I think I'll weigh in - why not?

[Cunning Runt]

Like this hasn't been beaten to death already, but I was a totally neutral observer. I like both teams and didn't really care who won and had no wagering involved.

 

Here's my take.

 

First off, I do congratulate the Steelers for winning the Super Bowl. They played the best football down the stretch and beat the 1,2,3 seeds in the AFC and then beat the NFC's #1 seed in the Super Bowl. No question, that's an impressive streak.

 

But there is a "but" to this post.

 

Someone posted on one of the countless threads on the topic that it's hard enough to make good plays once against a team like Pittsburgh, let alone have to do it multiple times. To me, that is the very best point to be made.

 

Those that say that the Seahawks dropped passes, missed FGs, etc... seem to be hanging their hat on that as rationalization that the outcome wasn't affected by the calls. To me, that's illogical. Every team makes good plays and bad plays throughout the course of a game. The Seahawks would have had to make pretty much every play, because the good ones they did make were oftentimes called back on what seemed to me to be highly questionable calls or conversely on non-calls when Pittsburgh had the ball. Or even bad calls such as the penalty on Hasselbeck on the interception. The cumulative effect of all these would have to be deflating to a team.

 

Again, I'm neutral, seriously, but the officiating absolutely did affect the outcome of the game - in terms of momentum, field position, and most importantly - actual points. That's not to say the Steelers still wouldn't have won, but we'll never know.

 

It just strikes me that people bring up things such as the missed field goals, Stevens' dropped passes, etc.. as the basis on which to say that the calls did not affect the outcome, when they clearly did. It's very possible that if the calls go the other way, that Pittsburgh is playing catch up and with Roethlisberger struggling the way he did, Seattle wins going away.

 

Like I said, we'll never know.

 

Rip away.

Edited February 7, 2006 by Cunning Runt

[Dead Horse]

I think I'll weigh in

[Menudo]

Like this hasn't been beaten to death already, but I was a totally neutral observer. I like both teams and didn't really care who won and had no wagering involved.

 

Here's my take.

 

First off, I do congratulate the Steelers for winning the Super Bowl. They played the best football down the stretch and beat the 1,2,3 seeds in the AFC and then beat the NFC's #1 seed in the Super Bowl. No question, that's an impressive streak.

 

But there is a "but" to this post.

 

Someone posted on one of the countless threads on the topis that it's hard enough to make good plays once against a team like Pittsburgh, let alone have to do it multiple times. To me, that is the very best point to be made.

 

Those that say that the Sehawks dropped passes, missed FGs, etc... seem to be hanging their hat on that as rationalization that the outcome wasn't affected by the calls. To me, that's illogical. Every team makes good plays and bad plays throughout the course of a game. The Seahwaks would have had to make pretty much every play, because the good ones they did make were oftentimes called back on what seemed to me to be highly questionable calls or conversely on non-calls when Pittsburgh had the ball. Or even bad calls such ats the penalty on Hasselbeck on the interception. The cumulative effect of all these would have to be deflating to a team. 

 

Again, I'm neutral, seriously, but the officiating absolutely did affect the outcome of the game - in terms of momentum, field position, and most importantly - actual points. That's not to say the Steelers still wouldn't have won, but we'll never know.

 

It just strikes me that people bring up things such as the missed field goals, Stevens' dropped passes, etc.. as the basis on which to say that the calls did not affect the outcome, when they clearly did. It's very possible that if the calls go the other way, that Pittsburgh is playing catch up and with Roethlisberger struggling the way he did, Seattle wins going away.

 

Like I said, we'll never know.

 

Rip away.

1311634[/snapback]

 

Actually, I think that was ver well said. We'll never know. However, as a Steeler fan, there is nothing that can be done about it, and I'm going to enjoy the victory. Sadly, when I think back on this year, I will remember the Bengals, Colts, and Broncos victories more fondly, because a. The Steelers played better in those games & b. There wasn't all of this controversy, but the Steelers are the Super Bowl Champions, and I understand everyone's anger, but nothing is going to change that fact.

[Cunning Runt]

Actually, I think that was ver well said.  We'll never know.  However, as a Steeler fan, there is nothing that can be done about it, and I'm going to enjoy the victory.  Sadly, when I think back on this year, I will remember the Bengals, Colts, and Broncos victories more fondly, because  a.  The Steelers played better in those games  &  b.  There wasn't all of this controversy,  but the Steelers are the Super Bowl Champions, and I understand everyone's anger, but nothing is going to change that fact.

 

1311651[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

I hear you and you should be thrilled.

 

I'm not angry at all about it. Take that back. I'm not angry that the Steelers won. I like the Steelers and if not the Colts, then of the teams that were still standing I liked the Seahawks, Panthers, and Steelers about the same. I'm angry that as a neutral fan, I saw one team in the biggest game of the year, get jobbed in my opinion.

 

Now if that would have been the Patrtiots and not the Steelers, THEN I would have been angry with a capital A.

[gijunky]

No dog in the fight...and I agree 100%. I would have liked to see the game competitive to the very end, but the officials took care of that.

 

I thought that the Seahawks looked like the better team on the field, moving the ball and stopping the Pitt offense when they needed to. Pittsburgh made 3 big plays (long pass to Ward, resulting in the TD by Roth; long run by Parker; reverse pass by Randle El). Had any one of those plays been called back by a "phantom hold", the game would have been a little more interesting in the end...

 

That being said, Seattle still had a great chance to win the game. Should Brown make those two field goals, they are only 5 down on that final drive.

 

You hope to see a great game for the superbowl, and I don't think that we got to see the best of EITHER team. Pittsburgh didn't play its best ball, but made plays when they needed to (that weren't flagged), and won. Seattle played well enough to win, but were shortchanged in the referee department, and blew some opportunities on their own.

 

I did like to see Cowher win the big one, however. He has gone through some tough years, and to managements credit, they never hung him out to dry. It's good to see an organization stick with someone through some unexpected lean years and be rewarded in the end.

 

my two cents...

[Bengal Mania]

I have NOT chimed in on this issue since the game, because it's pointless. Questionable calls can go both ways, and often do. Good teams often overcome them. Pitt has done that in the past.

 

It does seem to me, though, that when everyone (excpet Sarge and Seattle fans) said Pitt was the better team, it is surprising to still say Seattle ought to have been able to overcome the officiating AND the Steelers better team. That's not logical. The way both teams were playing, those calls very well could have affected the outcome of game. Maybe. Maybe not. Maybe they affect the "momentum". Maybe not. It is a shame that it's such an issue. Both teams deserved to be there, and the result (the way they played) should only have been based on who played the least bad.

 

BUT NONE OF THIS MATTERS! Pitt is the Superbowl Champ, the record books are not going to have an asterisk, Pitt fans are not going to enjoy the win any less (no matter what anybody else says or thinks). Why should they?

 

It would be absolutely the SAME if it had gone the other way. Pitt fans would be complaining, Seattle fans would be saying tough-t!tties, they'd be celebrating in Seattly today.

[Menudo]

I have NOT chimed in on this issue since the game, because it's pointless.  Questionable calls can go both ways, and often do.  Good teams often overcome them.  Pitt has done that in the past.

 

It does seem to me, though, that when everyone (excpet Sarge and Seattle fans) said Pitt was the better team, it is surprising to still say Seattle ought to have been able to overcome the officiating AND the Steelers better team.  That's not logical.  The way both teams were playing, those calls very well could have affected the outcome of game.  Maybe.  Maybe not.  Maybe they affect the "momentum".  Maybe not.  It is a shame that it's such an issue.  Both teams deserved to be there, and the result (the way they played) should only have been based on who played the least bad.

 

BUT NONE OF THIS MATTERS!  Pitt is the Superbowl Champ, the record books are not going to have an asterisk, Pitt fans are not going to enjoy the win any less (no matter what anybody else says or thinks).  Why should they?

 

It would be absolutely the SAME if it had gone the other way.  Pitt fans would be complaining, Seattle fans would be saying tough-t!tties, they'd be celebrating in Seattly today.

 

1311695[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

[Voltaire]

I'm seeing this gelling as the majority opinion of neutral folks.

 

So far as Pitt fans go, Meundo and Skippy deserve props for realizing and acknowledging that their team was handed the game. Some of the other Pitt fans though don't seem so contrite.

[rattsass]

Someone posted on one of the countless threads on the topis that it's hard enough to make good plays once against a team like Pittsburgh, let alone have to do it multiple times. To me, that is the very best point to be made.

 

Those that say that the Seahawks dropped passes, missed FGs, etc... seem to be hanging their hat on that as rationalization that the outcome wasn't affected by the calls. To me, that's illogical. Every team makes good plays and bad plays throughout the course of a game. The Seahawks would have had to make pretty much every play, because the good ones they did make were oftentimes called back on what seemed to me to be highly questionable calls or conversely on non-calls when Pittsburgh had the ball. Or even bad calls such as the penalty on Hasselbeck on the interception. The cumulative effect of all these would have to be deflating to a team. 

 

Again, I'm neutral, seriously, but the officiating absolutely did affect the outcome of the game - in terms of momentum, field position, and most importantly - actual points. That's not to say the Steelers still wouldn't have won, but we'll never know.

 

It just strikes me that people bring up things such as the missed field goals, Stevens' dropped passes, etc.. as the basis on which to say that the calls did not affect the outcome, when they clearly did. It's very possible that if the calls go the other way, that Pittsburgh is playing catch up and with Roethlisberger struggling the way he did, Seattle wins going away.

 

Like I said, we'll never know.

 

Rip away.

 

1311634[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

That sums it up right there. Concisely. Precisely.

 

I am in mourning not for the Seahawks, but for a sense of right and wrong. And penalizing Hasselbeck 15 yards for sacraficing his body to make a potential game saving tackle after throwing a pick was just Nazi gestapo stuff, and I am not into it.

[tonorator]

It would be absolutely the SAME if it had gone the other way.  Pitt fans would be complaining, Seattle fans would be saying tough-t!tties, they'd be celebrating in Seattly today.

 

1311695[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

menudo said he wouldn't complain. said he would give it up to seattle fans humbly. said it, yes he did.

 

i think he was lying.

[Yukon Cornelius]

contrite.

 

1311711[/snapback]

 

 

 

Ok big V stop with the 5 dollar words u will confuse the rednecks

[Menudo]

menudo said he wouldn't complain.  said he would give it up to seattle fans humbly.  said it, yes he did.

 

i think he was lying.

 

1311717[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

I did ? I've been saying over and over again, that the officiating has ruined this game for Seahawks fans, Steelers fans, and football fans in general. We all deserved better.

 

If I said it Sunday night, that was, um, like not me or something.

[bushwacked]

It does seem to me, though, that when everyone (excpet Sarge and Seattle fans) said Pitt was the better team, i

 

1311695[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

Well your somewhat correct about it not mattering, but it does matter in the sense that the NFL has an obvious problem that they need to adress.

 

Curious, what did you see in the game that (besides the final score ) that makes you think that Pittsburgh was the better team? Even with all the scores, scoring opporunities, and the 160+ yards taken away from Seattle by just a handful of the crappy calls, the statistics still don't point to Pittsburgh being the better team.

[Menudo]

I'm seeing this gelling as the majority opinion of neutral folks.

 

So far as Pitt fans go, Meundo and Skippy deserve props for realizing and acknowledging that their team was handed the game. Some of the other Pitt fans though don't seem so contrite.

 

1311711[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Hold up, I never and don't think Skippy said that we were handed the game. That would imply that without the officiating blunders, the Seahawks would have definitely won. What we said, is that there were calls that went the Steelers way, and without them, we will never know what might have happened, which is sad.

[Dragon]

I'm seeing this gelling as the majority opinion of neutral folks.

 

So far as Pitt fans go, Meundo and Skippy deserve props for realizing and acknowledging that their team was handed the game. Some of the other Pitt fans though don't seem so contrite.

 

1311711[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Actually, I am completely nuetral and I think "their team was handed the game" is just a bit of an overstatement.

Edited February 7, 2006 by Dragon

[tonorator]

I did ?    I've been saying over and over again, that the officiating has ruined this game for Seahawks fans, Steelers fans, and football fans in general.  We all deserved better.

 

If I said it Sunday night, that was, um, like not me or something. 

 

1311727[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

you were berated all complainers and saying that if the tables were turned, you would be showing class and respect and giving it up to seattle.

[Menudo]

you were berated all complainers and saying that if the tables were turned, you would be showing class and respect and giving it up to seattle.

 

1311746[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Was it during my drunken tirade Sunday night ?

 

I was an idiot. I"ve apologized for it and made my true feelings known many times since.

[Bengal Mania]

Well your somewhat correct about it not mattering, but it does matter in the sense that the NFL has an obvious problem that they need to adress.   

 

Curious, what did you see in the game that (besides the final score  ) that makes you think that Pittsburgh was the better team?  Even with all the scores, scoring opporunities, and the 160+ yards taken away from Seattle by just a  handful of the crappy calls, the statistics still don't point to Pittsburgh being the better team.

 

1311729[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

I meant Pitt was favored as the better team by almost everyone BEFORE the game. I don't think any media ever even seioursly contemplated a Seattle victory angle. The way they were slobbering all over Bettis' knob, it must taste like chocolate.

 

I'm saying that with all the pre-game presumption of Pitt being better (favored, media rave, etc), it would be foolish to think Seattle should overcome the "better team" AND the officials.

 

The NFL does need to figure something out. The fans did get robbed. Seattle got robbed. Even Pitt got robbed (of true legitimacy), but they've got a trophy to ease the burdon.

Edited February 7, 2006 by Bengal Mania

[Voltaire]

I don't want to argue semantics. I think Menudo and Skippy have expressed themselves well enough and didn't mean to imply the game was stolen or any such thing.

[wildcat2334]

Very well said, as a Seahawk homer I get way too fired up over it. As a neutral football fan you nailed it. Just do not undertsand anyone who thinks those calls do not affect the outcome, winner of the game. Amazing to me.

 

The phantom Locklear hold erases 1st and goal at the 1- Sea 17 Pitt 14- whole game changes- momentum is huge in the NFL- instead it goes the other way.

[H8tank]

I thought Pitt would win the game... until about mid-week, then all my money went on the Seahawks straight up.

 

Ben is still too young, was not prepared, and the defense can be beat.

 

It will be nice to see Pitt get spanked by Cinn twice next year, and I will relish them go 9-7 and miss the playoffs.

[DO Jaded]

Hold up, I never and don't think Skippy said that we were handed the game.  That would imply that without the officiating blunders, the Seahawks would have definitely won.  What we said, is that there were calls that went the Steelers way, and without them, we will never know what might have happened, which is sad.

 

1311734[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

First off: Saying "they were handed the game by the refs" is not the same as saying they couldn't have won it on their own. I think the statement from Voltaire is just that you acknowledged that the game was skewed by bad calls.

 

Second: I don't think anyone here is 100% positive that if the refs had called a better game it was a definite Seattle win. It just would have been nice to see it play out without the stripes getting in the way. As a homer, I think they would have won, but I'm letting that dead horse alone.

 

But I have to ask all Pitt homers. If Roeth had been unable to make that 1 in a 100 tackle in the Colts game and the colts had scored the winning TD, would you just chalk it up to Pitt not playing well enough to overcome the terrible INT reversal?

Edited February 7, 2006 by DO Jaded

[Copeman]

First off: Saying "they were handed the game by the refs" is not the same as saying they couldn't have won it on their own. 

 

  Second:  I don't think anyone here is 100% positiive that if the refs had called a better game it was a definite Seattle win.  It just would have been nice to see it play out without the stripes getting in the way.  As a homer, I think they would have won, but I'm letting that dead horse alone. 

 

  But I have to ask all Pitt homers.  If Roeth had been unable to make that 1 in a 100 tackle in the Colts game and the colts had scored the winning TD, would you just chalk it up to Pitt not playing well enough to overcome the terrible INT reversal? 

 

1312118[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

More "What if's"!

[DO Jaded]

More "What if's"!   

 

1312121[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

It's not a "What If?" so much as a frame of reference question. Too difficult for you to think about? I know it's easier to just enter or or "Good one! " than to actually think things through. Don't strain yourself. I'll wait for the more mature Pitt fans to respond.

[kcmast]

Also neutral here. At first I wanted to see Bettis win it, then the media ruined that for me and I didn't really care. But, the lopsided calls just ruined the game for me. It left a sour taste that I'm hoping the draft can remove; but seriously it put a dent in my NFL craze. And not just the officiating in that game, but all year. The 15 yarder on Hass was the topping. Didn't any other official see the play to overrule the guy who threw the flag?