The Super Bowl Game Day Thread - Page 2 - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

alby · 02-05-2006, 10:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Murphy3

Arizona would have given either of these two teams trouble considering how poorly they played.

The longhorns would have given Seattle a run for their money

Five-ofan · 02-06-2006, 12:01 AM

This was the worst officiated game i have ever seen. All but 1 of the bad calls benefited the Steelers. They have lost all right to ever say another word about an official. The touchdown PI was bs. Yes it was technically interference but that happens on every play in the nfl. Ward did the EXACT same thing on a play a couple of drives later on a crucial 3rd down. Jeremy stephens played like crap. Holmgren coached like an ass. In the end it has to come down to the officiating though. How hard is it to call an offside correctly??? That holding was done throughout the game by both teams. That comes down to you dont call it because it can be called on every play. Hell Wards block on Bens last first down was more of a hold then that. The TD by ben wasnt a td either but it couldnt have been overturned either. Just utterly craptacular and the commercials werent much either.

MavKikiNYC · 02-06-2006, 12:42 AM

Pittsburgh Stealers? Nah.....

Notable falloff in the quality of the game from previous SBs, but Steelers played well enough to win. Seahawks kept shooting themselves in the foot.

Congratulations to the Rooneys, and to Cowher.

Five-ofan · 02-06-2006, 12:47 AM

Well its damn easy to look good when you are playing 15 on 11. I had no rooting interest in this game. The seahawks played like crap and didnt deserve to win but so did the steelers. Honestly if that game was correctly officiated and none of the other things change (I know they would but just for arguments sake) the Seahawks win. Those officials were utterly craptacular. If that is the best the NFL has got ....

sike · 02-06-2006, 11:15 AM

boring.

Big Boy Laroux · 02-06-2006, 01:36 PM

boring game overall, but great running Diary from the Sports Guy. I felt like i was talking with my friends again while reading this.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2...simmons/060206

MFFL · 02-06-2006, 02:56 PM

"Allow me to become the first of 30 million football fans to make the "Can we give the Super Bowl MVP to the officials?" joke. "

LOL!

mavsman55 · 02-06-2006, 06:02 PM

As a Pittsburgher, I am getting sick of people saying the refs handed the game to Seattle. Seattle still blew all their chances. Say, for instance, That Ben's run is ruled not a TD. What are the chances that Jerome Bettis, possibly the most consistent goal-line performer in the history of the NFL, fails to gain 1 inch on 4th down? Even if they didn't call Darrel Jackon's push on Chris Hope (which you're not allowed to do), that makes 7 points instead of 3. Big Deal.

It wasn't the officials' fault that Seattle gave up a 75 yd touchdown run. It wasn't the officials' fault that Hasselbeck threw that interception at the end of the game. It wasn't the officials' fault that the Seattle DB's had no idea where they were when Randle El scorched them with a perfect pass.

The point is, the officials did alter the outcome of the game, but didn't change it entirely. Seattle blew it for themselves.

alby · 02-06-2006, 06:30 PM

a play here and there can essentially change the outcome of the game..

Male30Dan · 02-06-2006, 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mavsman55

As a Pittsburgher, I am getting sick of people saying the refs handed the game to Seattle. Seattle still blew all their chances. Say, for instance, That Ben's run is ruled not a TD. What are the chances that Jerome Bettis, possibly the most consistent goal-line performer in the history of the NFL, fails to gain 1 inch on 4th down? Even if they didn't call Darrel Jackon's push on Chris Hope (which you're not allowed to do), that makes 7 points instead of 3. Big Deal.

It wasn't the officials' fault that Seattle gave up a 75 yd touchdown run. It wasn't the officials' fault that Hasselbeck threw that interception at the end of the game. It wasn't the officials' fault that the Seattle DB's had no idea where they were when Randle El scorched them with a perfect pass.

The point is, the officials did alter the outcome of the game, but didn't change it entirely. Seattle blew it for themselves.

Dude come on... The entire world outside of PA KNOWS that Seattle got hosed SEVERAL times by the refs... I would feel the same way you do if I was in your position, but you haven't a leg to stand on here... If you are trying to come up with some GIVE US RESPECT, WE JUST WON THE SUPERBOWL, you are barking up the wrong tree! Pittsburgh, (and please know that I am happy for Bettis and Cowher), may be the worst SuperBowl team in the last 20+ years and maybe had the worst SuperBowl winning performance ever! Do you think the 06 Steelers beat ANY of the teams that have won the last 20 superbowls? MAYBE the 91 Skins! Maybe! Hell, matter of fact, you guys couldn't have won against O'Donnell's 96 Steelers that lost to the Cowboys in SB30!

Big Boy Laroux · 02-06-2006, 06:43 PM

that "blocking below the knees" call was HORRIBLE. why would hasselbeck be trying to block the guy with the ball? he was going for the tackle!

seattle did suck it up out there (especially stevens), but i do agree that little calls here and there do make a difference.

Murphy3 · 02-06-2006, 06:49 PM

BBL, the rule there is that the tackler can't go below the knees of a blocker to get to the guy with the ball. That's what the official ruled happened. With that being said, it was still a horrible call.

alby · 02-06-2006, 08:55 PM

it was a horrible call because he didn't go for the blocker, he went straight to ike taylor (the guy with the ball)

pittsburgh is ranked the 2nd worst superbowl champion in history behind the baltimore team back in superbowl V

Five-ofan · 02-06-2006, 09:50 PM

a) Since when is it illegal to cut a blocker? Its not in college or hs. It may be a new rule in the nfl but it isnt at any other level.
b) to those who say well Seattle didnt make the plays This is the dumbest effing argument i have ever heard. My point? Get a bs call on the Parker run or the reverse pass that gets those called back and get a bs holding call on the 3rd and 28 scramble play while allowing the Seahawks scores. Dont call the ben play a td. The steelers lose by 24. ANd btw i guarantee you the steelers kick the fg if that wasnt called a td. Also on the well they didnt force the hasselback pick, well actually they did. That was after the bs holding call wasnt it? The seahawks played the better game. Did they leave plays on the field? Yep but so did the steelers its just that all the big seahawks plays got called back on bs calls.

BTW did anyone else notice that the official didnt signal the td till after ben moved it past the goal line? Clear sign he had no clue what he was doing.

Murphy3 · 02-06-2006, 09:57 PM

a) It's illegal on a change of possession play.

dude1394 · 02-06-2006, 09:59 PM

I think it's illegal on an interception or kickoffs/punt returns as well.

Five-ofan · 02-06-2006, 10:07 PM

I know its illegal to BLOCK below the waste on a change of possession play but you cant block on defense. I will take you guys word for it and thats cool but i had never heard of it.

mavsman55 · 02-06-2006, 11:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Male23Dan

Dude come on... The entire world outside of PA KNOWS that Seattle got hosed SEVERAL times by the refs... I would feel the same way you do if I was in your position, but you haven't a leg to stand on here... If you are trying to come up with some GIVE US RESPECT, WE JUST WON THE SUPERBOWL, you are barking up the wrong tree! Pittsburgh, (and please know that I am happy for Bettis and Cowher), may be the worst SuperBowl team in the last 20+ years and maybe had the worst SuperBowl winning performance ever! Do you think the 06 Steelers beat ANY of the teams that have won the last 20 superbowls? MAYBE the 91 Skins! Maybe! Hell, matter of fact, you guys couldn't have won against O'Donnell's 96 Steelers that lost to the Cowboys in SB30!

On what premise do you base this? You're obviously flustered and upset.

But just be realistic: How could a #6-seeded team that took out the #1, #2, and #3 seeds in the AFC and the #1 seed in the NFC to win the Superbowl be the worst Superbowl team ever? Do you have any idea how much of a chance people were giving us to even get past Cincinnatti? Then let alone Indianapolis???

I admit, it wasn't a pretty win, but Steeler fans all knew from the beginning of week 13 (where we had to finish the season with 4 wins) that getting to the Superbowl by winning 7 straight games, let alone against teams like Indianapolis and Denver was going to be much harder than winning the Superbowl. Give us some credit. Honestly.

If the Super Bowl win didn't impress you, the rest of the games we played in the playoffs should.

Male30Dan · 02-06-2006, 11:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mavsman55

On what premise do you base this? You're obviously flustered and upset.

But just be realistic: How could a #6-seeded team that took out the #1, #2, and #3 seeds in the AFC and the #1 seed in the NFC to win the Superbowl be the worst Superbowl team ever? Do you have any idea how much of a chance people were giving us to even get past Cincinnatti? Then let alone Indianapolis???

I admit, it wasn't a pretty win, but Steeler fans all knew from the beginning of week 13 (where we had to finish the season with 4 wins) that getting to the Superbowl by winning 7 straight games, let alone against teams like Indianapolis and Denver was going to be much harder than winning the Superbowl. Give us some credit. Honestly.

If the Super Bowl win didn't impress you, the rest of the games we played in the playoffs should.

You are wrong starting with your first paragraph... I honestly didn't care ONE bit who won this game. It was one of the few times I can honestly say that. They were both sorta the Cinderella team so I couldn't root for one over the other in that area. I told myself before this started that I would be happy for either franchise and I had specific players from each team that I wanted to raise the trophy. I also found myself rooting against each team for a certain reason, (Pittsburgh because I didn't want them to tie Dallas and SF for most titles and Seattle because I simply didn't want to say the SEAHAWKS were the champs of the world).

Regarding their run, I NEVER said that wasn't impressive, but again, I see you didn't challenge my comment. Which champion of the last 20 do they beat??? ZERO! And even you must know that inside. Like I said, the 96 runner-up Steelers team was better. This was just a combination of two "good" teams playing a very poor game. Seattle would have never got past Philly without the craziness and injuries they suffered so you weren't playing the best the NFC had to offer. With that said, Seattle DEFINITELY did not play the best the AFC had to offer, as you were the 6 seed for a reason. I honestly think that if you play Indy/NE ten times each this past season you would win once vs. each, the one you did. Bottom line, you got hot at the right time and played WELL above your heads to get to the final game. At that point you came back to life; unfortunately, it was against competition that wouldn't have got out of the wild card game in the AFC so you managed to survive.

Gongrats though... I give the franchise credit for getting it done no matter the score or level of play. The thumb has bling!

MFFL · 02-07-2006, 10:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mavsman55

As a Pittsburgher, I am getting sick of people saying the refs handed the game to Seattle. Seattle still blew all their chances.

To set the stage, the Seahawks were in comeback mode. Despite getting the ball inside their 5 yard line, they were driving for a go-ahead touchdown. The Steelers had their heads down on the sideline, all their energy was sucked out of them (according to Madden). And the refs come to the Steelers rescue. Seattle completed a pass down to the 1 yard line and looked ready to go ahead. BUT NO - the refs called holding (I didn't see it). To make the insult worse, when I looked at the play again - not one but TWO Steeler players were offsides.

To say that the refs did not hand the game to Pittsburgh is being delusional.

And I didn't care a rats arse for either team. I'm calling it as a neutral observer. Hell, even Tabitha said that the refs were for Pittsburgh and she barely cared to pay attention to the game.

MFFL · 02-07-2006, 10:24 AM

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/footba..._miller07.html

Let's rewind.

Matt Hasselbeck hits Darrell Jackson for a 16-yard touchdown pass for a 7-zip lead?

Nope. The incidental contact that occurs on nearly every NFL passing play was, actually, offensive interference -- at least the officials decided so after safety Chris Hope stomped and huffed and demanded a flag, perhaps insisting that Jerome wanted it that way.

Beleaguered tight end Jerramy Stevens makes a spectacular catch inside the Steelers 2-yard line setting up what surely would have been a Shaun Alexander touchdown run and 17-14 Seahawks lead early in the fourth quarter?

Nope. Seems that offensive tackle Sean Locklear's incidental hooking (which occurs on nearly every NFL play from scrimmage) on his block of Clark Haggans (who was offside) was too dastardly to ignore.

Maybe the officials were calling the game tightly.

Nope. Only two plays later, Steelers linebacker Joey Porter used an illegal "horse collar" tackle on Alexander, and the officials decided to let it slide, even though that would have transformed a third-and-18 on the Steelers 34 to a first down on their 19.

"Penalties, as much as anything, were the story of the game," Seahawks coach Mike Holmgren said. "That's unfortunate. And that might be the first time I've said that in my life."

Here's the comic relief.

After the no-call on the horse collar, Hasselbeck tossed a critical interception to cornerback Ike Taylor. Hasselbeck then, apparently, forgot which team he plays for and tried to throw a block in order to spring Taylor. Only he threw a "low block," according to the game's official book.

So not only does he toss a pick and then try to block for an opposing player, but he also gets called for a 15-yard penalty.

Most folks would figure that Hasselbeck was trying to TACKLE Taylor. Seeing Hasselbeck is a quarterback lacking tackling skills, he went low. But the officials decided it was a block. Only Hasselbeck was credited with a tackle on the play.

(The official explanation is he went low on a guy trying to block him, which is against the rules on a change of possession. But the fact that he made the tackle erases, at least for a reasonable person, his potential motivation based on the result. It was a tackle.)

Like we said: Stupid.

Big Boy Laroux · 02-07-2006, 10:35 AM

that Horse collar rule is a joke. i haven't seen it called ONCE this year. why make a rule if you won't enforce it?

Usually Lurkin · 02-07-2006, 11:56 AM

This is why I'm not a football fan anymore.

Offensive pass interference?? Hooking? Blocking Low? Instant Replay????
Roughing the passer, roughing the kicker, forward momentum. . .

put on a leather helmet and tighten your jock, you bunch of pansies!!
no wonder people are more interested in soda commercials and gyrating 65 year old rock stars.

Big Boy Laroux · 02-07-2006, 12:05 PM

i was just interested in what the stones looked like in HD. good lord.

Usually Lurkin · 02-07-2006, 12:21 PM

ha. ha. ouch.

I don't know much about picture quality, but Jaggers triceps certainly were low-def. All that flapping gave a whole new quality to his chicken dance.

Murphy3 · 02-07-2006, 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Five-ofan

I know its illegal to BLOCK below the waste on a change of possession play but you cant block on defense. I will take you guys word for it and thats cool but i had never heard of it.

As I mentioned earlier in the thread, it's illegal to go low on a blocker on a change of possession to get to the guy with the ball. Obviously, Hasselback wasn't going low on a blocker, he went low on the guy with the ball. That shouldn't have been a penalty, but the official thought he went through the blocker first to get to the runner. That would have been a penalty if that would have been the case. But, it wasn't so it shouldn't have been a penalty.

Five-ofan · 02-07-2006, 01:20 PM

Yeah I agree that regardless it was stupid but i was just saying i had never even heard of the rule and I informed my buddy that i was watching it with that he needed to make sure he never did that if his qb throws a pick.

mcsluggo · 02-09-2006, 12:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mavsman55

As a Pittsburgher, I am getting sick of people saying the refs handed the game to Seattle. Seattle still blew all their chances. Say, for instance, That Ben's run is ruled not a TD. What are the chances that Jerome Bettis, possibly the most consistent goal-line performer in the history of the NFL, fails to gain 1 inch on 4th down? Even if they didn't call Darrel Jackon's push on Chris Hope (which you're not allowed to do), that makes 7 points instead of 3. Big Deal.

It wasn't the officials' fault that Seattle gave up a 75 yd touchdown run. It wasn't the officials' fault that Hasselbeck threw that interception at the end of the game. It wasn't the officials' fault that the Seattle DB's had no idea where they were when Randle El scorched them with a perfect pass.

The point is, the officials did alter the outcome of the game, but didn't change it entirely. Seattle blew it for themselves.

No, but suppose a crap ticktack hold was called on the steelers during that one 75 yard run, and a pussy passinterference was called on the long pass right before Roth's controvercial one yard sorta-score. Kinda mighta coulda changed the feel of the game, no? Yes, because those two plays were basically the full Pittsburgh offensive performance for the first 40 something minutesof the game.

Now imagine you did that AND gave back the Hawk's similar bs ticky tack fouls on THEIR big plays. The game is a freakin blowout... Steelers are basically bombed back to the stone age.

Male30Dan · 02-09-2006, 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcsluggo

No, but suppose a crap ticktack hold was called on the steelers during that one 75 yard run, and a pussy passinterference was called on the long pass right before Roth's controvercial one yard sorta-score. Kinda mighta coulda changed the feel of the game, no? Yes, because those two plays were basically the full Pittsburgh offensive performance for the first 40 something minutesof the game.

Now imagine you did that AND gave back the Hawk's similar bs ticky tack fouls on THEIR big plays. The game is a freakin blowout... Steelers are basically bombed back to the stone age.

Very nicely said! Rep coming your way!