Super Bowl XL

[KingPK 0]

Ive only read of one person having the opinion that the referees were absolutely perfect. Even the televised talking heads mentioned the bad calls quite often.

 

The only thing as sad as the conspiracy theories is acting like there were zero mistakes by the officials.

 

Yes, there were some horrible calls in that game....but the fact is that, after all these bad calls, Seattle was only down 14-10 at the start of the 4th quarter and had a whole 15 minutes to score just once to take the lead, but they played like shit and got nothing. Seattle lost that game, no one else lost it for them.

[naiwf 0]

Ive only read of one person having the opinion that the referees were absolutely perfect. Even the televised talking heads mentioned the bad calls quite often.

 

The only thing as sad as the conspiracy theories is acting like there were zero mistakes by the officials.

 

Yes, there were some horrible calls in that game....but the fact is that, after all these bad calls, Seattle was only down 14-10 at the start of the 4th quarter and had a whole 15 minutes to score just once to take the lead, but they played like shit and got nothing. Seattle lost that game, no one else lost it for them.

 

I don't disagree with you, but the phantom hold that took back a play that would have got the ball at the Pittsburgh 2 happened in the 4th quarter if I remember correctly. Hasselbeck promptly threw a pick a couple of plays later on 3rd and long. If Seattle scores and goes up 17-14, or even kicks a field goal it's a one possession game. In any case, Seattle didn't deserve to win, but then again neither did Pittsburgh.

[Damaramu 0]

I'm just still scratching my head over this "the NFL fixes games and fixed Super Bowl III" garbage.

[snuffbox 0]

Ive already said several times in this thread that Seattle made alot of stupid mistakes that kept them from possibly winning the game. I also realize that the referees had the worst game Ive ever seen in a Superbowl.

[snuffbox 0]

I'm just still scratching my head over this "the NFL fixes games and fixed Super Bowl III" garbage.

 

Those had to be 'jokes'.

[The Man in Blak 0]

Did anybody that's left on the Seattle bandwagon actually see the team play last year? This is not an unprecedented performance by the Seahawks; there were dropped passes, abysmal clock management, and meltdowns abounds in the "previous" Seahawk era, which may not have really ended in the first place.

 

As for the penalties, the calls are actually defensible. On replay, the Roethlisberger touchdown showed the edge of the ball just barely making it over the beginning of the white line. Easily close enough to be considered "disputable evidence." And the Darrell Jackson TD pushoff was just that: a pushoff, and it was one that was right in front of the official in the end zone.

 

It doesn't matter if Michael Irvin says he got away with it - if you consider Michael Irvin to be some standard of morality to hold all players to, then you may have officially gone completely batshit insane - it was a blatant push and it got the right call.

 

From the tone of some of the comments here, you'd think that the referees were throwing flags for pass interference on running plays, and then gleefully running back to their own huddle to talk about how they'd divide up the payoff money. Grow up.

[Slayer 0]

Let's go back to random fighting

 

Hey Barron, you smell!

[2GOLD 0]

I can even let the hold go because his arm comes up too close to the throat of the defender. If the guy is being hooked near his neck, you gotta call it even if it looks tacky. The Big Ben touchdown I still think was a very bad call but I was kinda "go either way" when the game was on. I thought it should have been overturned and Pittsburgh should have went on 4th and inch.

 

And no one made Hasselbeck throw a dying duck into triple coverage on third down. He could have hit a little pass and set up a FG to bring them within one with a whole 12 minutes to go. Instead he lofted it up, that's his fault for doing something stupid. And Jackson was stupid for doing what he did in front of an official. And Stevens was open all game and he dropped three big ones.

 

Seattle lost of their own stupidity, not some kind of phantom conspiracy. Just like New England lost in Denver because of their own stupidity mixed with bad calls. Just like Tampa lost because of their own stupidity. The one team in the playoffs who overcame shit calls in their game went on to win the Super Bowl. Seattle has already accepted they lost so why can't everyone else.

 

If Seattle played perfect and the calls beat them, fine. But Seattle looked like shit.

[Slayer 0]

One good point by MiB: Remember, this Seahawks team in the playoffs was essentially the same team that had the "We want the ball and we're gonna score" incident followed by Marc Bulger passing up and down Qwest Field in the previous two playoffs... so this isn't that surprising

[Special K 0]

One good point by MiB: Remember, this Seahawks team in the playoffs was essentially the same team that had the "We want the ball and we're gonna score" incident followed by Marc Bulger passing up and down Qwest Field in the previous two playoffs... so this isn't that surprising

 

Bullshit. Now everyone's talking like the Seahawks are a bad team again? If they're such a terrible team, then the whole NFL sucks and you should just give up on football.

[The Czech Republic 0]

Not bad, it just has its flaws, I think he means to say.

[2GOLD 0]

One good point by MiB: Remember, this Seahawks team in the playoffs was essentially the same team that had the "We want the ball and we're gonna score" incident followed by Marc Bulger passing up and down Qwest Field in the previous two playoffs... so this isn't that surprising

 

Bullshit. Now everyone's talking like the Seahawks are a bad team again? If they're such a terrible team, then the whole NFL sucks and you should just give up on football.

 

Sadly, Seattle has to take what they are getting because they sucked on the biggest stage of them all. Truthfully, I think they are one of the best in the league. But it's hard to defend them when they get in the Super Bowl and end up looking like Texas A&M beat them all up in the locker room just so they could play the game under the 12th man banner.

 

The Raiders, the Giants and the Falcons all suffered the same fate. They got called soft and overrated following the Super Bowl loss. The sad thing is they fought back against the detractors by royally sucking the next season. Seattle has to answer back with a run at least deep into the 2006-2007 playoffs.

[Slayer 0]

One good point by MiB: Remember, this Seahawks team in the playoffs was essentially the same team that had the "We want the ball and we're gonna score" incident followed by Marc Bulger passing up and down Qwest Field in the previous two playoffs... so this isn't that surprising

Bullshit. Now everyone's talking like the Seahawks are a bad team again? If they're such a terrible team, then the whole NFL sucks and you should just give up on football.

Not so much a terrible team as a team with a penchant for collapsing in the postseason.

 

2Gold has a good point also. The last time the Super Bowl losing team made the playoffs the following season was Tennessee in 2000 (and even then they went one and out)

[justcoz 0]

Ive only read of one person having the opinion that the referees were absolutely perfect. Even the televised talking heads mentioned the bad calls quite often.

 

The only thing as sad as the conspiracy theories is acting like there were zero mistakes by the officials.

 

Yes, there were some horrible calls in that game....but the fact is that, after all these bad calls, Seattle was only down 14-10 at the start of the 4th quarter and had a whole 15 minutes to score just once to take the lead, but they played like shit and got nothing. Seattle lost that game, no one else lost it for them.

 

I don't disagree with you, but the phantom hold that took back a play that would have got the ball at the Pittsburgh 2 happened in the 4th quarter if I remember correctly. Hasselbeck promptly threw a pick a couple of plays later on 3rd and long. If Seattle scores and goes up 17-14, or even kicks a field goal it's a one possession game. In any case, Seattle didn't deserve to win, but then again neither did Pittsburgh.

 

Pittsburgh deserved to win because they successfully made the big plays that win football games. They showed more character. Seattle had some bad breaks (although overexaggerated by some here) but if they made the two field goals, caught passes in bounds, didn't drop passes, managed the clock better and had better play calling, they could've won too. They didn't. Pittsburgh didn't let opportunities escape them despite a sub par performance overall.

[Boon 0]

I'd still like to know, too, why Montana and Bradshaw were absent from the Super Bowl MVPs ceremony

 

 

I'd still like to know, too, why Montana and Bradshaw were absent from the Super Bowl MVPs ceremony

 

Rumor is that Montana wanted a $100k appearance fee... if true, then he is quite the fucking asshole.

 

Bradshaw used the family excuse.

Aye, I heard that as well, not sure if its confirmed or not.

[Slayer 0]

The last time the Super Bowl losing team made the playoffs the following season was Tennessee in 2000 (and even then they went one and out)

Just because I thought it was interesting, further research shows the last time a SB losing team made the playoffs the following year and didn't go one and out was the 1996 Steelers (who went 1-1)

[dh86 0]

Ive only read of one person having the opinion that the referees were absolutely perfect. Even the televised talking heads mentioned the bad calls quite often.

 

The only thing as sad as the conspiracy theories is acting like there were zero mistakes by the officials.

 

Yes, there were some horrible calls in that game....but the fact is that, after all these bad calls, Seattle was only down 14-10 at the start of the 4th quarter and had a whole 15 minutes to score just once to take the lead, but they played like shit and got nothing. Seattle lost that game, no one else lost it for them.

 

I don't disagree with you, but the phantom hold that took back a play that would have got the ball at the Pittsburgh 2 happened in the 4th quarter if I remember correctly. Hasselbeck promptly threw a pick a couple of plays later on 3rd and long. If Seattle scores and goes up 17-14, or even kicks a field goal it's a one possession game. In any case, Seattle didn't deserve to win, but then again neither did Pittsburgh.

 

Pittsburgh deserved to win because they successfully made the big plays that win football games. They showed more character. Seattle had some bad breaks (although overexaggerated by some here) but if they made the two field goals, caught passes in bounds, didn't drop passes, managed the clock better and had better play calling, they could've won too. They didn't. Pittsburgh didn't let opportunities escape them despite a sub par performance overall.

 

its hard to let opportunities escape when u are handed a 21 pt swing and ya opponent had 161 yards taking away in penalties and callbacks

[dh86 0]

[Hawkius Maximus 0]

I don't think most of us rational Seahawks fans are screaming that they lost due only to the refs. It didn't HELP, but it didn't kill them off. What killed them off, was the implosion that I had been fearing from day one. After the first half, something just...imploded. I don't know if it was the defense, or the playcalling between Matt and Mike...but something just went boom, and they lost alot of the fire they did have.

 

I think they'll make the post season next year, due to the fact that they'll have just about everyone back, and if this post season has shown anything, it's the fact that Seattle doesn't NEED Shaun Alexander as much as they thought. Shaun's a dangerous tool to use, but he was completely held in check for most of the post-season, and it constantly fell to the defense, Matt Hasselbeck, and the wide receivers like Darrel Jackson, who had an amazing post-season to make plays, which they did. If Shaun starts demanding a huge contract, I do hope they let him go, and work with Maurice Morris, or another RB to take his slot after his preformences.

 

One thing that does frieghten me about Seattle, is I see Hasselbeck getting a "I have to do this to win!" mentality, and sacrificing his health, and good play deciding to make plays. Which, if it starts happening,you can't overly blame him, but it'd kill the team in the long run.

 

So...congrats to the Steelers, they played pretty well, didn't implode, and won. I think they'd have had a way harder time had Seattle not been fouled so often, but beyond that, they won the game, which is all that can really be said.

[justcoz 0]

Ive only read of one person having the opinion that the referees were absolutely perfect. Even the televised talking heads mentioned the bad calls quite often.

 

The only thing as sad as the conspiracy theories is acting like there were zero mistakes by the officials.

 

Yes, there were some horrible calls in that game....but the fact is that, after all these bad calls, Seattle was only down 14-10 at the start of the 4th quarter and had a whole 15 minutes to score just once to take the lead, but they played like shit and got nothing. Seattle lost that game, no one else lost it for them.

 

I don't disagree with you, but the phantom hold that took back a play that would have got the ball at the Pittsburgh 2 happened in the 4th quarter if I remember correctly. Hasselbeck promptly threw a pick a couple of plays later on 3rd and long. If Seattle scores and goes up 17-14, or even kicks a field goal it's a one possession game. In any case, Seattle didn't deserve to win, but then again neither did Pittsburgh.

 

Pittsburgh deserved to win because they successfully made the big plays that win football games. They showed more character. Seattle had some bad breaks (although overexaggerated by some here) but if they made the two field goals, caught passes in bounds, didn't drop passes, managed the clock better and had better play calling, they could've won too. They didn't. Pittsburgh didn't let opportunities escape them despite a sub par performance overall.

 

its hard to let opportunities escape when u are handed a 21 pt swing and ya opponent had 161 yards taking away in penalties and callbacks

 

Wow. Let me ask you this. If Pittsburgh overcame bad officiating in Indy to win, why couldn't Seattle??? My answer. Pittsburgh played their best football against Indy and Seattle didn't play their best against Pittsburgh. This is the reason they lost the game.

 

How many times does someone have to call attention to the missed field goals, dropped passes, no running game, routine punts into the endzone when they could have pinned a struggling Steelers offense deep in their own territory and just overall terrible coaching and clock management?

 

The Steelers didn't play great football but those big plays that the offense executed won the game and their defense didn't blow big plays like the Parker run and the Randel El - Ward reverse.

 

And where are you coming up with Pittsburgh being handed 21 points? 14 of those 21 Pittsburgh points were because Seattle's defense dropped the ball on coverages, had nothing to do with officiating. A 75 yard running play that had they watched the tapes they would have seen Parker break against Cleveland I believe. A reverse pass using Randel El with Hines off to himself that they pretty much ran fairly similar in the Cinci playoff game. And Cowher would have likely went for the seven on the fourth and inches whether the Ben TD was called back or not so that likely would have been another a TD.

 

I would have preferred a Steeler victory where there were no blown calls and no excuses. The NFL has a problem with their officiating and it needs to be addressed and taken care of, no argument from me there. Turning a blind eye to what really cost Seattle this game will get an argument from me.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

That picture says nothing. He was pushed back while in the air.

[naiwf 0]

Pittsburgh was up when they got victimized by the horrible Polamalu call. Seattle ended up having points taken away due to a multitude of calls. I don't disagree that Seattle SHOULD have overcome them, but it's much easier to beat bad calls when you're on the plus side of the score and it's the 4th quarter than it is when you're trailing.

[Fökai 0]

Every single one of the questionable calls came before the interception by Herndon.

 

Talk about letting a game-changing moment get away.

[naiwf 0]

The phantom hold on the Stevens catch to the 2 didn't, neither did the low block on a tackle call which was right after that when Hasselbeck threw the pick on 3rd and long. Seattle was poised to go up 17-14 at that point, and got it back to 14-10 due to Herndon's pick.

[Fökai 0]

It was an interception. Do you understand what an interception is?

 

And it wasn't a low tackle - it was a low block. They said he attempted to cut on Townsend, not Taylor (the guy who made the interception). It's not a reviewable call and we benefitted from the magic of four thousand cameras on the field. We can be armchair quarterbacks on a lot of things - this is one instance in where we couldn't.

[justcoz 0]

Pittsburgh was up when they got victimized by the horrible Polamalu call. Seattle ended up having points taken away due to a multitude of calls. I don't disagree that Seattle SHOULD have overcome them, but it's much easier to beat bad calls when you're on the plus side of the score and it's the 4th quarter than it is when you're trailing.

 

Not when you are only up by a very slight margin, with time on the clock, against an Indy-Peyton Manning offense. The Polamalu call put the ball back in Indy's possession so the pressure was on the Steeler defense and they came through, along with the Gods intervening with the missed field goal.

 

Seattle had seven points taken away from them with the defensive PI call - a call which was technically the right call, isn't called that much but happened to be called in the biggest game of the year. It wasn't as if the official made up the receiver taking his arm to push the defender away. It was clearly evident, right in front of him and not even necessary because I think he would've broke open anyway. You can moan that 'he didn't push him that hard' but it was a push regardless of the force.

 

The holding call after the completion to the 2 yd line was the only call I'm in agreement with as being a bad call. Perhaps the chop block too but Pittsburgh had the momentum with the pick by that time. That call didn't take points away from Seattle.

 

They would have had the ball down to the 2 yd line without the holding call but there is no guarantee that they would have scored seven on that drive - the way their offense had no run and dropped passes on big plays. Three would have made it 14-13 game but that reverse pass was in the Steelers play book to be called and I have every reason to believe that Seattle's D would have still fallen for it, making it a one possession and necessary two point conversion to even tie the game at 21-21.

 

The biggest difference maker was the six points Seattle should have had had they made those field goals. Nothing to do with officiating.

[dh86 0]

Ive only read of one person having the opinion that the referees were absolutely perfect. Even the televised talking heads mentioned the bad calls quite often.

 

The only thing as sad as the conspiracy theories is acting like there were zero mistakes by the officials.

 

Yes, there were some horrible calls in that game....but the fact is that, after all these bad calls, Seattle was only down 14-10 at the start of the 4th quarter and had a whole 15 minutes to score just once to take the lead, but they played like shit and got nothing. Seattle lost that game, no one else lost it for them.

 

I don't disagree with you, but the phantom hold that took back a play that would have got the ball at the Pittsburgh 2 happened in the 4th quarter if I remember correctly. Hasselbeck promptly threw a pick a couple of plays later on 3rd and long. If Seattle scores and goes up 17-14, or even kicks a field goal it's a one possession game. In any case, Seattle didn't deserve to win, but then again neither did Pittsburgh.

 

Pittsburgh deserved to win because they successfully made the big plays that win football games. They showed more character. Seattle had some bad breaks (although overexaggerated by some here) but if they made the two field goals, caught passes in bounds, didn't drop passes, managed the clock better and had better play calling, they could've won too. They didn't. Pittsburgh didn't let opportunities escape them despite a sub par performance overall.

 

its hard to let opportunities escape when u are handed a 21 pt swing and ya opponent had 161 yards taking away in penalties and callbacks

 

Wow. Let me ask you this. If Pittsburgh overcame bad officiating in Indy to win, why couldn't Seattle??? My answer. Pittsburgh played their best football against Indy and Seattle didn't play their best against Pittsburgh. This is the reason they lost the game.

 

How many times does someone have to call attention to the missed field goals, dropped passes, no running game, routine punts into the endzone when they could have pinned a struggling Steelers offense deep in their own territory and just overall terrible coaching and clock management?

 

The Steelers didn't play great football but those big plays that the offense executed won the game and their defense didn't blow big plays like the Parker run and the Randel El - Ward reverse.

 

And where are you coming up with Pittsburgh being handed 21 points? 14 of those 21 Pittsburgh points were because Seattle's defense dropped the ball on coverages, had nothing to do with officiating. A 75 yard running play that had they watched the tapes they would have seen Parker break against Cleveland I believe. A reverse pass using Randel El with Hines off to himself that they pretty much ran fairly similar in the Cinci playoff game. And Cowher would have likely went for the seven on the fourth and inches whether the Ben TD was called back or not so that likely would have been another a TD.

 

I would have preferred a Steeler victory where there were no blown calls and no excuses. The NFL has a problem with their officiating and it needs to be addressed and taken care of, no argument from me there. Turning a blind eye to what really cost Seattle this game will get an argument from me.

 

the OPI on Jackson=7 pts

holding on Locklear=possible 7pts

Roethlisberger TD=7 pts

and im not even mentioning the horse collar..the 15 yd penalty on Hasselbeck for 'blocking' that set up the Randle El pass..the horrible spot on the Mack Strong run...the 34 yard punt return called back, etc every single questionable call went against Seattle..if it were just bad refs...there woulda been bad calls both ways..this deserves federal investigation..seriously....I remember listening to Jay and Michelle on 97.1 last week and a brother of a ref said that the NFL wanted the Steelers to win...they hung up on him..he doesnt look so crazy today

[naiwf 0]

Pittsburgh was up when they got victimized by the horrible Polamalu call. Seattle ended up having points taken away due to a multitude of calls. I don't disagree that Seattle SHOULD have overcome them, but it's much easier to beat bad calls when you're on the plus side of the score and it's the 4th quarter than it is when you're trailing.

 

Not when you are only up by a very slight margin, with time on the clock, against an Indy-Peyton Manning offense. The Polamalu call put the ball back in Indy's possession so the pressure was on the Steeler defense and they came through, along with the Gods intervening with the missed field goal.

 

Seattle had seven points taken away from them with the defensive PI call - a call which was technically the right call, isn't called that much but happened to be called in the biggest game of the year. It wasn't as if the official made up the receiver taking his arm to push the defender away. It was clearly evident, right in front of him and not even necessary because I think he would've broke open anyway. You can moan that 'he didn't push him that hard' but it was a push regardless of the force.

 

The holding call after the completion to the 2 yd line was the only call I'm in agreement with as being a bad call. Perhaps the chop block too but Pittsburgh had the momentum with the pick by that time. That call didn't take points away from Seattle.

 

They would have had the ball down to the 2 yd line without the holding call but there is no guarantee that they would have scored seven on that drive and three would have made it a one possession game but that reverse pass was in the Steelers play book to be called and I have every reason to believe that Seattle's D would have still fallen for it, making it a one possession and necessary two point conversion to even tie the game.

 

The biggest difference maker was the six points Seattle should have had had they made those field goals. Nothing to do with officiating.

 

The 15 yard penalty gave them the ball near midfield. The tackle took place at somewhere around the 28 yard line. I don't doubt Cowher would have called the trick play, but I don't know if he does it inside of his own 30. The holding call was the big difference in the game to me because Seattle would have had 3 plays from the 2 yard line. They easily could have thrown a pick that went back 100+ for a TD, but they didn't have the chance. The right team won, but Pittsburgh did get the benefit of every questionable call in that game.

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

re: The bad calls

 

 

This is as bullshit a theme as any; ESPN is soaking up the controversy, as expected, without bothering to actually look at the tape. On the Jackson push-off, it's a tough call to make, but you guys are looking way too much at the slow motion replay of it. In full speed, the push-off is VERY clear, and it's not as if you can review a judgement call anyways. The call was made RIGHT in front of the referee, and he did not wait until Hope had argued it, as some have said (maybe not here, but elsewhere).

 

The Roethlisberger touchdown was just that: a touchdown. Was it a close call? Absolutely. However, if you watch the replay, his hand is completely on the goal line and unless you think he's not like, holding the ball, the nose of the ball absolutely HAD to have been over the goal line. There's absolutely no question about it. If any part of the ball goes over any part of the goal line, it's a touchdown. No question.

 

The hold? That's an interesting call, but then again, not really. If you watch the tackle hook Haggans almost up to his throat, it looks like sort of an "any NFL play" type of block. However, word is that the tackle had been warned for the same type of block twice during the game, and nonetheless, continued to hook around the LB's throat. If you look at the letter of the law, it's a hold. Is it a close call? Yes, of course it is. That's why we're debating it. However, to say that it's a "phantom" call is just being a blatant contrarian. The call was there.

 

And, hey, while we're at it, let's talk about the Stevens fumble when he held the ball for three steps and had it stripped... and it was called incomplete. He caught the ball, got to the ground, took three steps... and they call it incomplete? ZUH?! Right there, that play makes the Jackson PI call not happen because the Steelers have the ball at their own 20-ish. What about the illegal pick in the EZ on Stevens' touchdown?

 

The fact is, the right team won. It wasn't nearly as dominating a victory as any of the playoff wins, and it leaves a little bit of a bad taste in your mouth if you're a Steeler fan. But, you know what? Fuck it, the Steelers won the Super Bowl and I'll drink to that.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

So Tyler, you're saying that Seattle fans weren't disenfranchised and the Steelers didn't steal the game?