NFL Says SB Properly Officiated!

1. The game wasn't fixed by the NFL or the refs.

2. Seattle lost the game with their less than stellar play but the calls made against them did not hurt the Steelers in any way. And the preponderance of less-than-fully-obvious calls went against the Seahawks.


Now, with regard to the hideously self-serving statement by Greg Aiello, here is what I wrote in my rant for today in my Internet column. If I were ever to be on trial for something where jail time might be one of the outcomes of the affair, then I want Greg Aiello on my jury. I wonder whom he believes shot Lee Harvey Oswald.

I think Pittsburgh's offense was exposed a bit even though they won the game. I think they lose that game seven or eight times out of ten.

I also think the Redskins could learn from Holmgren's strategy of using three and five step drops to throw on first down. At times the Seahawks made it look easy against a very strong Pittsburgh defense. When Pitt can't get pressure, they struggle because they have an average secondary. The Redskins did a much better job against Seattle because they have one or two guys that can actually cover.

I think Pittsburgh's offense was exposed a bit even though they won the game. I think they lose that game seven or eight times out of ten.

I also think the Redskins could learn from Holmgren's strategy of using three and five step drops to throw on first down. At times the Seahawks made it look easy against a very strong Pittsburgh defense. When Pitt can't get pressure, they struggle because they have an average secondary. The Redskins did a much better job against Seattle because they have one or two guys that can actually cover.I don't know if Pitt's O was exposed I think it was alot of poor execution from both teams.

i honestly do think seattle out played pitt. pitt. made 3 plays on offense the entire game. pitt's defense had trouble stopping seattle's offense without the help of those "questionable" penalties.

i'm not even going to comment on the penalties. i'm pretty sure you know how i feel about that. i will say this, those penalties decided the outcome of that game.

i don't think complaining about the refs is what losers do, if they have legitament complaints. which i feel they most certianly do. i seem to remember a lot of folks on this site complaining about the officiating during the first skins- dallas game of 2004 (pass interferrence) also the skins-bucs game of 2005 (alstott's td). that doesn't make those who complained losers because they had legitament complaints. but because it's seattle those same people don't care as much, they just say "oh well, seattle just didn't play good enough to win".

Saying that they only made 3 plays doesn't really support your point. That's what EVERY team does to win a game. When the Skins blew out Dallas, they made 5 plays to win. Outplayed or not, Pittsburgh won the game. Dallas outplayed the Redskins the first time around, but the Skins came up with BIG PLAYS with it counted. Do you think Dallas deserved to win that game?

Saying that they only made 3 plays doesn't really support your point. That's what EVERY team does to win a game. When the Skins blew out Dallas, they made 5 plays to win. Outplayed or not, Pittsburgh won the game. Dallas outplayed the Redskins the first time around, but the Skins came up with BIG PLAYS with it counted. Do you think Dallas deserved to win that game?


You kind of make his point with that statement MC, If 3 0r 4 plays deciede a game, then thats all it takes for a officials to determain the outcome of a game, all it takes is 3 or 4 timely bad calls and there you have it. And that is what happened in this game, take away those very questionable penalties and Seattle wins, THERE IS NO DOUBT!

There was only one really bad call that stood out in my mind and that was Hasselbeck's "low block". The PI call WAS soft, BUT it was PI nonetheless and it was right in front of the ref. The holding call was most definitely holding. He wasn't offsides and the hold clearly prevented him from sacking Hasselbeck.

There was only one really bad call that stood out in my mind and that was Hasselbeck's "low block". The PI call WAS soft, BUT it was PI nonetheless and it was right in front of the ref. The holding call was most definitely holding. He wasn't offsides and the hold clearly prevented him from sacking Hasselbeck.

I think this whole thing has really been blown out of proportion.

The refs aren't perfect, but they certainly didn't cost Seattle the game. To say that is glossing over the fact they simply did not play well enough to win.

The refs did however almost cost Pittsburgh the game against the Colts, but on that day you saw a team that was good enough to overcome difficult circumstances. Seattle simply wasn't the better team last week.

i think you and i might be the only two on this site that actually watched and paid attention to the superbowl.:)

LOL what game were you guys watching exactly??

Seems like you two are the only ones in the country convinced Seattle outplayed Pittsburgh.

my reasoning for not focusing on the 3rd down % is because i don't feel it had anything or at least, very little to do with the out come of the game.

You can't tell me converting on just five 3rd downs has very little to do with the outcome of the game. Those are stalled drives, lost opportunities, and most importantly lost scoring chances.

Steven's 4 drops, Hasselbeck's INT and 2 missed FG's were far more damaging in the overall outcome than the refs in my opinion.

LOL what game were you guys watching exactly??

Seems like you two are the only ones in the country convinced Seattle outplayed Pittsburgh.


Maybe we can do a poll? Who outplayed who in the SB.