Sports: January 2006 Archives
People talk about the Steelers being a sixth place team, but they did win 11 games, and two of their three losses, Big Ben didn't even play.
Ben's got only four career losses in his two seasons: his first loss was to the defending (and future) Super Bowl champion Patriots in the playoffs last year. His second was to the Patriots this year.
Then he lost to the as-yet-undefeated Colts in week 12, and a close one to the Bengals the following week. And then he beat them in back-to-back weeks in the playoffs.
Not that Seattle can't beat Pittsburgh, but it takes a lot to knock off the Steelers with Roethlisberger at the helm.
I don't really care who wins. My family is all from Pittsburgh originally, but they are too much a rival of the Pats for me to like them. I live in Washington, near Seattle, and my only reason for not wanting the Seahawks to win have nothing to do with the team itself: I don't want the fans who barely know the names of five Seahawks -- which covers most of the fans I've met -- to talk smack for the next year.
Ben's got only four career losses in his two seasons: his first loss was to the defending (and future) Super Bowl champion Patriots in the playoffs last year. His second was to the Patriots this year.
Then he lost to the as-yet-undefeated Colts in week 12, and a close one to the Bengals the following week. And then he beat them in back-to-back weeks in the playoffs.
Not that Seattle can't beat Pittsburgh, but it takes a lot to knock off the Steelers with Roethlisberger at the helm.
I don't really care who wins. My family is all from Pittsburgh originally, but they are too much a rival of the Pats for me to like them. I live in Washington, near Seattle, and my only reason for not wanting the Seahawks to win have nothing to do with the team itself: I don't want the fans who barely know the names of five Seahawks -- which covers most of the fans I've met -- to talk smack for the next year.
I know it was not the point of the game, but hardly any reporter is stating the fact that the refs got the call wrong. It was a touchback, and there is no reasonable doubt about it.
Even Phil Simms demonstrated the proof that it was a touchback, at the time, using the same replay footage the refs had access to: just draw a straight line from where the ball landed to where it left his hand on the rear overhead shot. Now, it is possible the ball curved, and plus it is difficult to take into account the fact that the ball is a couple of feet of the ground when it leaves his hand, but those factors only matter if the line is close, and it's not. It was about 20 yards further downfield than would have been possible if it did not go over the goal line in bounds. Also, you must take into account the width of the football, because if any part goes over the pylon, it is in bounds, so the ball's trajectory would have had to have been at a very sharp angle for it to not have gone through the end zone, and it's just not possible given where it landed.
It really tainted the game (which, granted, was already well-tainted by the turnovers). I wonder if the head of NFL officiating will cop to the mistake this week; he usually does.
It's not that the refs lost the game. It's like the USC/UT game (the OTHER Patriots head coach going for his third straight championship): USC screwed up and lost the game, but that doesn't give a pass to the officials who simply blew the call. Except there, they didn't have replay access, and here they did.
This just in: a zebra just now threw another flag on Asante Samuel, from his home in Detroit. He wasn't at the game, but he says he is absolutely sure Samuel committed pass interference on that interception.
Even Phil Simms demonstrated the proof that it was a touchback, at the time, using the same replay footage the refs had access to: just draw a straight line from where the ball landed to where it left his hand on the rear overhead shot. Now, it is possible the ball curved, and plus it is difficult to take into account the fact that the ball is a couple of feet of the ground when it leaves his hand, but those factors only matter if the line is close, and it's not. It was about 20 yards further downfield than would have been possible if it did not go over the goal line in bounds. Also, you must take into account the width of the football, because if any part goes over the pylon, it is in bounds, so the ball's trajectory would have had to have been at a very sharp angle for it to not have gone through the end zone, and it's just not possible given where it landed.
It really tainted the game (which, granted, was already well-tainted by the turnovers). I wonder if the head of NFL officiating will cop to the mistake this week; he usually does.
It's not that the refs lost the game. It's like the USC/UT game (the OTHER Patriots head coach going for his third straight championship): USC screwed up and lost the game, but that doesn't give a pass to the officials who simply blew the call. Except there, they didn't have replay access, and here they did.
This just in: a zebra just now threw another flag on Asante Samuel, from his home in Detroit. He wasn't at the game, but he says he is absolutely sure Samuel committed pass interference on that interception.
"It is the common fate of the indolent to see their rights become a prey to the active. The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his guilt."
