect strike to his outside shoulder. The back judge looked uncertain — sound familiar, Patriots fans? — then finally jerked his flag out and called offensive pass interference to wipe out the touchdown. The replay showed receiver and defender hand-fighting, with Jackson getting the slightest push into Hope's chest before turning to catch the ball. ABC's John Madden thought the call was dubious. FOX analyst and all-time great offensive lineman Brian Baldinger had no doubts, calling it "absolutely horrendous" on his FOXSports.com Super Bowl Instant Analysis. ESPN's Steve Young and Michael Irvin also had no uncertainty, dismissing the call as ticky-tack and insisting the Seahawks got robbed of a TD.

Then came a huge call on the first play of the second quarter. Peter Warrick ripped off a 33-yard punt return to give Seattle the ball at the Steelers 46. But Etric Pruitt was called for holding. How clear was it? Well, Madden thought the call was for Pruitt holding the gunner at the beginning of the play. It wasn't. The flag came in during the runback and it looked pretty minor. Another example of an official searching to make a call.

So despite totally dominating the first 20 minutes of the game, the Seahawks led only 3-0.

Then came Pittsburgh's first touchdown. Whether you think Roethlisberger broke the plane of the goal line seems to depend on which team you were rooting for. The odd part was the line judge seemed to have determined that Big Ben had come up short as he ran in from the sideline. Since Roethlisberger had been pushed back well short of the goal line I don't know what he could have seen as he got closer to the pile that would have made him change his mind. But up went the arms. Had Roethlisberger been ruled short of the plane, that call would no doubt have stood too. But you figure the Black and Gold would have pounded it in from the two-inch line on fourth down so there's not that much here for Seattle fans to complain about except for the continuing storyline that every single call was going the Steelers' way. And the worst was yet to come.

The Seahawks were on the verge of taking a 17-14 lead early in the fourth quarter when officiating disaster struck. Hasselbeck had drilled a pass down the seam to Jerramy Stevens to set up first-and-goal at the one when suddenly Leavy appeared in the middle of the screen to call the play back on account of holding on Sean Locklear. No less a source than newly minted Hall of Famer John Madden came right out and said it was a bad call. This penalty was beyond ticky-tack. Baldinger called it "another terrible call" and added that the Steelers were offsides on the play. It was yet another official searching for a call, desperate to throw his flag, yearning to impact the action. Why, why, oh, why? That's 14 points the officials simply took away from the Seahawks. Incredible.

After a sack, Hasselbeck threw a pick and then was penalized 15 yards for making the tackle. I'm not kidding. The same thing happened in the Indy-Pittsburgh game in the regular season. It's like the officials become so discombobulated during the change of possession that they just randomly start throwing flags. The call was that Hasselbeck had thrown an illegal block below the waist on the return. Never mind that Hasselbeck wasn't trying to block anybody and did, in fact, make the tackle. Just another terrible call that cannot be reviewed in Paul Tagliabue's NFL.

The Steelers took quick advantage of their enhanced field position and just like that it was 21-10 Pittsburgh when it should have been 17-14 Seattle.

But the stripes weren't done.

First, they blew a fumble call on the field — of course against Seattle — before overturning it after replay. Then, with the Steelers trying to run out the clock, Leavy granted Roethlisberger a timeout, even though the play clock clearly read zero before the quarterback signaled for time. It ended up being the final bad call in Seattle's coffin.

As Madden and Al Michaels watched the replay they shared a laugh about a similar bad non-call in an earlier playoff game between the Bears and Panthers. This is what it has come to: Announcers comparing the bad calls happening before them to the bad calls from earlier rounds of the playoffs. Is this really what the NFL wants?

With Cris Collinsworth lobbying for pass interference to be eligible for review on Inside the NFL after New England got jobbed in Denver; Joey Porter inveighing against the league after the game in Indy; Young and Irvin railing at halftime of the Super Bowl; Baldinger being spot-on with his Instant Analysis critique of the officials; and Madden and Michaels wondering aloud about the officiating during the game ... is anybody in the league office listening?

Or can we pretty much count on next year's playoffs being dominated by the officials too?

savafan
02-06-2006, 03:12 PM
http://www.patsfans.com/bob/display_story.php?story_id=2933

By: Bob George/BosSports.net

DETROIT -- Looks like it wasn’t only the home crowd that was pro-Steelers at Ford Field.

Count the zebras amongst those who seemed to be among the Iron City faithful. All game long, it looked like they had an edict to “make sure Jerome Bettis goes out a winner and make sure Dan Rooney gets a Vince”. A hail of blatantly bad calls went against the Seattle Seahawks which cost them 14 precious points, and ultimately the game.

So, despite never getting untracked on offense, and despite not seemingly having a decent game plan, it is the Pittsburgh Steelers who come out of Super Bowl XL as world champions instead of the Seahawks, who for most of the game outplayed the Steelers. Three big plays and not much else was all the Steelers needed, other than those aforementioned officiating mistakes, which gave the Steelers a 21-10 victory and the franchise’s fifth Super Bowl win 26 years after their fourth.

Capping off a postseason littered with bad officials calls all over the place, it seemed only fitting that referee Bill Leavy and his crew apply the coup de grace in the biggest game of them all. Three bogus calls were what basically did the Seahawks in, though there were some junctures where Matt Hasselbeck and Mike Holmgren made some mistakes of their own which also helped the Steeler cause.

You hate to bag on the Steeler win, especially for Rooney. His father Art accepting the trophy for Super Bowl IX, the first Steeler championship after no titles for their first 41 years, is one of the most satisfying film clips in league history. The fifth Steeler Super Bowl win ties San Francisco and Dallas for most Vinces ever, and Rooney is generally hailed as one of the most distinguished owners in the league. Watching his team make NFL history by becoming the first six seed to win a Super Bowl had to be a highlight of his entire life.

But it would have gone over a lot better with the national football public if the Steelers had won this game without the help of Leavy and his crew. The Steelers were bitten by the bad officiating bug themselves in the win over Indianapolis (the interception by Troy Polamalu), but the Seahawks were chewed up and spit out. Pittsburgh thus becomes the least impressive Super Bowl champ since the Baltimore Colts in Super Bowl V, winning a turnover-plagued slopfest over Dallas in 1971 where a linebacker on the losing team was game MVP (Chuck Howley).

The first critical call came in the first quarter. Seattle had the ball at their own 49, and drove to the Pittsburgh 17 in three plays. Hasselbeck dropped back on first down, and found Darrell Jackson in the end zone on a slant route. Jackson and free safety Chris Hope jostled for position, then Jackson got separation from Hope by placing his hand on Hope’s shoulder. Jackson caught the pass in the end zone for the touchdown, but back judge Bob Waggoner threw a flag and never signaled touchdown. He called Jackson for pushing off on Hope, and the Seahawks had to settle for a 47-yard Josh Brown field goal.

Replays showed that Jackson never pushed off. He did make contact with his hand on Hope’s shoulder, but never pushed off. The play resembled a similar call on Troy Brown on the last drive of Super Bowl XXXVIII against Carolina, where he was called for a pushoff which was more incidental contact than a push. The call was a definitive ticky-tack play, but it cost Seattle seven points and a chance to establish superiority in a game where they did not permit a Steeler first down for the first 19 minutes of the contest.

Three calls went against Seattle in the fourth quarter, the first two proving fatal. Trailing 14-10, Seattle was driving from its own two-yard line to the Pittsburgh 19. Seattle was continuing to find soft spots in the Steeler secondary, as Bobby Engram caught two passes for 37 yards along the way. On first down at the Steeler 19, Hasselbeck found Jerramy Stevens at the one, making a great catch in a crowd. But there was a flag thrown, and offensive holding was called on right tackle Sean Locklear.

Replays showed that Locklear was flagged for holding linebacker Clark Haggans, but no holding took place. Locklear had a perfectly legal block on Haggans, who was bearing in from the right side. Locklear never grabbed any part of Haggans, but holding was still called.

Three plays later, Hasselbeck made a bona fide mistake and threw a bad pass to Jackson in the left flat which Ike Taylor intercepted and returned to the Pittsburgh 29. A flag was thrown, and Hasselbeck was called for a low block. Again, replays showed that this was not the case, as Hasselbeck made the tackle on Taylor by hitting low, which is legal, rather than blocking someone. This moved the ball to the 44-yard line, and gave Pittsburgh much better field position. The Steelers cashed in on this four plays later, when Antwaan Randle El, a quarterback at Indiana, ran a reverse right and hit Hines Ward for a 43-yard touchdown which completed the scoring.

After surrendering the ball, Seattle needed to stop Pittsburgh three and out to get the ball back and try for two scores down eleven points. On third and six at his own 24, Ben Roethlisberger called a timeout a second after the play clock ran out (replays showed this also), but was given a timeout by Leavy instead of a penalty. Roethlisberger proceeded to hit Randle El for a first down and essentially salt the game away for the Steelers.

Here is why the Seahawks can complain and it isn’t sour grapes. Roethlisberger finished with 9 of 21 passing, two interceptions, and a passer rating of 22.6. Willie Parker had nine carries for 18 yards if you take away his 75-yard third quarter touchdown gallop which was the longest run from scrimmage in Super Bowl history. Ward had only five catches to lead the Steelers, but most of his 123 yards came on that Randle El reverse and it was good enough to get him game MVP honors. The Seahawks had a much better balanced attack, led by Shawn Alexander’s 95 yards rushing and 16 catches among Joe Jurevicius, Engram and Jackson.

Take away the officiating, and the Seahawks can hang their heads on their inability to finish drives, and three big plays on offense by the Steelers. Late in the second quarter, facing third down and 28 on the Seattle 40, Roethlisberger found a wide open Ward at the three, covered poorly by Michael Boulware. The inexcusable gaffe led to a one-yard touchdown run by Roethlisberger which made it 7-3 Pittsburgh. The long run by Parker and the Randle El touchdown pass were the other two big plays for the Steelers.

But it will be interesting to see what kind of a spin NFL officials director Mike Pereira puts on this game. He is to be commended for his willingness to come on the NFL Network and explain controversial calls every week, but he will have some explaining to do about the Jackson “pushoff” and the Locklear “hold”. He will in all likelihood say something like “Well, it’s a judgment call, and in my opinion the official made a good call…” or something like that. But both calls turned out to be huge, and they ultimately cost Seattle a world championship.

Of course, Seattle could have stopped those three big plays, also. But in this year of bad postseason officiating, these bad calls are magnified a thousand fold. Leavy, who did distinguish himself when he overruled (correctly) a Hasselbeck fumble, led a crew which did a poor job, plain and simple.

You can just hear Bill Cowher’s detractors. This is the only way he could win the big one. Get outcoached by a mile and still win thanks to the officials. Cowher has his Super win, but Holmgren did a better job (had he won, Holmgren would have been the first head coach to win Super Bowls with more than one team). Cowher can smile all he wants, but this was clearly a case of stealing a Super Bowl win.

Stealing a win. Is that why they’re called the “Steelers”?

savafan
02-06-2006, 03:15 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs05/columns/story?columnist=smith_michael&id=2320683&lpos=spotlight&lid=tab1pos2

By Michael Smith
ESPN.com

DETROIT -- Three weeks ago, after the Steelers held on to upset Indianapolis, Joey Porter was unhappy about the overturning of Troy Polamalu's fourth-quarter interception that could have sealed the win much earlier. Believing that deep down the league preferred Peyton Manning and the Colts to win, Porter publicly criticized the game officials, asking them not to "take the game from us."

Well, the Steelers can call it even now, as the officials who performed well enough throughout the season to earn the privilege of working Super Bowl XL performed Sunday as though they were trying to make it up to the Steelers by giving them the game -- not just any game, but the biggest game. And, yes, this time the other guys, the Seahawks, cried conspiracy, only not quite as loudly as Porter.

"You know, that's what happens when the world is against you," one Seahawk said after the 21-10 loss at Ford/Heinz Field. "No one wanted us to win. They wanted Jerome Bettis to win and go out a hero, and they got it."

Seattle had its share of goats: in particular, tight end Jerramy Stevens, who dropped four balls, and kicker Josh Brown, who missed two field-goal attempts. Almost to a man, the Seahawks pointed the blame finger at themselves for converting only one of three red zone attempts (when they had been the best in the league in that area, scoring a touchdown on 71.7 percent of their trips inside the 20-yard line); for allowing Ben Roethlisberger to improvise and complete a 37-yard pass to game MVP Hines Ward to the 1; for giving up a 75-yard touchdown run to Willie Parker; and for getting beaten by a trick play on Antwaan Randle El's pass to fellow receiver Ward for a touchdown, a first in Super Bowl history. If you read between the lines, though, they pretty much spelled out in bold letters that they had plenty of help in handing Pittsburgh its fifth Lombardi Trophy.

Namely, the boys in black and white.

"Those things are out of our control," Seahawks quarterback Matt Hasselbeck said of the three major penalties that helped change the game completely. Not saying the outcome of the game would have been any different, but for sure it would have been a different game. "That's the way [the officials] called them," Hasselbeck continued. "The Steelers played well enough to win tonight, and we didn't. They should get credit. It's disappointing, it's hard, but what are you going to do?"

Here's what referee Bill Leavy's crew did, point blank: It robbed Seattle. The Seahawks could have played better, sure. They could have done more to overcome the poor officiating. We understand that those things happen and all, but even with all the points Seattle left on the field, there's a good chance the Seahawks would have scored more than the Steelers if the officials had let the players play.

In the biggest game of the year, the biggest game in sports, even, the officials were just a little too visible. In that regard, the Super Bowl provided a fitting conclusion to a postseason packed with pitiful performances by the game's third team. There were incorrect down-by-contact rulings in both NFC wild-card games; a touchdown that could have gone either way and should have gone the other way -- in favor of Tampa Bay -- in the Bucs' loss to the Redskins; the Patriots got no love in Denver in being hit with a bogus pass interference penalty and not catching a break on Champ Bailey's fumble at the goal line that looked as though it could have been a touchback; and, of course, the Polamalu play.

Still, what happened to the Seahawks wasn't the same as, say, New England going into Denver and playing badly (five turnovers) on top of the bad calls. Seattle gained almost 400 yards and turned it over just once.

You see, you can spend weeks -- and we did; two, in fact -- analyzing and dissecting matchups and giving each team the edge in certain areas and trying to figure out how the game is going to play out, but the two things you can't account for are turnovers and officials. The latter were the X-factor Sunday. Edge: Steelers.

It actually was a fairly clean game from a penalty standpoint, without a whole lot of yellow on the field -- 10 accepted penalties between the teams. Seven were against the Seahawks, though, a team that tied with Indianapolis for the second-fewest penalties (94) in the regular season. But those calls against the Seahawks stuck out like the Space Needle on the Seattle skyline.

Consider: The Seahawks lost 161 yards to penalties when you combine the penalty yards (70) and the plays the flags wiped out (91). By halftime alone, when it trailed 7-3, Seattle had had 73 hard-earned yards and a touchdown eliminated.

Hasselbeck hit Darrell Jackson with an apparent 16-yard scoring pass in the first quarter, but the play came back when Jackson was called for offensive pass interference. It was a touch foul. Jackson extended his arm, yes, but both players were fighting for position, and he didn't create any separation by doing so. It was like a referee calling a hand-check in a key moment of Game 7 of the NBA Finals.

The Seahawks had to settle for three instead of seven.

Still, that was early, and that one didn't change the game as much as did a holding call against Sean Locklear early in the fourth quarter with Pittsburgh leading 14-10. That one wiped out an 18-yard catch by Stevens that would have taken the ball to the 1. Locklear supposedly held Clark Haggans, so instead of first-and-goal at the 1 and the chance to complete a 98-yard touchdown drive and take a three-point lead, Seattle faced first-and-20 at the 29.

Three plays later, Ike Taylor picked off a Hasselbeck pass, and Hasselbeck went low to make the tackle on Taylor's return and was called for a 15-yard personal foul for a low block. The Steelers set up shop at their 44. That one right there made no sense.

Pittsburgh likes to run its trick plays in the middle of the field. Boom! Four plays later, from Seattle's 43, Randle El took a reverse and threw a sweet strike on the run to Ward. It was 21-10, and that was all she wrote. Everyone knows how important it is to play Pittsburgh with a lead or with the score tied. The Steelers don't lose when they're up by 11.

Eleven just so happens to be the total points taken away by bogus calls. Some penalties meant points; others meant field position. A holding call in the second quarter negated Peter Warrick's 34-yard punt return that would have started Seattle in Pittsburgh territory.

By contrast, the Steelers might have gotten a break on Roethlisberger's 1-yard touchdown plunge on third-and-goal in the second quarter. Leavy reviewed the play under the booth's orders, since it occurred inside the two-minute mark, and while still photos of an airborne Roethlisberger showed that the ball might have broken the plane of the goal line, he landed short of it and reached the ball over. It was close. Head linesman Mark Hittner didn't seem so sure of it, hesitating before signaling touchdown.

"I don't think he scored," Seahawks coach Mike Holmgren said.

It was that kind of evening for the Seahawks, who represent a town where residents know all too well that when it rains, it pours. If having what seemed like 90 percent of the 68,200 in attendance waving Terrible Towels wasn't enough to make Seattle feel as though it was playing on the road, the officials called it as though the Seahawks actually were.

Pittsburgh capitalized on its opportunities. And guys like Bill Cowher, Ward, Dan Rooney and The Bus are all very deserving of a championship -- and it's nice to see them win one -- but it would have been better had it not happened like this. It's like the Seahawks said: Not taking anything away from the Steelers, but keep it real.

"We had a touchdown taken away from us, the first one we scored," said Hasselbeck, who was measured in his words but clear in his frustration, "and then we had the ball at the 1-yard line, they called a penalty on us. That was unfortunate."

"I thought they were offside [on the play Locklear was called for holding]," center Robbie Tobeck said. "I thought we had a free play on because they had two guys come across. You know, that's the game. In a game, there's situations you have to overcome, and all night long we didn't do a good job of overcoming those things, and that's something we've done all year."

In the offseason, 31 teams will be back at the drawing board, evaluating what they need to do to knock off the Steelers in the fall. After the postseason they just had, Mike Pereira and the NFL's crew of officials would be wise to take a long, hard look at themselves. It's a real shame when, on the game's biggest stage, the major players aren't players at all. We saw too much of the third team in Super Bowl XL and not enough Seahawks and Steelers.

Michael Smith is a senior writer for ESPN.com.

deltachi8
02-06-2006, 03:15 PM
Feel better yet, Sava?

Im getting akick out of it myself.

savafan
02-06-2006, 03:17 PM
Feel better yet, Sava?

Im getting akick out of it myself.

Yeah, I'm glad that the media is finally picking up on it. Superbowl XL will go down in history as being a sham of a game because of the officiating.

deltachi8
02-06-2006, 03:23 PM
Wahtever gets you through the night
Its all right
Its all right

savafan
02-06-2006, 03:24 PM
I can't believe you can let your fandom blind you from what happened in that game delta

deltachi8
02-06-2006, 03:34 PM
Ill watch the game for a thrid time tonight and if I change my mind, I'll let you know.

As of right now, the only bad call I recall was teh Hassleback low block on the tackle he made. However, I feel that would have little to no impact on the game.

Chip R
02-06-2006, 03:41 PM
Coming soon to theaters near you:

NFL

by savafan and Oliver Stone

WVRed
02-06-2006, 03:44 PM
The only championship I remember being this tainted was the Arizona-Duke NCAA championship from 2001. The only thing missing was Michaels and Madden singing the Steelers praises. That at least saved the Super Bowl from being a total disgrace. Jim Nantz and Billy Packer took personal bias to a whole new low in that game.

savafan
02-06-2006, 03:47 PM
Coming soon to theaters near you:

NFL

by savafan and Oliver Stone

LOL, I'm a much better filmmaker than Oliver Stone.

traderumor
02-06-2006, 03:56 PM
I have no consideration that it was a "fix." I just think that how poor NFL officiating is was center stage last night, and for whatever reason all the bad calls went to the Steelers' advantage.

I have one serious question, though. What good is instant replay if it cannot give a good view of the goal line that gives better evidence? The Super Bowl and they did not have any really good shots of the goal line review play on Roethelsberger? That's just wrong.

Also, the Super Bowl needs a facelift. Folks are getting bored with it. My first recommendation is let it be played on a home field. You wanna end the practice of pulling players once a team clinches the playoffs? Make the Super Bowl home field advantage be at stake for the team with the best overall record. Also, you have home field all the way through the playoffs and it adds to the intensity and drama of the game. The crowd is going at a fever pitch for the home team and the visitors have the playing on the road chip on their shoulder. Makes for some great football most of the time. Not to mention all the disinterested neutral fans are sitting at home watching the game while the team's loyal fans get to make as much noise as they can muster.

Of course, anytime you have burnt out senior citizens prancing around on a tongue shaped stage as the halftime show, you are proving that you're just not getting it. Add to it a team running around constantly showing poor sportsmanship with taunts made to the other team with spit flying between face masks and you have big problems in your league. Clean that crap up, Tagliabue. Get rid of "football moves" rules and start enforcing some unsportsmanlike conduct penalties for getting in an opponents face and shouting obscenities and "we so bad" in their face after every play. I love that the Bengals are good again as I return to following the league closely, but certain things make this an ugly product that usually only has me wanting to watch my team. I doubt if I'm alone in that.

kbrake
02-06-2006, 04:02 PM
Deltachi I swear I am not trying to gang up on you buy you honestly think that the Hasselbeck block was the only bad call? You would have no problem if that had been Hines called for offensive pass interference and you honestly think that was a hold?

deltachi8
02-06-2006, 04:20 PM
Unlike many of my Steeler brothers, I tend to be objective. The pass interference was obvios, he extended his arm and pushed hope. Doesnt matter how hard, he pushed him, directly in front of an official and completely extended his arm in doing so.

Sad thing is, he didnt have to do that. Hope would not have been able to make a play on that ball and Jackson still could have caught it. If Hines did it, I would have called it a fair call.

Yes, I saw a hold. bot thimes I watched it. Lincoln Kennedy on the NFL Network post game show (Which, save for Ray Lewis and his mumbling, was quite good) said "That is going to be called every time."

Overall, I think the Steelers were lucky to a point...lucky that Seattle beat themselves, because it was clear Seattle was good enough to win, but kept puching themselves in the face.

It's not ganging up, no problems here. Its all in good fun, its football, shich is important to only a certain extent...not like baseball or hockey.

traderumor
02-06-2006, 05:14 PM
Unlike many of my Steeler brothers, I tend to be objective. I'm not sure one can be objective about whether or not they are objective. That is for others to decide.

MWM
02-06-2006, 05:26 PM
No one knows if the outcome would have been different with better officiating. But there's really no way around the fact that poor, and completely one-sided, officiating was a big factor in this game. And that just sucks. Their fingerprint is on the game forever, and that sucks for Steelers fans, too. It bothers me that we even have to speculate. Sure, Seattle made lots of mistakes, but so did the Steelers. But Pittsburgh was also handed a few golden opportunities that Seattle was not. Seattle had a couple of opportunities yanked away from them, which Pittsburgh did not. The Steelers might have won anyway, but the fact that it wasn't a level playing field taints this game forever, IMO.

pedro
02-06-2006, 05:30 PM
It was a horrible, sloppy, boring game.

MWM
02-06-2006, 05:31 PM
It was a horrible, sloppy, boring game.

Yep, IMO it was the worst SB I've ever seen. I'd rather watch a good blowout by a well-oiled team than what we watched yesterday. Bad play all around.

M2
02-06-2006, 05:49 PM
Caveat yeah technically that was pass interference but to take away a TD on that? Come on that is real weak.

Well if you throw a stiff arm into a defender as the ball's on its way directly in front of the ref then it would be pretty weak not to call it. I don't see where you should get to cheat a little extra in the end zone. If the defender did that, you can bet your bippy a flag would have been thrown.

I agree with Tony, the phantom hold and the low block are the only two calls that seemed questionable to me. I don't understand the low block call, though I doubt it mattered. The Steelers were going to pounce on Seattle's jugular there with or without those 15 yards.

The holding call was probably the one flagrantly bad call, but the ref threw the flag before the pass got completed, so unless he's got the shining it would be hard to read a conspiracy theory into that one. Plus, from the only view I got to see of the play I couldn't tell whether he grabbed a handful of jersey with one of his hands.

Anyway, the corresponding sack and interception strike me as the far more important events in that sequence. Yeah, maybe they got a bad call there, but the Seahawks were still within striking distance and they came apart at the seams. If that's all it took to undo Seattle then they were losing that game no matter happened.

Chip R
02-06-2006, 06:13 PM
For all the crying about wanting to have instant replay before it was actually put into use, it certainly hasn't improved the officiating at all. Not to mention the games have a lull in them when there's a replay challenge. I wouldn't mind a bit if they discontinued it altogether if the officiating is going to remain this crappy. I think the officials use it as a crutch. If they get a call wrong, no big deal cause there's always replay. Also these are supposed to be the creme de la creme of officials. Same for the playoffs. Yet we have all these horrible calls in the playoffs and Super Bowl which are the games most people are watching. It's major egg on the NFL's face.

max venable
02-06-2006, 06:27 PM
Did you guys catch the comment by Al Michaels referring to Bill Leavy's officiating crew being the crew with the lowest call-reversal percentage in the NFL?

What a pointless, meaningless stat...I mean, he's the guy that makes the call on whether or not the play gets overturned. Any ref could have the lowest % if he just never reverses a call.

I guess we were all supposed to be impressed by that stat. I wasn't.

kbrake
02-06-2006, 08:33 PM
The more I think about the NFL as awhole today the more upset I become. I am officially crossing the line with this league. I will not go as far as to say it is fixed, but I will say that the league knows who it wants to win its big games and they try to get it that way. Not just this game. The Polomolu INT in Indy was unbelievable....thats not a bad call that is blatant. Then on the Hasselbeck blocking call was a completely made up penalty....he got flagged for making a good sound tackle come on.

It is unreal to me how right college football got things this year and how bad the NFL screwed things up. Warm weather, outdoors, huge stadium, great fans from both teams, and a great game, decided by great players, making great plays.

Then you had the NFL and its Super Bowl. A cold city, inside, never had the feel of a real big game. For half time we watched a 62 year old with saggy skin run around in a belly shirt. And as for the game everytime Seattle was gaining some momentum it was ripped away by the refs not the Steelers. If your the Steelers its not your fault you did not make the calls but your not getting much respect either, and you did win the game.

I'm just so thankful that a blackeye has landed on someone outside of baseball.

Yachtzee
02-06-2006, 09:30 PM
For all the crying about wanting to have instant replay before it was actually put into use, it certainly hasn't improved the officiating at all. Not to mention the games have a lull in them when there's a replay challenge. I wouldn't mind a bit if they discontinued it altogether if the officiating is going to remain this crappy. I think the officials use it as a crutch. If they get a call wrong, no big deal cause there's always replay. Also these are supposed to be the creme de la creme of officials. Same for the playoffs. Yet we have all these horrible calls in the playoffs and Super Bowl which are the games most people are watching. It's major egg on the NFL's face.

I would hope that the Super Bowl puts more pressure on the NFL to hire full-time officials and institute a review process for officiating performance. Now, nobody is perfect, but I'd like to see how officials are scored on how often they make the correct/incorrect call and when they blow calls, what are the home/road and favorite/underdog splits. If an official team tends to err on one side or the other to a significant degree, they should be informed of the bias so that they can be made aware of their own biases and correct it. If used properly, I think it could really improve the quality of officiating and remove the taint of bad calls from important games.

Fil3232
02-06-2006, 09:47 PM
Well if you throw a stiff arm into a defender as the ball's on its way directly in front of the ref then it would be pretty weak not to call it. I don't see where you should get to cheat a little extra in the end zone. If the defender did that, you can bet your bippy a flag would have been thrown.

I agree with Tony, the phantom hold and the low block are the only two calls that seemed questionable to me. I don't understand the low block call, though I doubt it mattered. The Steelers were going to pounce on Seattle's jugular there with or without those 15 yards.

The holding call was probably the one flagrantly bad call, but the ref threw the flag before the pass got completed, so unless he's got the shining it would be hard to read a conspiracy theory into that one. Plus, from the only view I got to see of the play I couldn't tell whether he grabbed a handful of jersey with one of his hands.

Anyway, the corresponding sack and interception strike me as the far more important events in that sequence. Yeah, maybe they got a bad call there, but the Seahawks were still within striking distance and they came apart at the seams. If that's all it took to undo Seattle then they were losing that game no matter happened.

If jackson's push-off was pass interference, then that's fine, the refs set a precedent that any push-off by a reciever would be flagged. Unfortunately, this was not the case in the 2nd half when Hines Ward got away with just as much of a push (bigger IMO). Sadly Michaels or Madden didn't call the refs on it, but it was a clear example of a double-standard.

SteelSD
02-06-2006, 11:21 PM
Well if you throw a stiff arm into a defender as the ball's on its way directly in front of the ref then it would be pretty weak not to call it. I don't see where you should get to cheat a little extra in the end zone. If the defender did that, you can bet your bippy a flag would have been thrown.

What I find truly amusing about that play is that the ref actually whiffed on pulling the yellow flag out the first time. He went to pull it out almost before the ball was in Jackson's hand, but it was an "airflag". He missed the flag entirely with his first swipe and then finally got ahold of it after the defender turned around to lobby.

Well, that and it's pretty funny to me that the only defense folks can come up with to label it a bad call was that they saw Player X do something more severe at Point Y and not get called for it. That's like a drunk driver claiming he shouldn't be arrested because he once saw a guy swerve much worse but not get pulled over.


I agree with Tony, the phantom hold and the low block are the only two calls that seemed questionable to me. I don't understand the low block call, though I doubt it mattered. The Steelers were going to pounce on Seattle's jugular there with or without those 15 yards.

The holding call was probably the one flagrantly bad call, but the ref threw the flag before the pass got completed, so unless he's got the shining it would be hard to read a conspiracy theory into that one. Plus, from the only view I got to see of the play I couldn't tell whether he grabbed a handful of jersey with one of his hands.

I thought the second call was "Holding Lite" as well. That being said, it's pretty easy to get called for having your arm around the same guy you'd been flagged for previously hog-tying earlier. Best way to isolate yourself late-game is to get caught on a flagrant hold early.

And your post is the first one in which I've seen someone note that flags for holding are thrown during a developing play rather than after the play concludes. You'd think that football fans would have a relatively easy time grasping that concept, but I guess not.


Anyway, the corresponding sack and interception strike me as the far more important events in that sequence. Yeah, maybe they got a bad call there, but the Seahawks were still within striking distance and they came apart at the seams. If that's all it took to undo Seattle then they were losing that game no matter happened.

I thought the Hasselback low "block" was a stupid call. But then it seems to me that for Hasselback to be in a position to draw that penalty, something had to go horribly wrong on that play to get it to that point. But I dunno. Maybe that's just me.

I've been having a whole lot of fun reading this thread though. And as much as I'd wish Joey Porter would shut his trap, I also had a lot of fun watching him stand over a flattened Jerramy Stevens on Seattle's final offensive play of the season. Not quite poetic justice being that Porter was doing most of the talking, but quite ironic nonetheless.

Oh, and Bengals fans-

I'm sorry Carson Palmer got hurt. I wish him the best. I truly hope he comes back at 100% and that Marv can find himself something resembling a defense next year.

In the meantime, I'm going to enjoy this world championship. Doesn't make me any smarter, richer, or more attractive. But it makes me a heck of a lot happier than I was on Saturday. I honestly hope one day you guys get to know what that feels like and wish you and the Bengals good luck for the 2005 season.

Betterread
02-07-2006, 12:29 AM
[QUOTE=SteelSD]In the meantime, I'm going to enjoy this world championship. Doesn't make me any smarter, richer, or more attractive. [QUOTE]
Please be aware of the level that the team you support plays on. Pittsburgh is the NFL champion. They beat no team from another country than the USA, not even in an exhibition. They are not world-class, by definition.
The world champions of football are Brazil, who won the 2002 world cup over Germany. The US competed well in that competition, and were represented by one Ohioan that I can think of - Brian McBride. He was not from Pittsburgh, he played for the Columbus Crew.

westofyou
02-07-2006, 12:33 AM
McBride is from Illinois, so not even an Ohioan, No longer with the Crew either, I saw him score a on a awesome cross the other day for Fulham.

Fil3232
02-07-2006, 12:44 AM
"Well, that and it's pretty funny to me that the only defense folks can come up with to label it a bad call was that they saw Player X do something more severe at Point Y and not get called for it. That's like a drunk driver claiming he shouldn't be arrested because he once saw a guy swerve much worse but not get pulled over." -SteelSD

Or it's like the cops pulling over someone for swerving slightly and giving him a DUI only to see another guy come along, swerve more severly, and fail to pull him over and give him a DUI. The first guy is guilty, fine, but enforce the same rules consistently.

And I haven't seen it written, but if Joey Porter didn't make a "horsecollar" tackle on Shaun Alexander than I'm not really sure why the rule was made. (I realize the NFL hasn't enforced this rule at all this year).

SteelSD
02-07-2006, 12:49 AM
Please be aware of the level that the team you support plays on. Pittsburgh is the NFL champion. They beat no team from another country than the USA, not even in an exhibition. They are not world-class, by definition.

The world champions of football are Brazil, who won the 2002 world cup over Germany. The US competed well in that competition, and were represented by one Ohioan that I can think of - Brian McBride. He was not from Pittsburgh, he played for the Columbus Crew.

Whazzat? Sorry, I'm having a hard time hearing you. I have a Lombardi Trophy in my ear.

Krusty
02-07-2006, 12:56 AM
Oh, I agree that there was something rotten going on in that game too. Thing is, neither team should have to overcome those bad calls, the game should be decided by the players, not the officials. That was more like Wrestlemania than the Superbowl.

It was obvious in the Indy game that the plot line was going to be all warm and fuzzy about how the game's greatest QB was going to lead his team to the promised land and help his grieving coach to a title. That didn't work out, so the plot line became Bettis needing to end his career with a championship in his hometown. A Seattle victory wouldn't have delivered any feel good stories.

Obviously you have a hard on for the Steelers so what I say at this point will be fruitless.

SteelSD
02-07-2006, 01:06 AM
Or it's like the cops pulling over someone for swerving slightly and giving him a DUI only to see another guy come along, swerve more severly, and fail to pull him over and give him a DUI. The first guy is guilty, fine, but enforce the same rules consistently.

And I haven't seen it written, but if Joey Porter didn't make a "horsecollar" tackle on Shaun Alexander than I'm not really sure why the rule was made. (I realize the NFL hasn't enforced this rule at all this year).

You haven't seen anything written about your newest phantom infraction because you don't understand how the rule against "horsecollar" tackles is supposed to be enforced.

I'd explain it to you, but then you'd just find something else that didn't happen to complain about. Vicious cycle.

M2
02-07-2006, 01:06 AM
The US competed well in that competition, and were represented by one Ohioan that I can think of - Brian McBride. He was not from Pittsburgh, he played for the Columbus Crew.

He's no Taylor Twellman though.

Krusty
02-07-2006, 01:08 AM
If the NFL wants to improve the officiating, then they need to hire refs that work on a full-time basis for the NFL.

The officiating took away from the game. But to say the Steelers didn't deserve to win because of the refs is quite extreme.

Dom Heffner
02-07-2006, 01:08 AM
I just find it a little ironic that the same people on here who were complaining about the officiating of the Colts-Steelers game all of a sudden can't call a spade a spade.

Matt Hasselbeck, offensive blocker.

There were three or four game changing calls that were just outright blown.

Yeah, you have a Lombardi trophy, but you didn't outplay anbody, you didn't convincingly beat anyone- you just got all the bad calls to go your way.

This isn't anyone's fault but the officials- I don't expect the Steelers to hand back the trophy, but come on guys, those were hideous calls.

I would think as champions, they would have rather won it another way.


But to say the Steelers didn't deserve to win because of the refs is quite extreme.


It's a spot-on assessment. I'm not saying they didn't deserve to be in the game, but to say they deserved to win after having every single call go their way and those calls undoubtedly change the score of the game- I just don't see how you can say they deserve to win.

Krusty
02-07-2006, 01:11 AM
I just find it a little ironic that the same people on here who were complaining about the officiating of the Colts-Steelers game all of a sudden can't call a spade a spade.

Matt Hasselbeck, offensive blocker.

There were three or four game changing calls that were just outright blown.

Yeah, you have a Lombardi trophy, but you didn't outplay anbody, you didn't convincingly beat anyone- you just got all the bad calls to go your way.

This isn't anyone's fault but the officials- I don't expect the Steelers to hand back the trophy, but come on guys, those were hideous calls.

I would think as champions, they would have rather won it another way.

How would you like the Steelers to have won it? What are they going to do go up to the refs and say their officiating is giving the Seahawks a raw deal?

Bottom line is the officiating has sucked during the playoffs and not just the Super Bowl. I think the NFL has to sit down this offseason and figure out how to improve the officiating.

SteelSD
02-07-2006, 01:27 AM
I just find it a little ironic that the same people on here who were complaining about the officiating of the Colts-Steelers game all of a sudden can't call a spade a spade.

Matt Hasselbeck, offensive blocker.

I find it a little strange that you couldn't read where I called the Hasselbeck penalty stupid.


There were three or four game changing calls that were just outright blown.

And you're absolutely wrong about 3 of those 4 calls, but it's not like that's anything new.


Yeah, you have a Lombardi trophy, but you didn't outplay anbody, you didn't convincingly beat anyone- you just got all the bad calls to go your way.

This isn't anyone's fault but the officials- I don't expect the Steelers to hand back the trophy, but come on guys, those were hideous calls.

I would think as champions, they would have rather won it another way.

Pittsburgh won their last 8 games while playing elimination football the whole way. They beat the #1, #2, and #3 seeds in the AFC and the #1 seed in the NFC along the way.

37 yard pass on 3rd-and-28. Longest TD run in Super Bowl history. 43-yard pass from the only WR in Super Bowl history to throw one.

And you think I'm going to be all depressed that the Steelers saw one obvious blown call go their way on a tackle attempt by a QB who just threw an INT?

I have absolutely ZERO complaints about the way the Steelers just won their fifth World Championship. I'd suggest the Steelers themselves probably feel just about the same way.

But hey, don't let me stop you from being bitter. Not that I could, of course.

Dom Heffner
02-07-2006, 01:29 AM
How would you like the Steelers to have won it? What are they going to do go up to the refs and say their officiating is giving the Seahawks a raw deal?

I would have liked the officials to have been a non-factor. All the calls went Pittsburgh's way, so sorry if the win gets questioned.

I was sitting in a room in Tampa Florida where nobody cared about this game, and all they kept talking about was how bad the officiating was. That hold, regardless of when the flag was thrown was a joke. If that's holding, then everybody holds on every play. Even Madden said something, IIRC.


I mean, we read post after post from SteelSD talking about how bad the refs were in the Colts game, and all he can muster up here is that Hasselbeck put himself in that position by throwing a bad pass and a prior holding call made a second, lousy call legitimate.

This is absolutely amazing to me.

SteelSD
02-07-2006, 01:31 AM
I mean, we read post after post from SteelSD talking about how bad the refs were in the Colts game, and all he can muster up here is that Hasselbeck put himself in that position by throwing a bad pass and a prior holding call made a second, lousy call legitimate.

That's a complete misrepresentation of what I said and you know it.

Don't do that again.

macro
02-07-2006, 01:36 AM
Feel better yet, Sava?

Im getting akick out of it myself.

savafan is only pointing out that the rest of the nation sees it one way, and Steeler fans see it another. Deny it if you will, but the truth is the truth.

Caveat Emperor
02-07-2006, 01:49 AM
Please be aware of the level that the team you support plays on. Pittsburgh is the NFL champion. They beat no team from another country than the USA, not even in an exhibition. They are not world-class, by definition.
The world champions of football are Brazil, who won the 2002 world cup over Germany. The US competed well in that competition, and were represented by one Ohioan that I can think of - Brian McBride. He was not from Pittsburgh, he played for the Columbus Crew.

I think you're confused...we're talking about FOOTBALL, not soccer. :evil:

SteelSD
02-07-2006, 02:08 AM
savafan is only pointing out that the rest of the nation sees it one way, and Steeler fans see it another. Deny it if you will, but the truth is the truth.

Well, considering that sava thinks Hines Ward pushed off on all of the 10 passes thrown his way and is using the espn.com boards to guage the "heartbeat" of America (which is like using the mlb.com Reds board to get an objective read on Adam Dunn), methinks we have a severely different definition of "truth".

But don't fret. Just remember- there's always next year. And I'll be rooting for the Bengals to win every single one of their preseason games.;)

macro
02-07-2006, 02:54 AM
I listened to three different AM stations today in the car, albeit that one was ESPN Radio (others were Louisville and Nashville local broadcasts), and I heard no opinions that differ from those sava cited. It's not just sava, it's not just the ESPN boards, and it's not just Bengals fans. From what I can tell, every subjective source feels the same way. But I guess all those people are just wrong. They all just hate the Steelers.

Caveat Emperor
02-07-2006, 04:16 AM
I listened to three different AM stations today in the car, albeit that one was ESPN Radio (others were Louisville and Nashville local broadcasts), and I heard no opinions that differ from those sava cited. It's not just sava, it's not just the ESPN boards, and it's not just Bengals fans. From what I can tell, every subjective source feels the same way. But I guess all those people are just wrong. They all just hate the Steelers.

Come on...you know controversy sells papers. This "post-Super Bowl" period is one of the toughest for the national sports media, at least until the conference tournaments start up for college basketball. They're naturally going to take any excuse they can get to milk a few extra drops out of the NFL before the season comes to a close and the endless draft speculation begins.

The officiating in the game was poor -- hell, the officiating in the playoffs in general has been poor -- but officiating/umpiring/judging could always be better in sports. It's going to continue to BE poor until the NFL sets up more stringent paramaters on what constitutes various infractions, especially on the judgment calls such as holding and pass interferene, or puts more officials on the field to ensure that at least one official at all times has a clear view of the play. At least in this go around, there were no suspicious rules pulled seemingly out of the air a la Polamalu's "The INT that is not an INT" a couple weeks back or Brady's infamous tuck rule against Oakland.

In general, whining over officiating is crap. I'm an on-again-off-again member of the official Buccaneers BBS (about as quality as Reds.com), and the whining over there was absolutely unbearable following the playoff loss to Washington and Edell Shephard's dropped pass. Bucs fans can whine all they want about possession rules and catches, but it obscures the real issues, like poor offensive line blocking that led to two INTs on Simms and poor ball control that led to a fumble by Cadillac Williams. The bottom line is, teams determine outcomes of games by making plays. Seattle, even accounting for officiating, didn't make as many plays as Pittsburgh and they lost the Super Bowl because of it. There's nothing "tainted" about Pittsburgh's win -- they finished the game with more points than their opposition. Seattle had chances to score points that it left on the field with poor special teams play, poor clock management, and poor playcalling. Make a play.

The pity in all of this is that it is obscuring what should be a great moment for a great coach and human being in Bill Cowher, and giving a free pass to Mike Holmgren, who was (once again) outcoached in the Big Game. It's beyond moronic that they didn't run Shaun Alexander more than they did, and their clock management, as stated, was horrendous to end the 1st half. Last I checked, the officials didn't tell Hasselbeck to stand at the line for 20 seconds gesturing like he was suffering from some sort of psychosis while having a spare timeout and the clock ticking down.

traderumor
02-07-2006, 07:10 AM
The supporters of the offensive PI are wayyyyyyyyyyy overstating the contact. I don't even think that would be a foul in basketball.

savafan
02-07-2006, 08:44 AM
savafan is only pointing out that the rest of the nation sees it one way, and Steeler fans see it another. Deny it if you will, but the truth is the truth.

I'm dumbfounded over this macro. I'm not a Seahawk fan, or a Bengal fan for that matter. I had no vested interest in this game except to see a well played match up. The only people who can't seem to see what went on Sunday are Steeler fans. I'm happy for them that they got to see their team win a championship, but like someone else said, I'm sure even the Steeler players would probably have liked to have had it happen on the field and not by way of the officiating.

savafan
02-07-2006, 08:47 AM
Well, considering that sava thinks Hines Ward pushed off on all of the 10 passes thrown his way and is using the espn.com boards to guage the "heartbeat" of America (which is like using the mlb.com Reds board to get an objective read on Adam Dunn), methinks we have a severely different definition of "truth".



I never once sited the espn.com boards. I did site an article from espn.com, just like I sited articles from msn, slate, etc.

GAC
02-07-2006, 08:49 AM
I still say that any team/coach that doesn't realize it's a gadget play when the QB hands off to Randle-El, and allows them to perfectly execute the play for a TD, deserves to lose. I mean - C'mon! ;)

And to say that EVERY call went Pitt's way is simply playing fast and loose with the truth IMO.

I'm no fan of Pittsburgh either.... but I find this thread funny (and sad). :lol:

They were 7-5 at one point, and things were looking pretty dim for them. They run off 8 straight wins.. and 3 of them were away games during the post-season against teams that everyone predicted they would get their butts kicked.

Your predictions (or hopes) didnt come true.

Pittsburgh was just as much a victim of bad officiating as the rest (see Indy game) - give it a rest already.

savafan
02-07-2006, 08:49 AM
It's beyond moronic that they didn't run Shaun Alexander more than they did, and their clock management, as stated, was horrendous to end the 1st half. Last I checked, the officials didn't tell Hasselbeck to stand at the line for 20 seconds gesturing like he was suffering from some sort of psychosis while having a spare timeout and the clock ticking down.


Agreed, that was idiotic.

deltachi8
02-07-2006, 09:13 AM
savafan is only pointing out that the rest of the nation sees it one way, and Steeler fans see it another. Deny it if you will, but the truth is the truth.

okey dokey...

::smiles politely::

NJReds
02-07-2006, 09:22 AM
I realized this morning that the last three Sports Illustrated issues all featured the Steelers on the front cover:

Jan. 16 (Bettis)
Jan. 23 (Big Ben)
Jan. 30 (Bettis)

And obviously the next issue will feature the Steelers, too. (They can't put Bettis on again, can they?)

I wonder if any team has ever appeared on 4 consecutive issues of SI before? I assume Michael Jordan has pulled off what Bettis did (twice in three weeks.)

traderumor
02-07-2006, 09:27 AM
I still say that any team/coach that doesn't realize it's a gadget play when the QB hands off to Randle-El, and allows them to perfectly execute the play for a TD, deserves to lose. I mean - C'mon! ;)

And to say that EVERY call went Pitt's way is simply playing fast and loose with the truth IMO.

I'm no fan of Pittsburgh either.... but I find this thread funny (and sad). :lol:

They were 7-5 at one point, and things were looking pretty dim for them. They run off 8 straight wins.. and 3 of them were away games during the post-season against teams that everyone predicted they would get their butts kicked.

Your predictions (or hopes) didnt come true.

Pittsburgh was just as much a victim of bad officiating as the rest (see Indy game) - give it a rest already.
Just to clarify, all anyone has argued is that there were 4 or 5 very important calls that were under the scrutiny of instant replay, whether challenged or not, and the replays showed the calls to be highly questionable, if not just flat out wrong. One was rightly overturned, the others were not reviewable. No one has argued that EVERY call went to the Steelers, but the close, game changing calls did. I see no conspiracy, just bad referereeing.

Johnny Footstool
02-07-2006, 09:38 AM
In general, whining over officiating is crap.

Especially when you won the game (*cough* Indy *cough*).

Steeler fans claim everyone else (yes, EVERYONE else) is just bitter. However, they don't seem to mind dedicating thousand-word explanations about Kimo's "clean hit", why the refs calls against them in Indy were so very, very wrong and why the refs in the Super Bowl were virtually perfect. The rationalizations are flowing like warm Iron City beer. But like that yeasty swill, the bad taste won't go away. It's going to linger.

Krusty
02-07-2006, 09:46 AM
savafan is only pointing out that the rest of the nation sees it one way, and Steeler fans see it another. Deny it if you will, but the truth is the truth.

Everyone pretty much agrees that the officiating sucks. But to say Seattle lost the game to the officials is wrong. The gadget play in the fourth quarter killed them. Was that the officials fault? The officials didn't help Seattle at all. I won't argue that. But when the score was 14-10 in the third quarter, they had ample opportunity to take the lead and they didn't.

Krusty
02-07-2006, 09:50 AM
Come on...you know controversy sells papers. This "post-Super Bowl" period is one of the toughest for the national sports media, at least until the conference tournaments start up for college basketball. They're naturally going to take any excuse they can get to milk a few extra drops out of the NFL before the season comes to a close and the endless draft speculation begins.

The officiating in the game was poor -- hell, the officiating in the playoffs in general has been poor -- but officiating/umpiring/judging could always be better in sports. It's going to continue to BE poor until the NFL sets up more stringent paramaters on what constitutes various infractions, especially on the judgment calls such as holding and pass interferene, or puts more officials on the field to ensure that at least one official at all times has a clear view of the play. At least in this go around, there were no suspicious rules pulled seemingly out of the air a la Polamalu's "The INT that is not an INT" a couple weeks back or Brady's infamous tuck rule against Oakland.

In general, whining over officiating is crap. I'm an on-again-off-again member of the official Buccaneers BBS (about as quality as Reds.com), and the whining over there was absolutely unbearable following the playoff loss to Washington and Edell Shephard's dropped pass. Bucs fans can whine all they want about possession rules and catches, but it obscures the real issues, like poor offensive line blocking that led to two INTs on Simms and poor ball control that led to a fumble by Cadillac Williams. The bottom line is, teams determine outcomes of games by making plays. Seattle, even accounting for officiating, didn't make as many plays as Pittsburgh and they lost the Super Bowl because of it. There's nothing "tainted" about Pittsburgh's win -- they finished the game with more points than their opposition. Seattle had chances to score points that it left on the field with poor special teams play, poor clock management, and poor playcalling. Make a play.

The pity in all of this is that it is obscuring what should be a great moment for a great coach and human being in Bill Cowher, and giving a free pass to Mike Holmgren, who was (once again) outcoached in the Big Game. It's beyond moronic that they didn't run Shaun Alexander more than they did, and their clock management, as stated, was horrendous to end the 1st half. Last I checked, the officials didn't tell Hasselbeck to stand at the line for 20 seconds gesturing like he was suffering from some sort of psychosis while having a spare timeout and the clock ticking down.

Amen brother. I couldn't have said it any better.

savafan
02-07-2006, 09:53 AM
Everyone pretty much agrees that the officiating sucks. But to say Seattle lost the game to the officials is wrong. The gadget play in the fourth quarter killed them. Was that the officials fault? The officials didn't help Seattle at all. I won't argue that. But when the score was 14-10 in the third quarter, they had ample opportunity to take the lead and they didn't.

The score wouldn't have been 14-10 were it not for the officials. This is what you and Steeler nation, or whatever you guys call yourselves, aren't getting Krusty.

GIK
02-07-2006, 10:04 AM
No one is going to change anyone's mind on this, IMO. Let's not beat this horse to death please.

deltachi8
02-07-2006, 10:12 AM
Just a quick question about the holding call...can an OL hook the shoulder of the pash rusher after he has been beat?

No, I am not being a smart guy, its an honest question, because if he can, then, it wasnt a hold.

Puffy
02-07-2006, 10:22 AM
The supporters of the offensive PI are wayyyyyyyyyyy overstating the contact. I don't even think that would be a foul in basketball.

I'm not a Steeler fan - there were exactly three people in the endzone. The receiver, the CB and the ref. Jackson clearly extended his arm when the ball was in the air. The CB clearly was not only stopped dead in his tracks, but the push also caused him to be slightly lifted (as happens when someone pushes you against your will). It was directly in front of the official who had nothing else to look at besides those two players.

That was an easy call, and a correct one. To say it wasn't is clearly bias by those who don't like the Steelers. You can argue that the calls didn't go both ways, that the Steelers got more breaks, etc and I won't say a word. But to claim that wasn't interference isn't intellectually honest. Jackson extended his arm with the ball in the air and stopped the defender from being able to make a play.

savafan
02-07-2006, 10:27 AM
A lighthearted read about the Super Bowl:

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/3640680.html

Super Bowl factoids even ABC didn't offer

By NORMAN CHAD

Super Bowl Sunday had a little of everything: Terrible Towels, MVPs on parade, the Whopperettes, an instant-replay reversal, Cheesy Bites, "We have a Code Black" repeated and annoying Radio Shack ads, Satisfaction, a gadget-play touchdown, ABC's NFL swan song, The Bus' last ride, Fabio and, of course, a game for all ages.

Anyway, I took notes:

2:14 p.m. CST — Bill Belichick looked as comfortable on the pregame set as a turkey the night before Thanksgiving.

2:52 — Note to August Busch IV: You can "blah blah blah" all you want about Budweiser Select, but I'm only pushing Rolling Rock up the hill.

3:07 — I didn't know Jerome Bettis was from Detroit.

3:48 — Those Grey's Anatomy promos almost scared me back to radio.

4:02 — At my last MLS Cup party, we had a drinking game involving corner kicks.

4:23 — I don't know why, but I thought Belichick might eventually do some shadow puppets.

5:21 — Something tells me that future civilizations will look back at our Super Bowl ceremonial coin tosses with a degree of derision.

5:29 — The phone rings moments after kickoff — it's my second ex-wife, asking me what I'm doing. Man, she's got to let it go.

5:43 — Sadly, I realize that the most complex and rewarding relationship I've ever had as an adult is with John Madden.

5:51 — I used to have wavy locks like Troy Polamalu, but my co-workers at the cookie factory made me cut them.

5:59 — It's all about interior line play, my friends, interior line play. And turnovers.

6:16 — If Osama bin Laden were ever going to slip into America unnoticed, I'd bet it would be during the second quarter of the Super Bowl.

6:22 — Mike Holmgren calls his own plays. I tried that during my first marriage — it doesn't work.

6:26 — One drawback to HDTV — Bill Cowher's chin literally juts into your living room.

6:35 — Ben Roethlisberger reminds me of a taller, slower whirling dervish!

7:06 — The Rolling Stones were three-and-out. (A Don Mischer Production.)

7:18 — Actually, I'm surprised the Stones didn't miss their flight, considering Keith Richards often sets off metal detectors in airports he's not even in.

7:32 — One moment I'm in the kitchen getting Fritos, the next moment Willie Parker's in the secondary getting free.

7:40 — The game is two hours old, and I still can't believe the Colts aren't in it.

8:01 — Madden: "What so you think they were looking at that they made him take his pants down?" (That is uncut and verbatim — context not important.)

8:14 — Is Al Michaels really going to ESPN next season? That would be like Sinatra playing a Ramada Inn.

8:22 — TBS is running a Yes, Dear marathon, figuring that if you don't want to watch the Super Bowl, you really don't want to watch anything on TV.

8:28 — Antwaan Randle El to Hines Ward! I would have missed it if I hadn't set up a mini-fridge next to the beanbag chair.

8:33 — Hey, I love Matt Hasselbeck, but he keeps throwing picks and fumbling balls, he's going to be looking at careerbuilder.com sooner than later.

8:36 — Scratch the fumble — replay changed it.

8:36:30 — If they used instant replay back in the 1970s, I'd bet you Watergate plays out differently.

8:59 — The Steelers made three plays all day; the Knicks do that and lose by 15.

9:01 — Frankly, the Seahawks should have put their 12th man on the field. But the officials would have flagged them for it.

kbrake
02-07-2006, 10:28 AM
Not many people are saying that it wasnt pass interference we are arguing if your going to let guys play in weeks 1-20 then dont start calling cheap flags like that. As someone has already said that prolly wouldnt have been called in basketball. And to say Seattle had a chance to score and take the lead when it was 14-10 and didnt capitalize is a flat out lie. They had the ball at the one and that phantom hold called so by everyone not pulling for the Steelers took it away not a great play by the Steelers D. Joey Porter was right after the game agaisnt Indy and now Mike Holmgren is right.

M2
02-07-2006, 10:41 AM
The score wouldn't have been 14-10 were it not for the officials. This is what you and Steeler nation, or whatever you guys call yourselves, aren't getting Krusty.

I couldn't have cared less who won.

The game I saw was a finesse Seahawks club (which made the fatal early decision not to run between the tackles) trying to avoid the haymakers the Steelers threw their way.

IMO, best case scenario for Seattle is a 21-17 loss (minus that one holding call). If a penalty call is going to get you unhinged, then you're not really much of a threat to begin with. The Seahawks seemed to cave in when faced with a little adversity and flake out under pressure. That's a team that's going to lose a championship game.

What I saw is Pittsburgh deliver a knockout punch in the fourth quarter to a team with a glass chin. Seems to me that's where this contest was inevitably headed.

RFS62
02-07-2006, 10:47 AM
I'm not a Steeler fan - there were exactly three people in the endzone. The receiver, the CB and the ref. Jackson clearly extended his arm when the ball was in the air. The CB clearly was not only stopped dead in his tracks, but the push also caused him to be slightly lifted (as happens when someone pushes you against your will). It was directly in front of the official who had nothing else to look at besides those two players.

That was an easy call, and a correct one. To say it wasn't is clearly bias by those who don't like the Steelers. You can argue that the calls didn't go both ways, that the Steelers got more breaks, etc and I won't say a word. But to claim that wasn't interference isn't intellectually honest. Jackson extended his arm with the ball in the air and stopped the defender from being able to make a play.



Against incalculable odds, I completely agree. The ball was in the air. He pushed him off, right in front of the ref.

traderumor
02-07-2006, 11:01 AM
I'm not a Steeler fan - there were exactly three people in the endzone. The receiver, the CB and the ref. Jackson clearly extended his arm when the ball was in the air. The CB clearly was not only stopped dead in his tracks, but the push also caused him to be slightly lifted (as happens when someone pushes you against your will). It was directly in front of the official who had nothing else to look at besides those two players.

That was an easy call, and a correct one. To say it wasn't is clearly bias by those who don't like the Steelers. You can argue that the calls didn't go both ways, that the Steelers got more breaks, etc and I won't say a word. But to claim that wasn't interference isn't intellectually honest. Jackson extended his arm with the ball in the air and stopped the defender from being able to make a play.These are judgment calls, so calls of intellectual dishonesty is as ticky tack as that call was.

Fil3232
02-07-2006, 11:21 AM
I couldn't have cared less who won.

The game I saw was a finesse Seahawks club (which made the fatal early decision not to run between the tackles) trying to avoid the haymakers the Steelers threw their way.

IMO, best case scenario for Seattle is a 21-17 loss (minus that one holding call). If a penalty call is going to get you unhinged, then you're not really much of a threat to begin with. The Seahawks seemed to cave in when faced with a little adversity and flake out under pressure. That's a team that's going to lose a championship game.

What I saw is Pittsburgh deliver a knockout punch in the fourth quarter to a team with a glass chin. Seems to me that's where this contest was inevitably headed.

I'm a Bengals fan, but also a huge Big Ben fan dating back to his days at Miami University. Thus, I didn't really care who won the game. However, I saw it a lot differently.

The finesse label attached to the Seahawks is a misnomer to me. This is a team that ran the ball 25 times for a 5.5 avg. per carry. That seems like someone up front has to be getting physical.

And the Seahawks absolutely needed to come out throwing the ball to start the game. That's been the recipe that has destroyed the Steelers all year (1st Indy game, 2nd Cincy game, start of 3rd Cincy game). 'Blitzburgh's' D is at its best when it has the opponent in an obvious passing down and can pin its ears back and rush the passer from all angles. Seattle, on a whole, did a good job of mixing the run and pass and avoiding the sacks (and subsequent TOs) that ruined all the Steelers' previous playoff opponents.

This takes us to the 4th Q and Seattle about to cap off a devastating 97-yard drive to take a 17-14 lead. Instead, as had been beaten into the ground, the holding penalty occurs, Hasselbeck throws the INT, Randle-El throws the clinching TD.

I hate the argument how a 'championship' team should be able to overcome adversity. It's a cop-out 99% of the time. Every team overcomes adversity at some point, but it cannot overcome adversity 100% of the time. (I would say Seattle overcame adversity when they lost the NFL MVP in round 2 after 6 carries, or how they overcame a nullified TD in the 1st Q to put themselves in a position to take a 4th Q lead, etc.)

Let's reverse the argument and say Pitt is whistled for holding on the 3rd and 28 hail mary to Ward. If Pitt doesn't score and go on to win the game, is it fair to say Pitt folded after one holding call? I say absolutely not. Which brings me to...

Let's assume Seattle scores to take a 17-14 lead. Pittsburgh now gets the ball relatively deep in their own territory and must now ask Big Ben, who had barely shown a pulse all day, to lead them down the field to tie or take the lead. Maybe I'm naive, but I say big-time advantage to Seattle.

macro
02-07-2006, 11:29 AM
This thread is an excellent example of why a good friend of mine (Steelers fan) and I have not touched the subject of football in conversation since the Bengals-Steelers playoff game.

Tony Cloninger
02-07-2006, 11:33 AM
Deltachi8....i do not know what the rule is on the hook that took place by the RT which was called a hold.

I just think the ref saw the defender go down as if he was being held or dragged down. Now you can say that is human error and the illusion of a hold fooled the official. I have seen it happen many times in many football games in the past. I guess in such a critical call...IMO, the most critical call of all in the game... it would have been nice if a review could have happened. If you are going to use instant replay.... i guess you should be able to go all out in the Super Bowl... and use it 1 time for each team on a judgement call type play. Just like that one. But that is not going to happen and Hasselbeck still threw a bad pass that was INT. The WR was open...or looked open enough but the threw it to the wrong place. If the K had made at least 1 of the FG then maybe they could have played it conservative and it would have still been 16-14 with a FG.

Puffy
02-07-2006, 11:44 AM
These are judgment calls, so calls of intellectual dishonesty is as ticky tack as that call was.

OK.

So when a guy pushes off in front of the ref its a "judgment call" - forget the fact that the push off completely disallowed the defender to make any effort whatsoever to make a play - judgment call. Forget that the fact that anytime a defender or a receiver "extends" the arm its textbook interference - judgment call.

So what, he pushed off to gain an unfair advantage - judgment call.

M2
02-07-2006, 11:49 AM
I'm a Bengals fan, but also a huge Big Ben fan dating back to his days at Miami University. Thus, I didn't really care who won the game. However, I saw it a lot differently.

The finesse label attached to the Seahawks is a misnomer to me. This is a team that ran the ball 25 times for a 5.5 avg. per carry. That seems like someone up front has to be getting physical.

And the Seahawks absolutely needed to come out throwing the ball to start the game. That's been the recipe that has destroyed the Steelers all year (1st Indy game, 2nd Cincy game, start of 3rd Cincy game). 'Blitzburgh's' D is at its best when it has the opponent in an obvious passing down and can pin its ears back and rush the passer from all angles. Seattle, on a whole, did a good job of mixing the run and pass and avoiding the sacks (and subsequent TOs) that ruined all the Steelers' previous playoff opponents.

This takes us to the 4th Q and Seattle about to cap off a devastating 97-yard drive to take a 17-14 lead. Instead, as had been beaten into the ground, the holding penalty occurs, Hasselbeck throws the INT, Randle-El throws the clinching TD.

I hate the argument how a 'championship' team should be able to overcome adversity. It's a cop-out 99% of the time. Every team overcomes adversity at some point, but it cannot overcome adversity 100% of the time. (I would say Seattle overcame adversity when they lost the NFL MVP in round 2 after 6 carries, or how they overcame a nullified TD in the 1st Q to put themselves in a position to take a 4th Q lead, etc.)

Let's reverse the argument and say Pitt is whistled for holding on the 3rd and 28 hail mary to Ward. If Pitt doesn't score and go on to win the game, is it fair to say Pitt folded after one holding call? I say absolutely not. Which brings me to...

Let's assume Seattle scores to take a 17-14 lead. Pittsburgh now gets the ball relatively deep in their own territory and must now ask Big Ben, who had barely shown a pulse all day, to lead them down the field to tie or take the lead. Maybe I'm naive, but I say big-time advantage to Seattle.

I don't know what worked best against Pittsburgh during the season, but when you refuse to run your offense between the hashmarks in the first half then I say you've laid the groundwork for a bad day. It certainly didn't put points on the board.

Alexander impressed me and, IMO, Seattle woefully underused him. Pittsburgh basically pre-intimidated Seattle out of using its best weapon for much of the game.

I'll submit perhaps the gameplan you've suggested worked best for other teams because that's what they do best.

And Pittsburgh did overcome adversity in that game, though self-inflicted. It could have salted the game away in the 3rd quarter, but for that interception and ensuing touchdown.

This was always Billy Conn vs. Joe Louis. The Steelers were always going to get their chances to put the Seahawks away. It's the unavoidable consequence of the game. When they got the turnover in the 4th they pounced. When they got the ball back after that, they chewed up more than four minutes of game time and all of Seattle's timeouts.

The Steelers went 8-15 on 3rd down. The Seahawks went 5-17. What I saw was one team built to finish and another trying to survive. Seattle did a nice job of stringing it out, but the outcome, to me at least, never particularly seemed in doubt.

Johnny Footstool
02-07-2006, 12:01 PM
I don't know what worked best against Pittsburgh during the season, but when you refuse to run your offense between the hashmarks in the first half then I say you've laid the groundwork for a bad day.

Their game plan was beating Pittsburgh like a dirty rug through the entire first half.

Did you honestly feel like the Steelers outplayed the Seahawks?

NJReds
02-07-2006, 12:04 PM
So what, he pushed off to gain an unfair advantage - judgment call.

It is a judgement call. Did he push, or was his arm extended. Did he push off because the DB was holding onto him. Technically, any contact beyond 5 yards by the DB is "illegal".

In this case, the DB made contact w/the receiver as they ran toward the endzone. The official made the judgement that the contact was incidental.

He could've done the same thing with the play in the endzone. I'm not a Steeler fan or Seahawk fan. I thought that he should've let the call go, and it appeared that he was responding to the DB's complaint rather than making the call.

I had the same issue w/the Roethesburger TD run. The official first ran in to spot the ball short of the goal line -- then he raised his arms. What changed his mind - if Big Ben did get over the goal line, it was when he was in the air not on the ground.

Whether or not the officiating affected the outcome is irrelevant to me. The NFL has a bigger problem -- bad officiating in the playoffs and the Super Bowl. And it's worse when it's one-sided (Pitt v. Indy; NE v. Denver; Sea v. Pitt).

I don't know if instant replay is the problem, and officials are using it as a crutch. I don't know if "all-star" teams of officials for the playoffs is a problem (rather than keeping the regular season teams together)...or if they should just hire full-time officials. But the NFL has an image problem regarding officiating, and they'd be better off acting on it rather than hoping it just goes away.

SteelSD
02-07-2006, 12:23 PM
I never once sited the espn.com boards. I did site an article from espn.com, just like I sited articles from msn, slate, etc.

You're right. My apologies. That was macro (ack!).

BTW...

http://img70.imageshack.us/img70/527/plane5gg.jpg

Hopefully, we can put that one to bed now.

M2
02-07-2006, 12:27 PM
Their game plan was beating Pittsburgh like a dirty rug through the entire first half.

Did you honestly feel like the Steelers outplayed the Seahawks?

You mean the first half where the Steelers outscored the Seahawks 7-3?

I wasn't all that impressed by the Pittsburgh offense, but Seattle wasn't doing much of anything to vex the Pittsburgh defense. It was low percentage football. Sooner or later you're going to miss when you're constantly throwing to the outside and your drive is going to stop before it gets much of anywhere.

If Seattle had been pounding the ball up the middle, but not scoring I'd have a different take. In that scenario you're putting a down payment on the other team's pain in the second half. Seattle instead came out with a slap-fight offense that wasn't going to wear anyone down.

The Seahawk's two scoring drives went 30 and 20 yards. They only went 40+ yards twice. One was the last drive of the game where the Steeler defense was just trying to eat up the clock. The other was the drive that ended in catastrophe for Seattle with the penalty/sack/interception sequence. It was the best the Seahawk offense played all day (and no surprise that Alexander ran for 28 yards on that drive). Meanwhile Pittsburgh had drives of 59, 75, 53 and 56 yards. Seattle wasn't much more than a gnat the Steelers shooed away most of that game.

So yeah, I think the Steelers outplayed Seattle and fairly substantially. They were the only team on that field capable of doing much damage to the other.

Puffy
02-07-2006, 12:30 PM
It is a judgement call. Did he push, or was his arm extended. Did he push off because the DB was holding onto him. Technically, any contact beyond 5 yards by the DB is "illegal".

In this case, the DB made contact w/the receiver as they ran toward the endzone. The official made the judgement that the contact was incidental.

He could've done the same thing with the play in the endzone. I'm not a Steeler fan or Seahawk fan. I thought that he should've let the call go, and it appeared that he was responding to the DB's complaint rather than making the call.

I had the same issue w/the Roethesburger TD run. The official first ran in to spot the ball short of the goal line -- then he raised his arms. What changed his mind - if Big Ben did get over the goal line, it was when he was in the air not on the ground.

Whether or not the officiating affected the outcome is irrelevant to me. The NFL has a bigger problem -- bad officiating in the playoffs and the Super Bowl. And it's worse when it's one-sided (Pitt v. Indy; NE v. Denver; Sea v. Pitt).

I don't know if instant replay is the problem, and officials are using it as a crutch. I don't know if "all-star" teams of officials for the playoffs is a problem (rather than keeping the regular season teams together)...or if they should just hire full-time officials. But the NFL has an image problem regarding officiating, and they'd be better off acting on it rather than hoping it just goes away.

NJ,

Do me a favor - if you are watching Sportscenter or the like and they show that replay just watch the DB. When Jackson (who is a good, good receiver whom I like) extends the arm, watch the body of the DB. You'll see that the push causes him to be lifted slightly off the ground.

If you watch that and see that, then come back and we'll discuss this some more - cause I really don't see how impeding the path of the defender to gain that seperation can be anything but a penalty - and if you still disagree, thats cool, but if you could, just watch for that.

Puffy
02-07-2006, 12:33 PM
And by the way, just to clarify - I think the officiating this entire season was putrid. Absolutely terrible and the Giants got screwed on many occasions this year by missed calls or by call after call seemingly going against them.

The Rothlisberger TD - tough call either way, but the Official seemed to be marking the spot then all of a sudden declares TD, so that was rough. The hold I think was touchy, and the tackle call on Hasselback was horrible.

But that was, no doubt, interference.

SteelSD
02-07-2006, 12:40 PM
Their game plan was beating Pittsburgh like a dirty rug through the entire first half.

Did you honestly feel like the Steelers outplayed the Seahawks?

You think the New England Patriots cared about a word like "outplayed" when they got pushed around by the Steelers and had their offense throttled but scored two Special Teams TD's in the 2001-2002 AFC Championship game en route to their first Super Bowl victory?

New England netted 15 first downs to Pittsburgh's 23. Pittsburgh put up 306 yards to NE's 259. And Pittsburgh lost 24-17 after their QB made a couple stupid mistakes late in the ballgame. Shades of Super Bowl XL.

savafan
02-07-2006, 12:41 PM
http://img70.imageshack.us/img70/527/plane5gg.jpg

Hopefully, we can put that one to bed now.

That hurts my eyes to look at.

RFS62
02-07-2006, 12:41 PM
Arguing over which team in this game played better is like arguing which tastes better, haggis or liver and onions.

KronoRed
02-07-2006, 12:44 PM
That hurts my eyes to look at.
I can see the outline of someone in the backround

We have our suspect

Johnny Footstool
02-07-2006, 12:51 PM
You mean the first half where the Steelers outscored the Seahawks 7-3?

Yep. The same half in which Seattle outgained the Steelers, then lost a touchdown on a questionable-at-best call (see previous 1000 posts).

The same half in which the Steelers got lucky on their scoring drive with TWO scrambling, seat-of-your-pants, chuck-and-duck third down plays, then got a gift touchdown from the line judge.

I guess if you just look at the score and don't take into account their actual on-field play, it does look like the Steelers did pretty well in the first half.

Me, I look at it and see a team that got knocked around but managed to survive because it landed a couple of wild, eyes-closed haymakers and ended up on the favorable side of the penalty flag quite a few times.

Johnny Footstool
02-07-2006, 12:56 PM
You think the New England Patriots cared about a word like "outplayed" when they got pushed around by the Steelers and had their offense throttled but scored two Special Teams TD's in the 2001-2002 AFC Championship game en route to their first Super Bowl victory?

I never contended that they did. Nor did I ask the Steelers if they outplayed the Seahawks.

I asked M2, because he seemed to hold that opinion.

So the outcome of a four year old AFC championship game is not relevant to that discussion.

savafan
02-07-2006, 12:59 PM
Arguing over which team in this game played better is like arguing which tastes better, haggis or liver and onions.

That's easy. Both teams played like crap. The only people who really deserved to win that game were Hines Ward and Willie Parker. Randle El should have been the starting QB for what it's worth too.

deltachi8
02-07-2006, 12:59 PM
The Steelres were outplayed in the first half.

And Jimmy Cracked corn or something too...

Roy Tucker
02-07-2006, 01:06 PM
Arguing over which team in this game played better is like arguing which tastes better, haggis or liver and onions.
I myself am more partial to Slátur, an Icelandic dish similar to haggis.

Or perhaps nakami-jiru, an Okinawan pork tripe soup.

I recall watching a game earlier in the year (Bengals?) where a DB was returning an interception, he was running on the heels of a blocker, and a opposing player made what I thought was a nice play and went low right through the blocker's legs and took down the runner.

He got a PF flag as well. I thought it was a load of hooey and told my TV set so. It didn't listen.

deltachi8
02-07-2006, 01:18 PM
"I think all Scotish food is based on a dare"

M2
02-07-2006, 01:23 PM
Yep. The same half in which Seattle outgained the Steelers, then lost a touchdown on a questionable-at-best call (see previous 1000 posts).

The same half in which the Steelers got lucky on their scoring drive with TWO scrambling, seat-of-your-pants, chuck-and-duck third down plays, then got a gift touchdown from the line judge.

I guess if you just look at the score and don't take into account their actual on-field play, it does look like the Steelers did pretty well in the first half.

Me, I look at it and see a team that got knocked around but managed to survive because it landed a couple of wild, eyes-closed haymakers and ended up on the favorable side of the penalty flag quite a few times.

I always thought the yardage game in football was a blind alley. Bad teams spend entire seasons going 20-30 yards and punting. A bad offensive plan, like the one Seattle employed in the Super Bowl, will run out of steam before it goes much of anywhere.

What's hard is driving the 40+ yards you normally need to go to score points. Seattle didn't show any ability to do that until extremely late in the game. By that time Pittsburgh had already put three haymakers into the Seahawks and still had plenty of gameclock to launch another (which it did).

Seattle did well for a gandy dancer, but teams like that lose Super Bowls - think Redskins-Dolphins II and Giants-Broncos.

Seattle didn't knock anyone around. It danced around the edges and hoped that one substantial drive would be enough to win it a game. Pittsburgh landed those haymakers because it could and because it softened up Seattle's defense by attacking it instead of running from it.

Had the Seahawks unleashed the best offensive player and tried to force their way down field rather than sneak there it might have been a very different game. Unfortunately they only gave the league MVP 22 touches.

What I saw in the first half was Pittsburgh stalking Seattle.

Chip R
02-07-2006, 01:29 PM
I can see the outline of someone in the backround

We have our suspect

Bob Boone?

Krusty
02-07-2006, 01:29 PM
Read John Clayton's article and you'll see that it was more of Seattle's performance than the officiating that cost the Seahawks the game:

Mistakes doom Seahawks in Super BowlBy John Clayton
ESPN.com
Archive

Coaches say there are five key plays that decide a football game. The Seahawks blew at least eight in Super Bowl XL -- costing them as many as 20 points -- and lost to the Steelers 21-10.

In many ways, this was the most painful of Super Bowl losses. For two weeks, the Seahawks were confident about their ability and game plan, and they were right. For a while, they looked like the better team. Matt Hasselbeck came out and moved the football with quick passes to Darrell Jackson in the first quarter. Receivers were open. The defense continued its shutout streak in the first quarter, holding the Steelers' offense to three three-and-out possessions. Against the Redskins and Panthers in the NFC playoffs, the Seahawks' quick, undersized defense had a combined seven three-and-outs to start playoff games.

Seattle quarterback Matt Hasselbeck and coach Mike Holmgren were stoic in defeat.

Then came the mistakes, and the Seahawks didn't have answers.

"We had a great week of practice, and we did things very, very well," coach Mike Holmgren said. "There were some guys who made some great plays and great catches out there, but we did drop the ball uncharacteristically. And the thing that bothers me as much as anything was the penalties. We had a touchdown called back. We had a catch down to the 1-yard line called back. We had a pretty good punt return called back, and that's tough. You can't overcome those things."

Holmgren teams normally are among the best at not committing penalties. In Super Bowl XL, the Seahawks had seven infractions for 70 yards, and they all came at key times and left the Seahawks scratching their heads. In the regular season, Seattle averaged six penalties per game but for far fewer yards.

"That's the way it is when you are going against the world," Jackson said. "It seemed like all our big plays were overturned or called back. When you are going against the world, that's the way it is."

Jackson was involved in four wacky plays. He started the game red-hot, with five catches for 50 yards, the first five-catch first quarter in Super Bowl history. But worlds started colliding for Jackson.



AP Photo/Elaine Thompson
At the end, Seattle quarterback Matt Hasselbeck could only watch the clock tick away.In the first quarter, the Seahawks had a third-and-6 at the Steelers' 41. Hasselbeck hit Jackson with an 18-yard completion to the Steelers' 23, but it was called back by a holding penalty against guard Chris Gray. That killed a potential scoring drive and led to a punt.

Later in the first quarter, Hasselbeck threw a 16-yard touchdown pass to Jackson, but Jackson had shoved safety Chris Hope slightly with his right hand and drew an interference penalty. He couldn't believe it.

"I don't think I touched him," Jackson said. "I was very surprised when I got the call."

Replays showed Jackson's hand on Hope. It's safe to say the officials were calling them close in Super Bowl XL. The play cost the Seahawks four points when they failed to get a first down after the penalty and settled for a 47-yard Josh Brown field goal and a 3-0 lead.

Jackson caught two balls out of bounds in the final minute of the first half, one that could have been a touchdown and another that would have put the ball inside the 5. Instead, they settled for a missed 54-yard field goal attempt at the half and trailed 7-3 at the break.

"The ball hung up a little bit on the one throw, but maybe [I] could have done something to stay in bounds," Jackson said.

Joey Porter of the Steelers must have been smiling. During the week, in response to what he thought was a verbal slam against the Steelers, Porter called Jerramy Stevens soft, unwilling to block, a first-round bust and his "huckleberry." In Super Bowl XL, Stevens dropped three key passes.

“ I'm not sure they were mental mistakes as much as just mistakes. I guess it wasn't our day that way. You can't make the mistakes we made and expect to win the game against a good team like that. ”
— Seattle quarterback Matt Hasselbeck
One drop would have been a 20-yard completion to the Steelers' 27 on a third down early in the second quarter when Stevens had gotten behind a safety. Another would have been a 29-yard completion to the Steelers' 8 on the first possession of the third quarter. He dropped another one with four minutes left in the third quarter. After the game, reporters wondered whether the national attention affected his game.

"It doesn't matter what anyone thinks," Stevens said. "The bottom line is I didn't get it done. It was frustrating because we didn't play the way we were capable of playing. Obviously, it was frustrating. We just lost the Super Bowl."

Fittingly, Stevens -- who finished with only three catches for 25 yards and a touchdown -- had Porter standing over him while Stevens was on the ground at the end of the game.

"I don't need to think of anything," Stevens said of Porter. "He is on the winning team, and that's all that matters."

However, Stevens can't take the blame for the play that might have been the most critical of the game. With Seattle trailing 14-10 late in the third quarter, Hasselbeck was directing what looked to be a 98-yard scoring drive. Stevens caught a 17-yard pass to the Steelers' 2, but right tackle Sean Locklear was called for his second holding penalty of the game.

The drive came to an end when Hasselbeck didn't spot cornerback Ike Taylor on a throw to Jackson. Taylor made the interception, thwarting the scoring opportunity and preserving the Steelers' lead. Four plays later, Antwaan Randle El hit Hines Ward with a 43-yard touchdown pass on a reverse.

If the penalties and drops weren't enough, kicker Josh Brown missed two long field goals -- for 54 and 50 yards. He was 5-for-8 on long kicks this year. The Super Bowl attempts -- had he made them -- could have kept the Seahawks in the game.

"I'm not sure they were mental mistakes as much as just mistakes," Hasselbeck said of the Seahawks' offensive woes. "I guess it wasn't our day that way. You can't make the mistakes we made and expect to win the game against a good team like that."

This loss won't be easy to get over for the Seahawks and Holmgren. Remember, when Holmgren and the Packers lost the Super Bowl to the Denver Broncos, it took him a month to get out of the funk. He punished himself mentally for what he thought was his inability to convince the Packers that the Broncos were that good.

That's one reason he felt so good about his team's chances in this game. His team peaked during Super Bowl week. Wednesday's practice was one of the team's best and sharpest. The passing was crisp. The tempo was phenomenal. The defense was flying around the field, and that carried over to a first quarter in which the Seahawks defense pitched a shutout.

But the penalties and the dropped passes and the questionable officiating calls nagged at Seattle all game. Holmgren was so mad about Ben Roethlisberger's controversial 1-yard touchdown run that he spent as much time arguing with officials while heading to the locker room at halftime as he did talking to ABC's Suzy Kolber.

"I'm more disappointed in how we played in certain areas," Holmgren said. "I think we were careless with the football, and we had too many penalties. And that combination against a great team like the Steelers is not a good combination, so I think that's pretty much the story of the game."

Hasselbeck admitted his interception in the fourth quarter came when he was trying to force a pass because the Seahawks were trailing and were trying to make a play. It killed him to think how many points the Seahawks -- the league's highest-scoring offense -- left on the field.

"There were a lot of them," Hasselbeck said. "We've done a great job of scoring this year and scoring in the red zone. We had a touchdown taken away from us. We had a ball on the 1-yard line. That's unfortunate."

It cost the Seahawks their first Super Bowl.

John Clayton is a senior writer for ESPN.com.

SunDeck
02-07-2006, 01:33 PM
Yet another reason why baseball is superior to football. In a seven game series it's pretty tough to say the team that played better lost.
I wonder if the NFL has considered the revenue of a best out of three series. Sure, some players might just die, but think of the money it would make.

NJReds
02-07-2006, 01:34 PM
I guess there was no problem. The NFL is satisfied.


That (questionable calls) led to plenty of public scrutiny of the officiating, but Greg Aiello, the NFL's vice president of public relations said Monday the league is satisfied with the performance of its officials during the postseason.

"It was a very well-officiated playoffs, including the Super Bowl," he said.

KronoRed
02-07-2006, 01:35 PM
Yet another reason why baseball is superior to football. In a seven game series it's pretty tough to say the team that played better lost.
I wonder if the NFL has considered the revenue of a best out of three series. Sure, some players might just die, but think of the money it would make.
Cash over health issues :D

Word

NJReds
02-07-2006, 01:48 PM
Yet another reason why baseball is superior to football. In a seven game series it's pretty tough to say the team that played better lost.
I wonder if the NFL has considered the revenue of a best out of three series. Sure, some players might just die, but think of the money it would make.

The only one that comes to mind is the Dom Denkinger call in the KC-St. Louis World Series (game 6) in 1985.

traderumor
02-07-2006, 01:59 PM
OK.

So when a guy pushes off in front of the ref its a "judgment call" - forget the fact that the push off completely disallowed the defender to make any effort whatsoever to make a play - judgment call. Forget that the fact that anytime a defender or a receiver "extends" the arm its textbook interference - judgment call.

So what, he pushed off to gain an unfair advantage - judgment call.

That is correct. Your judgment said the pushoff gave an unfair advantage. I watched the same play several times and came to a different conclusion with no more known mitigating factors than you have. That's the way it is with officiating and reviewing calls--there's a lot of personal, subjective opinion, so it is a bit much (actually a lot much) to say you are the objective one and those who don't agree with you are intellectually dishonest. It was a close call, but I and many, many others did not see the play the way you did (judgment vs. judgment) and do not agree that the level of contact reached pass interference.

Fil3232
02-07-2006, 02:14 PM
I always thought the yardage game in football was a blind alley. Bad teams spend entire seasons going 20-30 yards and punting. A bad offensive plan, like the one Seattle employed in the Super Bowl, will run out of steam before it goes much of anywhere.

What's hard is driving the 40+ yards you normally need to go to score points. Seattle didn't show any ability to do that until extremely late in the game. By that time Pittsburgh had already put three haymakers into the Seahawks and still had plenty of gameclock to launch another (which it did).

Seattle did well for a gandy dancer, but teams like that lose Super Bowls - think Redskins-Dolphins II and Giants-Broncos.

Seattle didn't knock anyone around. It danced around the edges and hoped that one substantial drive would be enough to win it a game. Pittsburgh landed those haymakers because it could and because it softened up Seattle's defense by attacking it instead of running from it.

Had the Seahawks unleashed the best offensive player and tried to force their way down field rather than sneak there it might have been a very different game. Unfortunately they only gave the league MVP 22 touches.

What I saw in the first half was Pittsburgh stalking Seattle.

I think you are giving Pittsburgh way too much credit. Pittsburgh was inept in the first half. I hardly think they were stalking anybody. In fact, the majority of their yards came from a Ward reverse and a Roethlisberger wounded-duck that inexplicitly found its way past the Seattle secondary. Hardly plays that sent messages of toughness and the ability to grind the Seattle defense down.

They didn't soften up the Seattle defense at all. They ran at them twice, got stuffed, didn't complete a 3rd pass, and finally punted the whole first quarter. Their gameplan was miserable in the first half and didnt get much better in the second half (save for K. Whisenhunt calling the trick play at the right time.) They got fortunate Seattle's 3rd string strong safety was woefully out of posistion on Parker's TD run to start the third or they would have been back to the same gameplan as the first half.

Seattle, on the other hand, came out throwing which is what it needed to do to open up the running lanes for Alexander. And the running lanes were there as evidenced by the 5.5 avg. yards per carry.Unfortunately, as stated before, Seattle couldn't overcome drops and dubious penalties.

Johnny Footstool
02-07-2006, 02:40 PM
What I saw in the first half was Pittsburgh stalking Seattle.

Like Clouseau stalking Kato.

M2
02-07-2006, 03:09 PM
I think you are giving Pittsburgh way too much credit. Pittsburgh was inept in the first half.

Offensively yes. So were the Seahawks. Neither team drew a lot of blood in the first half, but what the Steelers did, to my eyes, was soften up the Seahawks so that they could pile up 155 yards on the ground in the second half. It's not sexy, but it almost always works if you've got the patience, will and muscle to do it.


I hardly think they were stalking anybody. In fact, the majority of their yards came from a Ward reverse and a Roethlisberger wounded-duck that inexplicitly found its way past the Seattle secondary. Hardly plays that sent messages of toughness and the ability to grind the Seattle defense down.

You pay too much attention to the window dressing. Pittsburgh did quality bodywork in that half.


They didn't soften up the Seattle defense at all.

Then explain the 227 yards of offense they racked up in the second half. Did they just try harder? No, they simply pushed on the defense enough to open it up. Football's a simple, brutal game.


They got fortunate Seattle's 3rd string strong safety was woefully out of posistion on Parker's TD run to start the third or they would have been back to the same gameplan as the first half.

Safety's are out of position and/or miss tackles all the time. The real trick is punching the hole to spring your back in the first place.

And, far as I could tell, Pittsburgh's gameplan never deviated. The ran their offense at the Seahawks, waited for the payoff and then ran a few wrinkles when Seattle reacted to what Pittsburgh was doing.


Seattle, on the other hand, came out throwing which is what it needed to do to open up the running lanes for Alexander. And the running lanes were there as evidenced by the 5.5 avg. yards per carry.Unfortunately, as stated before, Seattle couldn't overcome drops and dubious penalties.

Let's see, this plan netted only one sustained drive the entire game and you're defending it as a good idea?

I'll guarantee you that if you asked Bill Cowher what he didn't want Seattle to do it was to punish his defense with Alexander and then to spring big plays off the play-action fake. He was probably doing a jig inside when he saw Seattle picking at the edges of the field. I know my initial thought was that it was the kind of sissified football that Super Bowl losers invariably play.

The 5.5 yards per carry only points out how ridiculous it was to throw chains around Alexander. He only got 20 carries, never found the endzone and the Seahawks walked out with 10 points to show for the night (might have had 17 if not for that one holding flag). That's 5.5 yards per carry of kissing your sister.

Seattle ran as afterthought and not nearly enough to win. Alexander and the offensive line could have opened up running lanes for Alexander. Seattle didn't try it and it found out what happens when you try to be cute.

The game featured two of the best running teams in the NFL (neither club was anything special in the air). Pittsburgh won the running battle and, not surprisingly, the game.

M2
02-07-2006, 03:32 PM
Like Clouseau stalking Kato.

It worked better than the beer garden death brassiere approach the Seahawks tried.

WMR
02-07-2006, 03:41 PM
He's no Taylor Twellman though.

Twellman had a nice game against Norway's C team, but he isn't in the same area code as Brian McBride.

Johnny Footstool
02-07-2006, 03:56 PM
And, far as I could tell, Pittsburgh's gameplan never deviated. The ran their offense at the Seahawks, waited for the payoff and then ran a few wrinkles when Seattle reacted to what Pittsburgh was doing.

Their execution hinged on fluke plays. I don't think their game plan included letting their quarterback nearly get sacked on third down only to have him scramble and shovel an underhanded pass on one occasion and have the Grant Wistrom trip over his own feet en route to the sack on another occasion. That's Clouseau slipping on a bar of soap, falling into a suit of armor, dislodging a battle axe, and using it to cut loose the chandelier and send it crashing down on Kato's head.

westofyou
02-07-2006, 03:58 PM
Twellman had a nice game against Norway's C team, but he isn't in the same area code as Brian McBride.
No doubt... a 25 year old in the MSL are not the same as 25 year olds in Premier League.

M2
02-07-2006, 03:59 PM
Twellman had a nice game against Norway's C team, but he isn't in the same area code as Brian McBride.

McBride's going to be 34 by the time the cup rolls around and he's never scored anywhere the way Twellman has in MLS the past two years.

You only get a whack at the World Cup once every four years (if you're lucky). I'd place my bet on the young legs (Donovan, Beasely, Twellman) and bring in McBride as a substitute for after the kids have run the defense ragged.

Caveat Emperor
02-07-2006, 03:59 PM
No doubt... a 25 year old in the MSL are not the same as 25 year olds in Premier League.

Mostly because, usually, if the 25 year old in MLS was good enough to play in the Premiership, they WOULD be playing in England and not in the United States.

WMR
02-07-2006, 04:05 PM
Here's how I'd use McBride:

First game, against Czech Republic (OUCH) he should start. Depending on how things go, play him between 65-75 mins. At this point, what US soccer fans have to understand is that we have a BIG dearth of proven goal scorers. Eddie Johnson has been great, and is very young with young legs, but he's been unable to stay consistently healthy. If he's at 100% come WC, he'll start next to McBride, no question. At that 65-75 minute mark, though, I would agree with you that, at this point, Twellman is probably the first forward off the bench. McBride is used to logging lots of minutes and his level of fitness, playing in the EPL, is still very high, his age notwithstanding.

Beasley and Donovan will both start, obviously.

Here's my starting 11 for the WC:

Keller
Cherundolo -- Onyewu -- Pope/Berhalter(that's a toss-up at this point although I'd probably give the nod to Berhalter at the moment with Pope as first man off the bench -- Bocanegra
Midfield: This is another tough one, For the right winger at this point, you probably going to see Ralston, but if Clint Dempsey can play like he did vs. Norway in the remaining matches then I'd love to see him step up to that role, Donovan, Reyna, Beasley
Forwards: Eddie Johnson, Brian McBride

WMR
02-07-2006, 04:08 PM
The thing about the WC is how it tests your depth.

You can expect Hejduk, Pope, Twellman, Ralston, O'Brien (that's another guy who could start, if he is healthy in time for WC), among others, to log significant minutes

WMR
02-07-2006, 04:09 PM
Twellman has been such a no-show at the International level that we really need to see similar performances against better opponents. The Norway game was great, for a number of reasons, and he has come on as of late, and is great in the MLS, but he has been spotty in Int. competition, although we need another goal-scorer BAD.

I'd like to see the US play a modified 4-4-2.

Basically a
4-1-2-1-2

You've got your 4 defenders. Claudio Reyna, an excellent tackler and field general, is your defensive midfielder.

Beasley on the left; whoever on the right.

Donovan as the back-forward:

Feeding the ball to McBride & Johnson

That's sort of how they run things at times and I LIKE IT A LOT. ;)

M2
02-07-2006, 04:11 PM
Their execution hinged on fluke plays. I don't think their game plan included letting their quarterback nearly get sacked on third down only to have him scramble and shovel an underhanded pass on one occasion and have the Grant Wistrom trip over his own feet en route to the sack on another occasion. That's Clouseau slipping on a bar of soap, falling into a suit of armor, dislodging a battle axe, and using it to cut loose the chandelier and send it crashing down on Kato's head.

And yet they stuck to the same plan and in the second half the started to push the chains. That's what good running teams do. They put in the early work, find the soft spots and then croak you.

Their gameplan was to win the ground game and they did it. You win that battle and good things like Super Bowl wins happen. Simple, brutal game and the simpler, more brutal team beat the club that decided to don the fancypants.

WMR
02-07-2006, 04:14 PM
McBride's going to be 34 by the time the cup rolls around and he's never scored anywhere the way Twellman has in MLS the past two years.

McBride has 10 goals in the EPL this year. That's among the tops in the league. Scoring 10 goals in the MLS might equate to one EPL goal. The talent level is that disparate.

Against the tall Czechs, we desperately need his precision in the air. 34 ain't too old for a striker if he's smart with his touches.

Joseph
02-07-2006, 04:22 PM
The better team in the Superbowl? Seattle.

The Superbowl winner? Pittsburgh.

History only remembers the winners, not the best team. It's rare that it works out that the lesser team wins, but it does happen.

Now can we all talk baseball and forget this game that means nothing to the true sport that is baseball?

Football is filler. Something to do when real men aren't competing during the heat of summer. Football is nothing compared to baseball.

Let's talk baseball.

Let's forget this mumbo jumbo.

Let's talk baseball.

M2
02-07-2006, 04:31 PM
Mostly because, usually, if the 25 year old in MLS was good enough to play in the Premiership, they WOULD be playing in England and not in the United States.

McBride didn't get there until he was 31. Meanwhile Twellman's been far more dominant in the league where McBride spent most of his professional career.


Twellman has been such a no-show at the International level that we really need to see similar performances against better opponents. The Norway game was great, for a number of reasons, and he has come on as of late, and is great in the MLS, but he has been spotty in Int. competition, although we need another goal-scorer BAD.

I'd like to see the US play a modified 4-4-2.

Basically a
4-1-2-1-2

You've got your 4 defenders. Claudio Reyna, an excellent tackler and field general, is your defensive midfielder.

Beasley on the left; whoever on the right.

Donovan as the back-forward:

Feeding the ball to McBride & Johnson

That's sort of how they run things at times and I LIKE IT A LOT.

Swap out McBride for Twellman and I mostly agree (though we'll see if Reyna's got the legs for it). I've always maintained the U.S. won't truly break through until it figures out how to attack more consistently. You've got to marry style to temperament.

Anyway, McBride strikes me a lot like Fernando Morientes. He's still dangerous in bursts, but what you really need is for guys like Donovan, Beasely, Twellman and Johnson to spend the next few months getting comfortable with where to find each other. They're the more consistently dangerous players. I'd aim to have McBride go hard for 20-30 minutes.


McBride has 10 goals in the EPL this year. That's among the tops in the league. Scoring 10 goals in the MLS might equate to one EPL goal. The talent level is that disparate.

Against the tall Czechs, we desperately need his precision in the air. 34 ain't too old for a striker if he's smart with his touches.

All I know is that Twellman's scoring in MLS like no one before him, including McBride. What he'd do in the Premiership is pure conjecture. Where the two share a similar point of refence, Twellman's done better.

I hear what you're saying about the Czechs, but do you think the U.S. can beat them in the air? If it comes down to set pieces, I figure that's a U.S. loss. I'd make 'em run.

I still prefer McBride using his smarts and precision against defenders who've been worn down. FWIW, I thought McBride was underused in 1998. I like youth in the attack.

WMR
02-07-2006, 04:41 PM
Cool, M2 i started a thread about WC stuff, i posted some stuff there i'd be interested to hear your insight on

Betterread
02-07-2006, 06:41 PM
McBride has 10 goals in the EPL this year. That's among the tops in the league. Scoring 10 goals in the MLS might equate to one EPL goal. The talent level is that disparate.

Against the tall Czechs, we desperately need his precision in the air. 34 ain't too old for a striker if he's smart with his touches.

I really respect McBride's skill set matched with his commitment and workrate. He is a tremendous representative of the US team and gives consistently strong performances for Fulham. Twellman has not proven himself on the same level as McBride. He has the potential to do so and the WC 2006 would be a great place for him to realize his potential.

savafan
02-07-2006, 11:00 PM
http://www.thenewstribune.com/sports/story/5509834p-4965313c.html

JOHN MCGRATH; THE NEWS TRIBUNE
Published: February 7th, 2006 02:30 AM

DETROIT – Say this for Detroit: No longer can it be called The City that Never Sweeps.

On Monday, as tens of thousands of tourists headed for the airport, downtown Detroit showed no visible hangover from the world’s largest 10-block party.

Broken bottles, empty cans, and discarded food containers already were off the sidewalks. Patches of snow sparkled in the sun.

The major cleanup project remaining after Super Bowl XL, it seems, belongs to the NFL, whose task over the next few days will be to debunk conspiracy theories.

You’ve heard the accusations: The league favored the Steelers because owner Dan Rooney belongs to the old-boy network that pulls strings for commissioner Paul Tagliabue …

The league favored the Steelers because Jerome Bettis’ return to his hometown was an easy-to-follow saga for indifferent television viewers in faraway places …

The league favored the Steelers because it is headquartered in New York, and thus harbors an East Coast bias against West Coast markets such as Seattle …

The league favored the Steelers because their throwback jerseys are way cooler than any officially licensed Seahawks apparel to make cash registers go ka-ching …

While all of this is so much hokum – how was it that the NFL’s aversion to West Coast champions didn’t prevent the San Francisco 49ers from winning four Super Bowls between 1985 and 1995? – it can’t be denied that officials assigned by the NFL made one atrocious call that cost the Seahawks a touchdown, and another bad call that prevented Seattle from attempting, at the very least, a routine field goal.

Coach Mike Holmgren was as reluctant to point fingers Monday morning as he was in the postgame interview compound Sunday night. His tone on both occasions was diplomatic.

But Holmgren on Monday was candid about one aspect of Super Bowl XL: Pittsburgh’s conspicuous home-field advantage.

The Seahawks understood the hostile climate that awaited them in Ford Field. Days before kickoff, corporate tickets available to league business associates living in places like Dallas, Chicago, New York and Los Angeles suddenly showed up on eBay. Weighing a weekend trip to Detroit to watch the Seahawks and Steelers against making some easy money on an Internet auction, those tickets wound up in the hands of Steelers fans.

But it wasn’t until the pregame introduction of former Super Bowl MVP winners that the intensity of the Pittsburgh faction become fully evident. While most of the MVPs heard polite applause, Steelers’ icons Lynn Swann and Franco Harris were treated to a heroes’ welcome. Of the 68,206 fans on hand, it seemed as though 60,000 of them waved “Terrible Towels.”

Holmgren had more on his mind Sunday night than the emotional makeup of the audience. After the Seahawks’ 21-10 defeat, however, he talked with his grown children.

“They were pretty emotional – their father had lost a football game,” said Holmgren.

OK, coach, we’ll consider the source.

Their beef?

“Steelers towels were on sale at every souvenir stand in the stadium,” Holmgren said, noting that blue-and-green Seahawks towels were not available.

“That,” he said, “seems pretty unfair.”

The preponderance of Steelers fans in the house did not, at first, appear to faze the “visitors” at the neutral site. While quarterback Matt Hasselbeck worked the flanks of the Pittsburgh defense with a succession of precision, high-percentage passes, the Steelers were penalized for two false starts. (Pittsburgh was flagged only once thereafter.)

But the trappings of a road game took an eventual toll. There’s a human element in sports, even with pros competing on an elite level, and the human element insists it’s more difficult to win when the crowd is overwhelmingly against you.

“This is the first Super Bowl I’ve ever been a part of – as an assistant or a head coach – where one team had that many fans behind it,” said Holmgren.

Actually, previous Super Bowls have featured local teams, with mixed results: San Francisco played at nearby Stanford Stadium in 1985 (the 49ers beat Miami), and the Los Angeles Rams played at Pasadena in 1980 (they lost to Pittsburgh). The Oakland Raiders twice made a relatively short trip to Southern California, beating Philadelphia in 1981 and losing to Tampa Bay in 2003.

But the crowds in those instances were not as wildly animated as the one that cheered on the Steelers in Detroit.

More than “Terrible Towels” were at work. Amid the buildup to Super Bowl XL, mayor Kwame Kilpatrick not only presented Bettis with a symbolic key to the city, he told the running back how he wished for him to bring the Vince Lombardi trophy to Detroit.

Mayors will be mayors, to be sure, and Super Bowl tickets are a free-market enterprise. The NFL cannot control allegiances.

Souvenir stands are something else: Either make rooting accoutrements available for fans of both teams, as Holmgren suggested, or ban such items as “Terrible Towels” altogether.

No, the 9-1 ratio of Pittsburgh fans at Ford Field wasn’t responsible for the Seahawks’ sloppiest performance since the season opener at Jacksonville. But the mere appearance of league-sponsored partisanship feeds the imagination of Seahawks’ conspiracy theorists.

After watching replays of Darrell Jackson’s touchdown catch – called back because of slight and incidental contact – the imagination is one hungry beast.

Krusty
02-08-2006, 01:00 AM
Even if it was a conspiracy, what would you like the Steelers to do......give back the Lombardi trophy?

SteelSD
02-08-2006, 01:25 AM
I never contended that they did. Nor did I ask the Steelers if they outplayed the Seahawks.

I asked M2, because he seemed to hold that opinion.

So the outcome of a four year old AFC championship game is not relevant to that discussion.

Sure it's relevant because a team doesn't have to out-gain or out-possess a team to outplay them.

Seattle came out with a gameplan that included the concept that they could dink and dunk outside passes to protect from Pitt's outside pass rush. Then they consistently ran Alexander around the ends in an attempt to capitalize on the outside 'backer's overpursuit. While that may have been the smart play considering that trying to push at the middle of the Pitt defense is near suicide (Hampton, Farrior, Polamalu), it meant that the Seahawks need a bunch of plays to actually sustain drives. Heck, it's how Pittsburgh used to play prior to the Willie Parker's emergence- need to sustain long multi-play drives and just about anything that happens negatively would screw it up.

Then when the 'hawks tried to throw at the middle of the Pitt defense, they saw dropped passes, holding penalties while trying to protect from the outside speed rush, or the Jackson pushoff.

It's interesting to me that no one has figured out that Holmgren and Co., even with their vaunted O-Line, gameplanned in a way that sacrificed distance for protection. That's fine if your dink-and-dunk gameplan can soften up the middle for a couple big plays. But it doesn't work if you can't get those big plays to happen considering the amount of time you're taking to set up the potential big plays when coupled with the fragility of having to sustain long drives.

After a while, the other team is going to figure out what you're doing and gameplan to capitalize. Because of their commitment to the dink-and-dunk, Seattle had exactly one meaningful drive of over 40 yards. One. Not one scoring drive for the Seahawks started further back than their own 49 yard line.

Meanwhile, the Pittsburgh coaching staff adjusted. The game was like a boxing match where one guy is landing a high percentage of jabs, but then he sees a left hook, an overhand right, and a haymaker to the chin to take him out in the 10th round. Doesn't matter who you think was "ahead" on the "scorecard" at that point because if you're the guy standing over your sprawled-out opponent, you done just outboxed him.

Johnny Footstool
02-08-2006, 09:29 AM
Meanwhile, the Pittsburgh coaching staff adjusted. The game was like a boxing match where one guy is landing a high percentage of jabs, but then he sees a left hook, an overhand right, and a haymaker to the chin to take him out in the 10th round. Doesn't matter who you think was "ahead" on the "scorecard" at that point because if you're the guy standing over your sprawled-out opponent, you done just outboxed him.

The Steelers didn't really "outbox" the Seahawks, though. As we've been pointing out all through this thread, they relied on a couple of fluke, seat-of-your-pants plays and some bad calls. That's not "being good" -- that's "being lucky."

They have the trophy, though, regardless of whether or not they earned it.

SteelSD
02-08-2006, 12:14 PM
The Steelers didn't really "outbox" the Seahawks, though. As we've been pointing out all through this thread, they relied on a couple of fluke, seat-of-your-pants plays and some bad calls. That's not "being good" -- that's "being lucky."

They have the trophy, though, regardless of whether or not they earned it.

Ah. "Fluke" plays. Just "lucky". That's hilarious. Which plays were those again?

Was it where Roethisberger had the presence of mind to stay behind the line of scrimmage on a 3rd-and-28 while waiting for a receiver to create enough separation to snag a 37-yard pass?

Or was it the 75-yard TD scamper by a blazing-fast Willie Parker- a guy who already had an 80-yard run earlier in the season?

Maybe it was the gimmicky 43-yard TD pass from El to Ward? I mean, no way anyone could sniff that out considering the Steelers had run the same play successfully against the Browns in 2005. It's nice to have three QB's on the field at all times.

Possibly Roethlisberger's shovel pass to Ward while scrambling that resulted in perpetuating a drive? God forbid that Pittsburgh has a mobile QB who's constantly finding ways to make plays outside the pocket. He's been doing that for two years. Maybe you'll figure that out sometime next season?

Sorry, man, but it's pretty obvious that you don't really understand what the Steelers are capable of doing offensively. There was no Music City Miracle. No Doug Flutie Boston College hail mary for a TD. No one had to run through a marching band to score after four or five laterals to end the game.

Instead, what you saw was a Steelers team that made plays when they desperately needed to make plays.

It was up to the Seahawks to stop them. They didn't. So the Lombardi Trophy goes to the Steel City BECAUSE the Steelers earned it. Such is football.

Krusty
02-08-2006, 12:29 PM
Ah. "Fluke" plays. Just "lucky". That's hilarious. Which plays were those again?

Was it where Roethisberger had the presence of mind to stay behind the line of scrimmage on a 3rd-and-28 while waiting for a receiver to create enough separation to snag a 37-yard pass?

Or was it the 75-yard TD scamper by a blazing-fast Willie Parker- a guy who already had an 80-yard run earlier in the season?

Maybe it was the gimmicky 43-yard TD pass from El to Ward? I mean, no way anyone could sniff that out considering the Steelers had run the same play successfully against the Browns in 2005. It's nice to have three QB's on the field at all times.

Possibly Roethlisberger's shovel pass to Ward while scrambling that resulted in perpetuating a drive? God forbid that Pittsburgh has a mobile QB who's constantly finding ways to make plays outside the pocket. He's been doing that for two years. Maybe you'll figure that out sometime next season?

Sorry, man, but it's pretty obvious that you don't really understand what the Steelers are capable of doing offensively. There was no Music City Miracle. No Doug Flutie Boston College hail mary for a TD. No one had to run through a marching band to score after four or five laterals to end the game.

Instead, what you saw was a Steelers team that made plays when they desperately needed to make plays.

It was up to the Seahawks to stop them. They didn't. So the Lombardi Trophy goes to the Steel City BECAUSE the Steelers earned it. Such is football.

Amen brother.

Johnny Footstool
02-08-2006, 01:36 PM
Ah. "Fluke" plays. Just "lucky". That's hilarious. Which plays were those again?

Classic. "Our team isn't lucky, just good." That's straight from a social psychology textbook. You don't see any of the lucky things that happened to the Steelers. You think all their success is based on skill. Casual observers see it differently.


Was it where Roethisberger had the presence of mind to stay behind the line of scrimmage on a 3rd-and-28 while waiting for a receiver to create enough separation to snag a 37-yard pass?

More blind-eyed rationalizations.

You praise Roethlisberger's presence of mind for staying behind the line of scrimmage, and you conveniently ignore the fact that he narrowly avoided a sack, then benefitted from Grant Wistrom simply falling down as he pursued the QB out of the pocket.

The underhanded shovel pass to Hines Ward was another example of a fluke play that happened to go the Steelers' way.

And I don't even have to mention the luck they experienced on defense thanks to the officials. See the previous 1000 posts on this thread.


Sorry, man, but it's pretty obvious that you don't really understand what the Steelers are capable of doing offensively.

Yeah, clearly they draw up offensive plays that involve poor pass protection, mad scrambles, and clumsy defenders.

traderumor
02-08-2006, 01:45 PM
Classic. "Our team isn't lucky, just good." That's straight from a social psychology textbook. You don't see any of the lucky things that happened to the Steelers. You think all their success is based on skill. Casual observers see it differently.



More blind-eyed rationalizations.

You praise Roethlisberger's presence of mind for staying behind the line of scrimmage, and you conveniently ignore the fact that he narrowly avoided a sack, then benefitted from Grant Wistrom simply falling down as he pursued the QB out of the pocket.

The underhanded shovel pass to Hines Ward was another example of a fluke play that happened to go the Steelers' way.

And I don't even have to mention the luck they experienced on defense thanks to the officials. See the previous 1000 posts on this thread.



Yeah, clearly they draw up offensive plays that involve poor pass protection, mad scrambles, and clumsy defenders.
You're forgetting the "luck" involved with having the two players that hooked up for a 66 yard gain on the first offensive play of the game of the first playoff game also get hurt on that play. I mean, what are the odds? :laugh:

Caveat Emperor
02-08-2006, 02:13 PM
You praise Roethlisberger's presence of mind for staying behind the line of scrimmage, and you conveniently ignore the fact that he narrowly avoided a sack, then benefitted from Grant Wistrom simply falling down as he pursued the QB out of the pocket.


The underhanded shovel pass to Hines Ward was another example of a fluke play that happened to go the Steelers' way.

Come on...I'm going to call shenanigans on this. The fact that Roethlisberger "narrowly avoided a sack" speaks clearly to his pocket presence and ability as a quarterback. That's like saying Brett Favre wasn't a great QB, he was just really lucky to keep avoiding horrid sacks whenever plays broke down and he moved to find open targets.

All plays of that sort are a combination of lucky and talent. Talented players create thier own "luck" through the use of their superior skills to keep plays alive and find ways to make good things happen.

I'm shocked at the level of bitterness surrounding this Pittsburgh victory. They clearly proved their talent as a team in winning 3 consecutive playoff games on the road, beating Cincinnati, Indianapolis, and Denver -- all of whom I believe would've beaten Seattle in a head-to-head matchup at a neutral site. If it's still the Carson Palmer/Bengals thing -- get over yourselves. Seriously... it was a horrible injury and I feel bad for Carson and the team, but EVERY team suffers through injuries -- Chicago played an entire season with a rookie QB, Carolina lost Stephen Davis mid-season plus DeShaun Foster AND Nick Goings in the playoffs, Tampa Bay lost their starting QB in week 6, the New York Jets lost so many quarterbacks they were playing Brooks Bollinger, Kliff Kingsbury and Vinny Testaverde. It sucks, it ruins a season, but you sack up and deal with it.

Johnny Footstool
02-08-2006, 02:45 PM
Come on...I'm going to call shenanigans on this. The fact that Roethlisberger "narrowly avoided a sack" speaks clearly to his pocket presence and ability as a quarterback. That's like saying Brett Favre wasn't a great QB, he was just really lucky to keep avoiding horrid sacks whenever plays broke down and he moved to find open targets.


Do the Steelers' count on that magical ability, or do they breathe a sigh of relief when it happens?

Circumstances unfolded extremely favorably. Roethlisberger didn't telekinetically trip Wistrom. His underhanded toss to Ward isn't something they practice regularly.

The Steelers utterly dominated the Colts and the Broncos -- no question about it. No luck involved -- they hit those teams in the mouth. They did the same to the Palmer-less Bengals in the second half of that game as well.

Against the Seahawks, they got lucky on several occasions. I don't know why that's so hard for Steeler fans to admit.

deltachi8
02-08-2006, 03:05 PM
Against the Seahawks, they got lucky on several occasions. I don't know why that's so hard for Steeler fans to admit.


Maybee we haven gotten use to Ben making plays like that the past two years. So yes, It becomes an expectation. When Ben moves from the pocket, he buys time for his recievers to find holles and he has an ability to keep his eyes down field and spot openings.

Its lucky perhaps if its isolated, with Ben its a more common happening.

M2
02-08-2006, 04:06 PM
The Steelers didn't really "outbox" the Seahawks, though.

I think you missed the point of the boxing analogy. The Seahawks tried to pepper the Steelers while the Steelers worked the body and went for the knockout. One team was trying to steal the fight, the other was swinging to end it.

My take has always been that football favors the puncher.

SteelSD
02-08-2006, 05:53 PM
Classic. "Our team isn't lucky, just good." That's straight from a social psychology textbook. You don't see any of the lucky things that happened to the Steelers. You think all their success is based on skill. Casual observers see it differently.

That's why they're called casual observers.


More blind-eyed rationalizations.

You praise Roethlisberger's presence of mind for staying behind the line of scrimmage, and you conveniently ignore the fact that he narrowly avoided a sack, then benefitted from Grant Wistrom simply falling down as he pursued the QB out of the pocket.

The underhanded shovel pass to Hines Ward was another example of a fluke play that happened to go the Steelers' way.

Yeah, clearly they draw up offensive plays that involve poor pass protection, mad scrambles, and clumsy defenders.

And you're conveniently attempting to position sack avoidance as a non-skill based event.

Heady mobile Quarterbacks have the ability to make something out of broken plays consistently.

Tarkington had it. Stabler had it. Elway had it. Young had it. McNair had it. Favre had it. And Roethlisberger has it.

It's part of a QB's skill set.


And I don't even have to mention the luck they experienced on defense thanks to the officials. See the previous 1000 posts on this thread.

1,000 bitter posts are just 1,000 bitter posts. Nothing more.

kbrake
02-08-2006, 06:27 PM
I'm not bitter. I just think it was poorly officiated. I have nothing agaisnt Pittsburgh I dont think think their offense was lucky one bit. All their big plays on offense were just what the Steelers have done all year. As for the defense yeah they got lucky a few times and were bailed out by the stripes. If you win the Total Yards, the turnover battle, and time of possesion in the NFL you should win 99% of the time. To lose by 11 shows that something was up. Also though, I think Ben is much better then he showed in that game, I kind of thought he had a rough night.