Super Bowl XL-- Was it a Super Game?

[OldRetired1]

Time for the "Monday Morning Quarterbacks" to speak.

Every year it is the same -- it happens every championship game in every sport.  Before the big game, everyone says, "I hope it is a good game."  The day after, everyone (usually) says, "What a horrible game."  It is Monday morning and if I had a dollar for every person (on TV, the radio, and at work) that has said the Super Bowl was horrible or boring, I would retire today.

I would like to ask anyone, "What is your definition of a great game?"  Is it a game that comes down to the last play?  Is it a game that has no turnovers or penalties?  Do the great games have lots of scoring?

It was said that the qb's were sloppy.  True.  But what is said about the pass coverage?.  Maybe, the defenses had something to do with the poor qb play.  Is it considered a good game if both qb's throw for 300+ and 2 td's?

With the exception of Willie Parker's long run, it was said that the running games were non-existent.  Maybe the front-7's of both teams played very well.  Is it considered a good game if Alexander or Bettis runs for 100+ and a couple of td's?

Why can't a defensive struggle be considered a good game???

I guess I just the love the game itself.  I enjoyed it.  I saw two great teams slugging it out.  Sure there was a lot of mistakes, but great players FORCE mistakes, too.  A qb throws a bad pass but maybe a hand was in his face when he threw it or a DB made a great break on the ball.  Either way you look at it, usually a mistake is caused by another person making a play.  I believe Pittsburgh made more plays than Seattle, especially at crunch-time, and that is why they are world champs.


Let's hear from the "Monday Morning Quarterbacks!"

[HOGDOG]

Anytime the Steelers win it is a great game and that last night was GREAT

[d_lm1]

i love football, even though "my" team didnt make it, i thought it was a good game.  anytime their are 2 teams on the field is a good game, i dont always like the outcome, and its easy to sit on the sidelines and say they should have done this or should have done that, but when your in their shoes its a completely different situation

[footballfan-tastic]

Not a great game, definatelynot a super game.   Super games have more hype to begin with, Ididn't notice that about this one.  Also the game's tempo was kind of slow, and for the love of mike wht was Seattle doing in the last 2 minutes.

[Lions84]

Nope it was tainted by the Refs

[arreferee]

Nope it was tainted by the Refs

I've heard this a few times, but haven't heard any details as to what calls "tainted" the game.  Can you give details?  From what I've heard, there were a few questionable calls, but none of them were incorrect rulings.

[OLDBEAR]

I was listening to ESPN radio this morning and Colin Cowherd announced that his show would not recognize the Steelers as this year's Super Bowl champions because the refs won the game.  He played clips from Ben Roth on late night last night where he said he did not get in the end zone, from Holmgren complaining and from Bill Parcells who said that it was bad.  I thought the biggest bad calls were the touchdown, the pass interference, and the hold on the pass play that Stephens caught at the one.  The other call that was in a category all its own was the blocking below the waist on Hasselbeck.  It would not have changed the interception, but definitely changed the field position.  MVP of this game wore a striped shirt.

[arreferee]

I was listening to ESPN radio this morning and Colin Cowherd announced that his show would not recognize the Steelers as this year's Super Bowl champions because the refs won the game. He played clips from Ben Roth on late night last night where he said he did not get in the end zone, from Holmgren complaining and from Bill Parcells who said that it was bad. I thought the biggest bad calls were the touchdown, the pass interference, and the hold on the pass play that Stephens caught at the one. The other call that was in a category all its own was the blocking below the waist on Hasselbeck. It would not have changed the interception, but definitely changed the field position. MVP of this game wore a striped shirt.

I didn't see the hold, so I can't comment on that.  I don't care what Roth said, the nose of the ball touched the plane of the goal line just as he was hit.  It doesn't matter where he ended up...it only matters that the ball touched the plane.

The pass interference might not have seemed like much, but the receiver did get seperation by using his arm...and that's pass interference.  He may not have pushed off very hard, but the seperation he got helped him gain an advantage illegally.

I'm not sure about the Hasselbeck play.  I don't know what the NFL rule is on that, but the NCAA rule says you can't block below the waist on a change of possession.  By the book, it's probably a foul if he hit the blocker below the waist before getting to the ball-carrier.

You also have to remember that all the people you quoted are coaches and players.  The only people who know less about the rules than them are the sportscasters.  Just because a coach said it was a wrong call doesn't mean it was wrong. 

[OLDBEAR]

Just looked at the Fox Sports web site.  Apparently there are alot of people that would agree that the officials in this game were awful.  I am sure there are more places that are discussing the same.  I personally thought the interference call was much less contact than what the NFL normally allows.  On replay the hold looked like no hold at all.  We will just have to agree to disagree on the ball touching the plane.   I did not think it did.

[D-way Trey]

I'm not sure about the Hasselbeck play.  I don't know what the NFL rule is on that, but the NCAA rule says you can't block below the waist on a change of possession.  By the book, it's probably a foul if he hit the blocker below the waist before getting to the ball-carrier.

Unless I just completely missed something, he didn't hit a blocker below the waist. He hit the ball carrier below the waist, making the tackle that ended the play.

Immediately after the holding call the announcers also thought the call was unnecessary. He had his hands inside the shoulders from what I could tell. Who knows, maybe it was a makeup call from a previous play or something. But it sure didn't seem like a hold. If I recall correctly, that hold led to the interception that led to the "block below the waist" call. A string of events that certainly could change a game's outcome.

[arreferee]

He had his hands inside the shoulders from what I could tell. Who knows, maybe it was a makeup call from a previous play or something.

Trey, these two statements are awful.  First, just because the player has his hands inside the shoulders doesn't mean it isn't a hold.  I'm not old enough to remember this, but I believe that was the philosophy in the 1970s...today it is different.  Yes, if the players hands are outside the frame of the body, it's much easier to see, but holding happens quite often without the hands being outside the frame.

Also, I know many fans think officials have "make up" calls all the time, but I can guarantee you nothing called at the NFL level is a "make up" call.  The types of guys who have "make up" calls never get above the high school level. 

[D-way Trey]

He had his hands inside the shoulders from what I could tell. Who knows, maybe it was a makeup call from a previous play or something.

Trey, these two statements are awful.  First, just because the player has his hands inside the shoulders doesn't mean it isn't a hold.  I'm not old enough to remember this, but I believe that was the philosophy in the 1970s...today it is different.  Yes, if the players hands are outside the frame of the body, it's much easier to see, but holding happens quite often without the hands being outside the frame.

Also, I know many fans think officials have "make up" calls all the time, but I can guarantee you nothing called at the NFL level is a "make up" call.  The types of guys who have "make up" calls never get above the high school level. 

The make up call part was more of a joke. But I've always heard that unless you take someone down, offensive linemen usually get by with their hands inside the pads.

[OldRetired1]

When I posted earlier this week, I was trying to start a discussion about the quality of play rather than the horrible officiating.  Oh well, here's my 2 cents worth.

To all the whiners:  There were 2 calls that went against Pittsburgh that NOBODY is saying anything about.

#1  In the 1st quarter, the Seattle TE caught the ball, took 2 steps, got hit, and lost the ball.  It was ruled incomplete.  Pittsburgh would have recovered the fumble had it not been ruled dead.  Questionable call.

#2  On the long interception return by Seattle, Big Ben was clearly hit in the back.  Mark the penalty from the spot and Seattle has to drive 50 yards instead of 20.  (If you remember, Seattle scored its only TD on this drive.)

So if you say all the calls went against Seattle, you are mistaken.

Let's get back to the quality of play during the game.  Here is what Seattle failed to do (officiating has nothing to do with these):

#1  Did the officials cause the Seattle receivers to drop numerous passes?

#2  Did the officials cause the kicker to miss 2 FG's?

#3  Did the officials cause the punter to kick 4 punts into the end zone for touchbacks?

#4  Did the officials cause Seattle to have poor clock management at the end of the 2nd and 4th quarters?


Seattle failed to make plays, especially in crunchtime.  The officiating crew should not be blamed for Seattle's repeated blunders.  Seattle has no one to blame but themselves.

[d_lm1]

the officials had nothing to do with your 4 questions, the problem with that is:  it all falls on the teams shoulders.  you have good days and bad days, it was a bad day for seattle.   by the way, the nfl is standing behind the officiating after reviewing all the plays.  that doesnt mean the calls were perfect, just means the officials did the job to the best of their ability.  like it or not, it all stands as is, and steelers are the winners

[SingleWingGuru]

[chilly gilly]

Show & Tell Jeremy!!!!! TOUCHDOWN PIMPS!!!!!!!!

[highschoolftball07]

I was listening to ESPN radio this morning and Colin Cowherd announced that his show would not recognize the Steelers as this year's Super Bowl champions because the refs won the game.  He played clips from Ben Roth on late night last night where he said he did not get in the end zone, from Holmgren complaining and from Bill Parcells who said that it was bad.  I thought the biggest bad calls were the touchdown, the pass interference, and the hold on the pass play that Stephens caught at the one.  The other call that was in a category all its own was the blocking below the waist on Hasselbeck.  It would not have changed the interception, but definitely changed the field position.  MVP of this game wore a striped shirt.

thats tru about the refs... when they showed the replay of ben getting into the td zone, his knee was down and then he reached and put the ball in the inzone and they gave them the td, but if u remember when the titans played the rams, the titans did that and they didnt count it...i dont like the steelers of seahawks, but the seahawks had the superbowl won last year if the refs was any good to see all the calls, they was so stupid, i wonder wat they thought after  they saw the replays on tv, lol