| laborlitigator |
quote:
Originally posted by keremoner
On a side note, I feel bad for Colts. I don't know if they will be seen any differently than the Bills who went to the big game three times in a row but never won.
At least the Bills made it to the big dance. But I agree, with what Dungy went through.
I'm picking the Panthers over the Seahawks while Jake pulls one out over the Steelers. |
|
|
| Maik |
quote:
Originally posted by keremoner
If the bogus defensive pass interference was not called in the end zone , the game would probably have concluded differently. That was a major momentum changer.
BTW, what I meant by Pats lost the game is self evident in the stats: If you outgain your opponent by almost 50% and control the ball for majority of the time, you should win, unless of course you commit 5 turnovers that result in practically all your opponents points. However, all aside, Broncos win where it counts - in the score board.
On a side note, I feel bad for Colts. I don't know if they will be seen any differently than the Bills who went to the big game three times in a row but never won.
I couldn't believe Chris Carter's piece on how he thinks this was the end of Patriots greatness era. He is trying to make up for his piss poor prognostication abilities. Pats will be better than ever next year if injuries allow it. Whether they lose Mangini or not, they will be back with a vengeance.
Sorry Kere,
Tha Pats lost the game because they made too many mistakes. Many of which were forced by the Donkies. Simply put, the pats were beaten by their own game. Dont make mistakes and let the other team make them.
As for the Colts, I thought that they were beatable and that's why I wanted the Pats to go to Indy rather than Denver.
In my opinion, refs made some horrible calls this weekend. None worse than the interference call in Pats game, Baily's fumble (which had to have been a touchback) and the no intercept call against the Steelers. |
|
|
| keremoner |
quote:
Originally posted by Maik
Sorry Kere,
Tha Pats lost the game because they made too many mistakes. Many of which were forced by the Donkies. Simply put, the pats were beaten by their own game. Dont make mistakes and let the other team make them.
As for the Colts, I thought that they were beatable and that's why I wanted the Pats to go to Indy rather than Denver.
In my opinion, refs made some horrible calls this weekend. None worse than the interference call in Pats game, Baily's fumble (which had to have been a touchback) and the no intercept call against the Steelers.
Maik:
I'm not trying to make excuses. Hpwever, the resulting field positions after all the turnovers was horrible (15 yds and less). Still no excuse to commit those turnovers. I thought both the offensive and defensive lines played horribly.
Do you hear anything about any players calling it quits?
I don't know about you but, I believe they will be better next year because they learned valuable lessons from this defeat, which they hadn't tasted before. I know Bellichick and Brady will mull things over over the off season and they'll be a better team for it, unlike moronic Chris Carter thinks. I know I'll catch flak for this but I still think they were the best team in the playoffs and had they not had a uncharacteristicly bad game, they would have won the SB. |
|
|
| MDteX |
quote:
Originally posted by MDteX
I'll toss in my two cents worth since I don't have any skin in these games.
Broncos 27 Pats 20
Seattle 28 Wash 10
Indy 27 Steelers 20
Carolina 21 Chicago 17
3 out of 4--not too bad. But I think I'll keep my day job. :D |
|
|
| andreseng |
quote:
Originally posted by andreseng
LL-
And now 4 of the 5 you mentioned are done and out and the 5th hasn't played. Nice call. Orton/Grossman has that hot defense to fall back on though. Should be a fun weekend.
I like Denver/Indy and Seattle/Carolina.
:1:
I'll take my 3/4 too. One thing that is really evident is that all the Pats fans keep saying "It's not an excuse BUT this and that and this and that. :rolleyes:
Get over it. Pro Bowl, draft and training camp are right around the corner for you guys. The sun will come out tomorrow. Enjoy what should be a hell of a good football weekend coming up. :4:
Labor- you hit on it with 5/5 on the non-playoff experienced QB's, nice call! :claphead: |
|
|
| one4gatr |
I tried to warn the Pats fans to not get too caught up in that win over Jacksonville. They played the same game against Denver that they played the week before. But this time the breaks didnt fall their way. The put the ball on the ground alot against Jax but were fortunate enough to cover them up. Denver has an offense that can score where as Jax does not. Brady played about the same as the Jax game but with one major exception Jax doesnt have a CB the caliber of Champ Bailey.
Hell of a play by Ben Watson to run Bailey down though.
Chris Carter may be right about the dynasty ending though. Brady yelling at his O-line, Bellichick whining, the team fighting during the game on the sidelines. It looks on outside like the team is falling apart.
I am not about to write the Pats off but it obvious they have some re tooling to do. I have faith that Bellichick will pull the team back together and be a contender in the AFC again next year.
Oh...
quote:
I know I'll catch flak for this but I still think they were the best team in the playoffs and had they not had a uncharacteristically bad game, they would have won the SB.
PLEASE put down the cool aid. |
|
|
| keremoner |
[QUOTE]Originally posted by one4gatr
[B] Denver has an offense that can score where as Jax does not. .
I don't think so. If they had such a good offense they wouldn't have ended up with almost 150 yds less than the Pats. Pats also had the time of possession. The turnovers killed them since they all gave the ball to Denver at the Pats 15 yd line or less. And, lets not forget the 2 bad calls (pass interference in the end zone and Bailey return that was fumbled through the end zone) that gave the Broncos 14 points which was the difference in the game.
All this said, Pats are still accountable for commiting the turnovers and ultimately the guilty party in this loss. However, I'll stand by my statement that they clearly lost this game and Denver did not win it on the strength of their offense or defense.
As to the squabbling on the sidelines, I don't think that is any sign of a crack in the dynasty. Pats will have Poole, Harrison, and Light back next year (and maybe even Ty Law may be back with the team). Coupled with the lessons learned from this year, they should be a more formidable force next year. |
|
|
| andreseng |
quote:
Originally posted by keremoner .
If they had such a good offense they wouldn't have ended up with almost 150 yds less than the Pats.
That's like me saying if the Pats held on to the ball they wouldn't have ended up with 5 turnovers.
Nonsensical.
Ever heard of playing down to the level of your competition? They didn't need the yardage. As you so eloquently pointed out, the Pats gave them points. Check this quote out.
quote:
Found on denverbroncos.com
Williams said that a combination of soreness in his groin and the Broncos' lead kept him on the sidelines during the final quarter Saturday.
"I gave three good quarters; I probably could have gone in the fourth, but we had a pretty good lead and were pretty much in control of the game," Williams said. "I said (on the sidelines), 'If you need me to go back in, I can go back in,' but the game was under control, and (the coaches) were just resting me up."
My point is I don't think Denver felt the urgency to put up any yardage and I think the above quote tells that story. Denver had the #5 Total Offense in the league and the #7 Scoring. There is no doubt they can put points on the board. On the other side of the ball they had the #15 Total Defense and #4 Scoring which says their defense bends, but it doesn't break. I won't even give you the Pats numbers because the excuses (that you say you are not making) will just start.
quote:
Originally posted by keremoner
Maik:
I'm not trying to make excuses. However, the resulting field positions after all the turnovers was horrible (15 yds and less).
quote:
Originally posted by keremoner
I don't care for excuses like crowd noise, bad calls by the refree resulting in two touchdowns, and thin air.
quote:
Originally posted by keremoner
If the bogus defensive pass interference was not called in the end zone , the game would probably have concluded differently. That was a major momentum changer.
quote:
Originally posted by keremoner
laborlitigator:
i am not making excuses. Just pointing out the fact that with crushing blows to it, this team survived and adjusted to its realities like no other team in history.
These are all excuses. HELLO....INJURIES ARE PART OF THIS GAME. Everyone has them to some degree or another. Granted NE may have had more than their fair share but that is part of the game. It's not Denver's fault. You can't take away from them because of this that or the other thing. Pats lost, done, over, bye bye, see you next year. |
|
|
| Maik |
It is really very simple. On Saturday nite, the Broncos were the better team. They created breaks and took advantage of them.
I do agree that it was a shame that the Pats did not play their usual mistake free playoff game. I think they lost out on an opportunity to make history with a 3 peat.
As for next year, with the nucleus intact and only one restricted free agent they will likely loose (Givens), rest assured the Pats will indeed be back in the hunt next year. |
|
|
| Maik |
I read this morning that the ref who made the interception reversal in the Indy/Pitt game admited that he blew the call.
I can't help wonder if he would have come out and said that if the Colts had won. |
|
|
| laborlitigator |
quote:
Originally posted by Maik
I read this morning that the ref who made the interception reversal in the Indy/Pitt game admited that he blew the call.
I can't help wonder if he would have come out and said that if the Colts had won.
They admitted it when the Giants lost in SF a few years back. |
|
|
| Maik |
quote:
Originally posted by laborlitigator
They admitted it when the Giants lost in SF a few years back.
I remember that one...I almost threw a can at the TV. |
|
|
| one4gatr |
quote:
Originally posted by laborlitigator
They admitted it when the Giants lost in SF a few years back.
Alot of controversial calls this weekend. The Pats/Broncos one in my opinion was inconclusive (meaning that not enough to over turn the call on the field). That play makes me wonder why we dont have an overhead camera on the goal line. I know they can do it I just wonder why they dont.
The Pitt/Colts play on the non interception was sooooo wrong I think that ref should have been fired on the spot. There was absolutely no excuse to get that wrong. And then the Fannaca flinch. What the heck was that??? |
|
|
| gdot |
Seattle 27, Carolina 17
Denver 17, Pittsburgh 14 |
|
|
| laborlitigator |
Panthers 28 Seattle 17
Denver 24 Steelers 17 |
|
|
| anjan |
I thought I'd just check and see how Broncos lucky streak would be defended but instead find two predictions putting them over the Steelers :2: Honestly, that's how you saw it going down after they scuttled the supposedly vaunted Colts' offense?
The only reason Broncos made it so far was because their opponents sucked. I hate to admit it as a Pats fan, but Broncos didn't win the game, Patriots lost it - Big time.
And laborlitigator, honestly Carolina over Seattle by 11 points? What are you smoking buddy? :1: :D I know the game is underway but how could not see Shaun Alexander running all over them? |
|
|
| screbr |
quote:
The only reason Broncos made it so far was because their opponents sucked. I hate to admit it as a Pats fan, but Broncos didn't win the game, Patriots lost it - Big time.
anjan - It must be nice to sit in your little roost, wait for things to unfold, and then jump all over everyone after things are said and done. Pats suck - and they are out, and today the Steelers looked like they are unbeatable. I love the Broncos, but today they lost to a better team. When the dust settles, at least we knocked Brady and the Pats off of their pedestal. That still feels good from where I sit.... |
|
|
| anjan |
quote:
Originally posted by screbr
anjan - It must be nice to sit in your little roost, wait for things to unfold, and then jump all over everyone after things are said and done. Pats suck - and they are out, and today the Steelers looked like they are unbeatable. I love the Broncos, but today they lost to a better team. When the dust settles, at least we knocked Brady and the Pats off of their pedestal. That still feels good from where I sit....
That's the reason the term "Monday morning quarterback" was coined :D I was just fulfilling my obligation. And don't worry, I'm used to directed hatred - I'm a Yankees fan too (and I have my Yankees hat on when I visit Boston). At the end of the day, Pats will be back next year but where will your beloved Horsies be? No one said Broncos didn't win the game fair and square but you are comparing a unproven team to one that won three of last four. It wasn't as if NE was on the top of the game and they lost like it was today. Both teams played well and the Steelers were better.... |
|
|
| MDteX |
quote:
Originally posted by anjan
I hate to admit it as a Pats fan, but Broncos didn't win the game, Patriots lost it - Big time.
Last time I checked the results of that game the Broncos won. They must broadcast something else in Beantown.
The Broncos were definitely outplayed yesterday. But in your view the Steelers didn't win, the Broncos lost it - Big Time.
quote:
Originally posted by anjan
No one said Broncos didn't win the game fair and square but you are comparing a unproven team to one that won three of last four.
Make that 3 of the last 5. Just like the Cowboys did in the 90's. Get over it. |
|
|
| carguy1234 |
quote:
Originally posted by laborlitigator
....Head and shoulders. . . far from it...
Do you guys believe yet that Seattle is head and shoulders the best team in the NFC? You guys gave me a bunch of crap for saying that a month ago. |
|
|
| andreseng |
| Was not a good day for anybody named Jake! Both Jake's were rattled. But looks like after the upcoming two weeks of hype we should have us one hell of a game. I'm looking forward to it. |
|
|
| MDteX |
quote:
Originally posted by carguy1234
Do you guys believe yet that Seattle is head and shoulders the best team in the NFC? You guys gave me a bunch of crap for saying that a month ago.
I do not believe they are head and shoulders above any team. But they have played well when it counts and have been very consistent. They looked solid yesterday. |
|
|
| Maik |
Kudos to the Steelers. Having made the playoffs in the final weekend and beating the #1, #2 and #3 seeds all on the road is no small feat.
My head tells me that this is Cower's year...my heart is with Hasselback and Tatupu, both sons of former Pats and local guys. |
|
|
| keremoner |
quote:
Originally posted by MDteX
Last time I checked the results of that game the Broncos won. They must broadcast something else in Beantown.
The Broncos were definitely outplayed yesterday. But in your view the Steelers didn't win, the Broncos lost it - Big Time.
Make that 3 of the last 5. Just like the Cowboys did in the 90's. Get over it.
First of all, what he is saying is that Pats lost the game. Just look at the stats. If you outgain your opponent by well over 100 yards and control the ball like the Pats did, you have to win, unless of course you turn the ball over 5 times. I call that losing the game. (not to mention two blown calls by the refs that resulted in the difference in the game-14 points)
Secondly, Broncos didn't lose to Steelers. Steelers had all the stats their way, so they won fair and square.
Thirdly, come next year, Pats should be as good as this year, if not better. Broncos have no hope to hold onto because they do not have a Brady or a Bellichick. These two teams aren't in the same league. My next year's contender picks are the Pats, Steelers, and possibly the Colts from AFC. |
|
|
| MDteX |
quote:
Originally posted by keremoner
First of all, what he is saying is that Pats lost the game. Just look at the stats. If you outgain your opponent by well over 100 yards and control the ball like the Pats did, you have to win, unless of course you turn the ball over 5 times. I call that losing the game. (not to mention two blown calls by the refs that resulted in the difference in the game-14 points)
Secondly, Broncos didn't lose to Steelers. Steelers had all the stats their way, so they won fair and square.
Thirdly, come next year, Pats should be as good as this year, if not better. Broncos have no hope to hold onto because they do not have a Brady or a Bellichick. These two teams aren't in the same league. My next year's contender picks are the Pats, Steelers, and possibly the Colts from AFC.
I know what he is trying to say but I don't buy it. One of the commentators yesterday said that the offense gets blamed for turned overs instead of the defense earning. Most of the time it is the defense earning the turnover not because an offensive player just dropped the ball with no one around.
The Pats had more offensive yards because the Broncos created turnovers and had a short field. Games are still judged by the scoreboard and until that changes stats are just for fun. No one 'has to win' has to win because they have better stats. It happens all the time. |
|
|
| gdot |
quote:
Originally posted by MDteX
I know what he is trying to say but I don't buy it. One of the commentators yesterday said that the offense gets blamed for turned overs instead of the defense earning. Most of the time it is the defense earning the turnover not because an offensive player just dropped the ball with no one around.
The Pats had more offensive yards because the Broncos created turnovers and had a short field. Games are still judged by the scoreboard and until that changes stats are just for fun. No one 'has to win' has to win because they have better stats. It happens all the time.
:werd: |
|
|
| laborlitigator |
quote:
Originally posted by MDteX
I do not believe they are head and shoulders above any team. But they have played well when it counts and have been very consistent. They looked solid yesterday.
Head and shoulders is what the Steelers did to the Broncos on the road. Although you blew out a tired and decimated Carolina team, the Seahawks didn't look awesome against the Skins.
With that said, I'll still root for the Seahawks to bring some respectability back to the NFC. Tough task though against the Steelers who are already a 4 point favorite. |
|
|
| laborlitigator |
quote:
Originally posted by anjan
And laborlitigator, honestly Carolina over Seattle by 11 points? What are you smoking buddy? :1: :D
Fair enough, but where were you when I picked the Broncs by 10 over the beloved Pats. |
|
|
| anjan |
quote:
Originally posted by laborlitigator
Fair enough, but where were you when I picked the Broncs by 10 over the beloved Pats.
I was hiding dreading the possibility that the Pats might slip :D and they did....
Although MDteX is having difficulty in grasping the concept that sometimes teams bring their "A" game and someone wins and sometimes its "A" against "F" game. Of course, that doesn't take away the win but the Denver NE game was A vs F and the Steelers game was A vs A and Steelers didn't give the Broncos even a hope at winning.
Of course, I have been told to get over myself :2: so I'll make a mental note of the comparison to the Cowboys of the 90s and be back next year when the Pats will still dominate because the crucial pieces are in place |
|
|
| laborlitigator |
quote:
Originally posted by anjan
Of course, I have been told to get over myself :2: so I'll make a mental note of the comparison to the Cowboys of the 90s and be back next year when the Pats will still dominate because the crucial pieces are in place
The Pats couldn't hold the 90's Cowboys joxstrap. . . (and that's from a Giants fan) |
|
|
| anjan |
quote:
Originally posted by laborlitigator
The Pats couldn't hold the 90's Cowboys joxstrap. . . (and that's from a Giants fan)
And pray what would disprove something as ridiculous as that? It can't be on the basis of performance since NE has bested all NFL playoff records as far as consistency is concerned. They also have collected some Super Bowl records that dwarf the Cowpokes. Heck, how old was Aikman when he got his third ring? If you compare post-season stats of the teams, the current Patriots are so far ahead of the 90s Cowboys that they look like a speck on the rearview mirror.
When you claim something as preposterous as that, you have to at least honor that with an explanation, as ridiculous as it must be ;) |
|
|
| laborlitigator |
quote:
Originally posted by anjan
And pray what would disprove something as ridiculous as that? It can't be on the basis of performance since NE has bested all NFL playoff records as far as consistency is concerned. They also have collected some Super Bowl records that dwarf the Cowpokes. Heck, how old was Aikman when he got his third ring? If you compare post-season stats of the teams, the current Patriots are so far ahead of the 90s Cowboys that they look like a speck on the rearview mirror.
When you claim something as preposterous as that, you have to at least honor that with an explanation, as ridiculous as it must be ;)
Name how many HOF players are on each of those teams. . .
Cowboys
1. Aikman
2. Irvin
3. Emmitt
4. Larry Allen
5. Deion Sanders
6. Mark Tuinei
7. Erick Williams
Then the depth, Leon Lett and Darren Woodson weren't even starters.
And 70-26 over their 6 year run when the league wasn't as watered down as it is today.
Patriots
1. Brady
2. ?
Depth, not even close. |
|
|
| anjan |
quote:
Originally posted by laborlitigator
Name how many HOF players are on each of those teams. . .
Cowboys
1. Aikman
2. Irvin
3. Emmitt
4. Larry Allen
5. Deion Sanders
6. Mark Tuinei
7. Erick Williams
Then the depth, Leon Lett and Darren Woodson weren't even starters.
And 70-26 over their 6 year run when the league wasn't as watered down as it is today.
Patriots
1. Brady
2. ?
Depth, not even close.
Keep in mind that its easier to spot HOF players for a team that last flashed glory 10 year ago. So prediction-wise let me continue the list
2. Dillon
3. Bellichick
4. Matt Light
5. Tedy Bruschi
6. Rodney Harrison
7. Tom Ashworth
Like I said, the list will be easier and more accurate in 2015. Let's look at records of Aikman's Cowboys and Brady's Patriots -
- Most consecutive PS wins - NE 9; Dallas - 7
- Most passes in a game - Brady 32 (twice); Aikman - not listed
- Least intercepted - Brady 0.99%; Aikman - not listed
I could come up with NE records and you could come up with 90s Dallas ones but at the end of the day Brady won his third at the youngest age of 27. And he has many more years to go. And like I said, its very difficult to extrapolate the records and performance of a dynasty still under run. Even next year they could win another one and put this discussion to rest... |
|
|
| laborlitigator |
quote:
Originally posted by anjan
Keep in mind that its easier to spot HOF players for a team that last flashed glory 10 year ago. So prediction-wise let me continue the list
2. Dillon
3. Bellichick
4. Matt Light
5. Tedy Bruschi
6. Rodney Harrison
7. Tom Ashworth
Like I said, the list will be easier and more accurate in 2015. Let's look at records of Aikman's Cowboys and Brady's Patriots -
I'll agree with the 2015 argument, it will be easier at that point. Plus, it's fun to make the arguments at least. But from your list. . .
2. Dillon - Probably not, his best season was 1600 yards with the Pats a couple years ago. But as good as Marcus Allen or Tony Dorsett. I'd say he needs two more 1500+ seasons for 13,000 yards.
3. Belllichick - no argument
4. Matt Light - no way
5. Bruschi - great team player, but not dominant enough, compared to Taylor or Singletary. Remember, only 16 LB in the HOF.
6. Harrison- Comparing him to Ronnie Lott (63 INT's over 13 years) he comes up short with 31 INT over 12 years. Again, a very good player but HOF, again, no way.
7. Tom Ashworth - No way at this point. |
|
|
| m2pc |
It will be hard to debate due to free agency.......
BTW,
what happens if they don't work out a new contract? I think its up next year? |
|
|
| MDteX |
In years to come people will talk about the Steelers, 49'ers, Cowboys and Patriots. And the Bills but in a slightly different context. (I'm sure someone will want to add to this distinguished list.)
Along the way there will probably be another team that ranks up there as being dominant during a given time span. How do you rate success or consistency? The number of Super Bowl wins? The number of Super Bowl appearances?
The odds should catch up someday so that every team has been to the Super Bowl. We have a newcomer making their first visit this year. Getting there once is tough. Getting there as many times as the teams listed above is what makes them special--and a point of discussion, hate and envy from other fans. |
|
|
| keremoner |
There were dominant teams ala 85 Bears who crushed opponents and then there were others like the Pats who on paper did not seem dominant but with the combination of certain unquantifiable factors such as coaching , team spirit/disciplne, etc were winners.
I believe that the day of the dominant teams because of their rosters is over after the free agency. Pats are the type of team others have to strive for to be consistent winners. For example, besides an outstanding QB, the factors that make the Pats lethal most of the time are the genious of Bellichick, the fact that no flashy/egoistic player ala T.O. are welcome, and non-meddling ownership. |
|
|
| laborlitigator |
quote:
Originally posted by keremoner
. . . genious of Bellichick. . .
I'll call him a genious when he can do it in more than one place, such as Parcells and Holmgren, then we can annoint him with the title. Last time I checked, he was 36-43 with the Browns, not very "genious" like. |
|
|
| xfactor |
quote:
Originally posted by keremoner
...I believe that the day of the dominant teams because of their rosters is over after the free agency...
Sad but true I'm afraid. This fact is consistent with what I've been saying all along. Those of us who are old enough to watch and appreciate great teams, loaded with great personnel miss the superior team quality. The youngins will never know, without reviewing NFL films. |
|
|
| andreseng |
quote:
Originally posted by keremoner
the genious of Bellichick
I'm no genius, but what does genious mean??:jester: |
|
|
| m2pc |
quote:
Originally posted by laborlitigator
I'll call him a genious when he can do it in more than one place, such as Parcells and Holmgren, then we can annoint him with the title. Last time I checked, he was 36-43 with the Browns, not very "genious" like.
When he first came over from the Jets, I thought along the same lines as you and thought to myself "Are they nuts-giving up a first rounder for what he did at the Browns?!?!?!" Especially after taking Carroll from the Jets and having him downgrade the teamduring his time here (But hey, what a job at USC!)
I think he's done a great job this year with all the injuries and lets not forget losing both his offensive and defensive coordinators, how would other teams and coaches fared under the same circumstances, who's to know, but, even if he isn't a genius, he sure does know football though :) and I have to take back my original thoughts and admit he's a dang good coach.
ps...Having had both Parcells and Belichick as coaches for the Patriots, the Tuna may be more colorful, Belichick was able to win 3 superbowls, so I guess I would prefer BB over BP. |
|
|
| Lrpba300 |
quote:
Originally posted by keremoner
........
Thirdly, come next year, Pats should be as good as this year, if not better. Broncos have no hope to hold onto because they do not have a Brady or a Bellichick. These two teams aren't in the same league. ......
you talk about a statement that has NO substance to it, this is the on of the worst I've ever seen! I hate to break it to you in your little world there, but who's records did you guys break along the way to those 4 good years your team had?? Denver was the last team to win back 2 back b4 the NE Patriots did it. And who was the coach? Shanahan! Ask your coach what he says about Shanny. He admires him greatly. No hope?? Let's look at their records as head coach's.
Shananhan is 101-59 in the Reg season .631%, 108-63 overall .632% winning percentage. That's pretty damn good. Now
Belichek he's 99-72 .579% not bad, but not as good as Shanny's record. I believe we ALWAYS have a good chance each year with him as our coach. Don't make such broad, sweeping statements that are asinine! :rolleyes: |
|
|
| Maik |
quote:
Originally posted by Lrpba300
you talk about a statement that has NO substance to it, this is the on of the worst I've ever seen! I hate to break it to you in your little world there, but who's records did you guys break along the way to those 4 good years your team had?? Denver was the last team to win back 2 back b4 the NE Patriots did it. And who was the coach? Shanahan! Ask your coach what he says about Shanny. He admires him greatly. No hope?? Let's look at their records as head coach's.
Shananhan is 101-59 in the Reg season .631%, 108-63 overall .632% winning percentage. That's pretty damn good. Now
Belichek he's 99-72 .579% not bad, but not as good as Shanny's record. I believe we ALWAYS have a good chance each year with him as our coach. Don't make such broad, sweeping statements that are asinine! :rolleyes:
Have to agree. What is interesting is that around here, Bellichick is acknowledged to be the top "defensive minded" coach while Shannihan is considered his peer on offense. How would you like to see those two on the same team? |
|
|
| Lrpba300 |
quote:
Originally posted by Maik
Have to agree. What is interesting is that around here, Bellichick is acknowledged to be the top "defensive minded" coach while Shannihan is considered his peer on offense. How would you like to see those two on the same team?
I would think the NFL wouldn't allow that Maik. The rest of the league may ***** to much b/c that would be a DOMINATE team! :4: |
|
|
| gdot |
All the talking is over, now let's play the game.
Seahawks 27, Steelers 14 |
|
|
| carguy1234 |
I hope the refs don't have their heads up their butts like they have in the other playoff games! Officiating has been a joke this playoff season.
I'm sticking with Seattle as my pick. I just hope the best team wins and the refs stay out of the picture. |
|
|
| screbr |
After what I saw in the AFC playoffs, I got believe that the Steelers are a team of destiny.
Steelers 31, Hawks 21 |
|
|
| laborlitigator |
quote:
Originally posted by carguy1234
I hope the refs don't have their heads up their butts like they have in the other playoff games! Officiating has been a joke this playoff season.
I'm sticking with Seattle as my pick. I just hope the best team wins and the refs stay out of the picture.
Carguy,
I hope you're right just for the NFC's sake. But my head says the Steelers by 7. |
|
|
| hammermdx |
| Congrats to the Steelers, however there were several calls by the Refs that I think they blew. The offensive pass interference in the end zone in the first half against Seattle was BS, and I don't think Roethlisberger punched it through the goal line in the first half either. And I think that was the worse clock management I've seen in a long time by the Seahawks. |
|
|
| laborlitigator |
Hammer,
The Seahawks should have been up by at least 1 touchdown at the 1/2. Too many mistakes on their part as well as questionalbe calls. Also, I really question Holmgren's coaching of the game. |
|
|
| m2pc |
Yes,
I am a bit suprised by the play calling as well as the clock management.
The officiating, no ones perfect, but its been so-so through the playoffs. |
|
|
| carguy1234 |
| I wasn't real impressed with either team. Too bad neither team brought their A game to the Super Bowl. Seattle especially played like they didn't want to win. |
|
|
| MDteX |
quote:
Originally posted by hammermdx
Congrats to the Steelers, however there were several calls by the Refs that I think they blew. The offensive pass interference in the end zone in the first half against Seattle was BS, and I don't think Roethlisberger punched it through the goal line in the first half either. And I think that was the worse clock management I've seen in a long time by the Seahawks.
I agree.
No one at our house enjoyed watching the game. The game just lacked excitement and intensity.
1 - Dull, boring game
2 - Poor officiating
3 - Boring Commercials |
|
|
| vlam |
I am a bit suprised by the play calling as well as the clock management.
I too am surpise, in both half time and end of the game. Chalk it up to another Mike Holgram=Andy Reid |
|
|
| keremoner |
| Steelers started the game poorly. It was Seattle who played like I expected Steelers to play throughout the first half. Second half, the long running TD changed the whole game and in my view changed the whole dynamic of the game. Overall Steelers deserved to win. |
|
|
| eRauL |
quote:
Originally posted by laborlitigator ... Also, I really question Holmgren's coaching of the game. [/B]
remember the Eagles' no-hurry-offense at the end of last year SB? Similar bad coaching/clock mgmt by another NFC coach.
Anyway, I was rooting for The Bus, The Jaw, and The Big Ben... amen. |
|
|
| gdot |
Congrats to the steelers. They did come out on top in the end.
There were several questionable calls:
-the offensive pass interference in the endzone
-Big Ben's phantom touchdown, shades of the Vinny Testeverde touchdown that kept the 'hawks out of the playoffs a few years ago
-Sean Locklear's questionable holding penalty when the guy he was supposedly holding looked to be offsides anyway
-Matt Hasselbeck's 15 yard penalty for making a tackle
The game was still the Seahawks to win. It's too bad they picked the biggest game of the year to play their worst. |
|
|
| andreseng |
| Neither QB looked "super" yesterday. The best pass of the day came from the Steelers wide receiver Antwaan Randle El. Of course he was a QB at Indiana. But regardless, it was the prettiest and best thrown pass of the day. That was the straw that broke Seattle's back IMHO. You knew it was over then. Speaking of broken backs I was shocked to see Randle El in there so fast after that hit he took in the first half. I thought for sure he was done.:eek: |
|
|
| laborlitigator |
quote:
Originally posted by gdot
Congrats to the steelers. They did come out on top in the end.
There were several questionable calls:
-the offensive pass interference in the endzone
-Big Ben's phantom touchdown, shades of the Vinny Testeverde touchdown that kept the 'hawks out of the playoffs a few years ago
-Sean Locklear's questionable holding penalty when the guy he was supposedly holding looked to be offsides anyway
-Matt Hasselbeck's 15 yard penalty for making a tackle
The game was still the Seahawks to win. It's too bad they picked the biggest game of the year to play their worst.
That "holding" call was huge. I just wish they swallow the whistles at that point. |
|
|
| msu79gt82 |
quote:
Originally posted by gdot
There were several questionable calls:
-the offensive pass interference in the endzone
-Big Ben's phantom touchdown, shades of the Vinny Testeverde touchdown that kept the 'hawks out of the playoffs a few years ago
Its always intersting how folks can see the EXACT same facts in such a different way :rolleyes:
- the push-off for offensive pass interference was an easy to see no-brainer call. He pushed-off in front of the ref. Period.
- Any part of the ball need only touch the plan of the goal to be a TD. The position of the ball in Ben's arm, while he was still in the air, was so close to the white stripe that the call could not be over-turned. From the TV angle down the line it looked like the edge of the ball and the edge of the stripe were "touching" - the rules say to overturn there has to be clear evidence, there was not.
BTW: I am just an unbiased fan from Texas. |
|
|
| wmquan |
quote:
Originally posted by msu79gt82
- the push-off for offensive pass interference was an easy to see no-brainer call. He pushed-off in front of the ref. Period.
I may not be unbiased, but the last time I looked, football was a contact sport. :rolleyes:
I watched the replay frame-by-frame on my DVR. In fact, the defender actually pushed out his arm and touched the receiver before the ball arrived, and actually initiated the contact (without even looking up for the ball). Then the usual "hand fighting" between receiver and defender occurred. The defender tried to extend his arms within the receiver's frame to try to hold him up, the receiver hacked back to get free.
99% of the time, that is not called a penalty. It's just incidental contact. Even the official didn't flag it immediately. He only whipped it out after the Pittsburgh player whined about it.
Speaking of Texas, Michael Irvin made a living out of pushing smaller defenders with both hands, and infrequently got called for it, even if his shoves were a hell of a lot more blatant. He and Steve Young said it was a "ticky-tack" call.
As far as the goal line play, some folks don't see the ball crossing the plane, some do. What's probably more important is what did the line judge see. The suspicious thing about it is that he ran in after the play, without his arms up. Then he looked around and raised his arms to signal touchdown.
If he saw the ball break the plane from where he was standing, it's a touchdown, no need to run in and look around. He raises his arms immediately, since if the ball breaks the plane, it doesn't matter where the ball ends up, or whether there's final posession.
Usually when a line judge runs in after a goal line play, without signaling a touchdown, it's to spot the ball relative to the goal line, or to see if someone still has posession.
If he didn't see the ball break the plane, and had run in to see whether or not Big Ben landed across the goal line, then he was ruling it a touchdown based on the final position of the ball. Which was after Big Ben was down and extended the ball across the goal line. If that was the basis of the ruling, it's easily overturnable by replay.
Now, that all said, even if it's not a touchdown, Pittsburgh bangs it in on fourth and inches.
And I'm not excusing the Seahawks. They choked. Clock mismanagement, dropped passes, bad punting, poor field goal kicking, mental mistakes in the defense, Hasselbeck tossing the costly pick and flinging the ball wildly in some cases, receivers not catching the ball in-bounds, etc.
Nevertheless, the NFL needs to improve the officiating, it's been terrible this post-season.
Congratulations to the Steelers, the Super Bowl Champs. |
|
|
| hammermdx |
| Well said, wmquan! If any of you caught Letterman last night, Big Ben said he didn't think the ball broke the plane of the goal line.....but they were going to go for it again on 4th down. It's a shame the officials played such a big role in this game. |
|
|
| gdot |
quote:
Originally posted by msu79gt82
- the push-off for offensive pass interference was an easy to see no-brainer call. He pushed-off in front of the ref. Period.
I heard this morning that the back judge who made this call was born and raised in Pittsburgh and graduated from Pitt. |
|
|
| gdot |
quote:
Originally posted by hammermdx
It's a shame the officials played such a big role in this game.
:werd:
Even with all those bad calls, the one that really hurt was the holding penalty that took back the pass to Jeremy Stevens at the 2 yard line. If that play stands, Shaun Alexander scores a touchdown and the 'hawks are ahead 17-14 with ~10 minutes left. But instead, it leads to an interception where Hasselbeck gets a 15 yard penalty for making a tackle which then leads to the gadget play that takes advantage of a 3rd string safety who's only played special teams this year. |
|
|
| laborlitigator |
| The holding call really changed the game. But, Holmgren should still not have said what he said. It takes away from what he and his team accomplished. |
|
|
| msu79gt82 |
quote:
Originally posted by wmquan
As far as the goal line play, some folks don't see the ball crossing the plane, some do. What's probably more important is what did the line judge see. The suspicious thing about it is that he ran in after the play, without his arms up. Then he looked around and raised his arms to signal touchdown.
If he saw the ball break the plane from where he was standing, it's a touchdown, no need to run in and look around. He raises his arms immediately, since if the ball breaks the plane, it doesn't matter where the ball ends up, or whether there's final posession.
I never said this was a good or a bad call; what I said was that there was not clear evidence to overturn the call on a replay.
I also agree the holding penalty was huge. |
|
|
| wmquan |
quote:
Originally posted by msu79gt82
I never said this was a good or a bad call; what I said was that there was not clear evidence to overturn the call on a replay.
Right, but my point was -- if the line judge did NOT see the ball pass the plane of the goal line, and he ruled it a touchdown based on the final position of the ball, the replay is clear evidence in overruling the touchdown.
So if he thinks the ball didn't cross the plane -- then the inconclusive replay doesn't prove that the ball crossed the plane, and doesn't overrule that. No touchdown based on crossing the plane. If instead he thinks the ball crossed as a result of Big Ben's reach after he was down (that the line judge probably didn't see with the bodies in the pile), that is clearly overturnable by the replay.
If he thought the ball crossed the plane on Ben's initial lunge, then yes, the replay is indeed inconclusive evidence to overturn his ruling as you said. The touchdown should indeed stand.
Now, obviously we don't know (and probably will never know) what was in his mind. We only have observed his actions in the play. The line judge's actions weren't consistent with seeing the ball cross the plane (he ran in without signaling a touchdown, and then only signaled after he looked down at the pile). That is a strong suggestion that he didn't see the ball break the plane, and thought that Ben had made a second effort to get the ball across the goal line. If he actually saw the ball cross the plane, he'd have raised his arms immediately and not run in to inspect the pile.
The review of plays permits specifically validating/rejecting the basis of the call, not just the final result. When the coaches challenge, they can challenge the spot of a ball as opposed to challenging a fumble. However, since this was under two minutes, it was up to the officials to initiate the review. They're up in the booth, and I wonder if there was really enough communication about what the line judge based his call on. |
|
|
| wmquan |
Anyway, arguing about it isn't going to change the outcome of the game. Here's another Super Bowl story:
http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/5314734
quote:
...
The NFL, which produced the show seen on ABC Sunday night, silenced Jagger's microphone during sexually suggestive passages of two of the three songs the band performed before an audience of 90 million television viewers.
...
In "Start Me Up," the show's editors silenced one word close to the song's end, a reference to a woman so sexy she could arouse a dead man. The lyrics for "Rough Justice" included a synonym for rooster that was removed.
...
|
|
|
| Maik |
| This is how the Steelers won... |
|
|
|
