Best thing on this site in months...

I see that by allowing the Great Tiger to win, the Japanese are foreseeing the Indians take over as the most powerful democratic country in Asia

"Ladies and Gentleman, your 2006 Mr. Fraternity winner is..."

bean-o and other steelers fans, how mental would the city have gone if the steelers had lost? what a game...

watching craig during that game was priceless. i don't think even i've recovered from it. oh, and big weekend in the casino. i think almost everyone except joe had a good weekend. team hero for the week, fun tomforde. won some huge double downs on 200 dollar bets (bringing only 100 to the table),

i was (am) this close to never watching an nfl game after this years playoffs. I dare anyone to convince me that there wasn't a colts fix on that game. This could be it for me. That said, I'm the last guy to claim conspiracy on anything. The best phone call from any of you fuckers was Phil calling me to tell me he slept through the whole game. Just turn on ESPN classic this week and you will catch it

I dare anyone to convince me that I was sober at 1:15. The goal today is to avoid actually talking to anyone so nobody realizes how banged up I am.

i'm curious to hear the explanation of the interception reversal. My guess is that the official was sticking to some sort of "letter of the law" interpretation. Maybe falling and rolling isn't considered a football move, and he hadn't completed the act of getting up since he knee was on the ground. Who knows, regardless, that was b.s. NFL network usually has the head of officials on the network to explain all that stuff, so maybe he'll explain it. And no way the game was fixed. Shit went crazy, but there were also some random calls that wouldn't have been made if the refs were in on it. Case in point, after the lead was cut to three, on the first steelers play, the refs called a very iffy pass interference call on the colts db. Granted, he caught the pass so it didn't matter. But if the fix is in, no way he makes that call and gives the steelers 8 yards and a first down. It's easy to swallow your whistle on a pass interference, even when it's obvious, which that one wasn't.

A fix is debatable for sure. But I will really question things if that referee isn't fired. Bang bang plays going a thousand miles an hour are one thing, sticking your head into a replay for ten minutes to come up with a decision that nobody understands is another thing. The integrity of the NFL is in question right now. The thing about the fact his knee was on the ground is that if you watch the replay, he rolls over at least once, if not twice. So when does that knee come off the ground?

I'm not saying it wasn't a crap call, I'm just saying that i can totally see the referee making it because he thought that based on the strictest interpretation of the rules of possesion that polamalu didn't have it. That doesn't change the fact that either he screwed up, or he stuck too rigidly to the way the rule was written. If the league officals are able to explain the ruling as "correctly interpreting the rules", then the entire replay system is screwed up because it forces the ref to think about how the rule is worded rather than just using his fuckin brain.

That's right. I said that last night that if this is how replay is going to be run, it isn't worth it to me. I'll trust the officials eyes and expertise over this junk.

The play that truly indicated the incompetence of that officiating crew was the No-Call on the false start. The Colts defensive line came across the line of scrimmage and apparently didn't touch anyone. Then the Steelers left tackle stands up while the Colts are pointing all over the place. Well, the book would say that if a defensive player crosses the line of scrimmage and then the offensive player moves, that it's a neutral zone infraction by the defense. I was flabbergasted that the net result was NO CALL. It technically cannot be a no call, as the offense was set, then, randomly, people were just walking around looking for a do-over. Cats and Dogs living together. . . total anarchy.

what i don't understand about that interception reversal is this. if troy stays on the ground and a colt comes and touches him, he is down, and gets possession. But because it spits out well after he's survived contact with the ground. It's a very stupid rule, if it was interpretting correctly. Attempting to get up should not put whether you have received the ball in jeopardy.

I'd be interested to see how the rule is written. If it's written in such a way that the call was technically correct, the official did the right thing and the league screwed up. Otherwise he screwed up. It happens, calling it a "fix" is a bit much.

Can we get back to the real issue? Seattle's fullback is named "Mack Strong." I mean, come on. There's no way that's his real name. It's way too awesome.

Yes, I believe his Christian name is Lance Uppercut.

He's no Taco Wallace.

Right, Rob, it's either a bad rule or a bad ruling. Akin to a certain "tuck rule" play. Since coaches won't talk in too much depth about it because they are limited in how they can criticize officiating, hopefully the media will talk about this more this week. You know, at least give it enough press that you bully the league into making some type of statement. It's not unheard of for them to contact a coach or just make a statment and admit "yeah we blew that one." Or read the rule verbatim, and then explain the interpretation, and then either say "that's an acceptable interpretation" or "it was a pretty big stretch." Just for peace of mind, because this is the most absurd ruling I've seen - possibly ever.

It would cool if that dude next year on MNF, or whichever format in which they get to introduce themselves, in Hulk-voice says "Mack Strong. Mack very strong."

It's the name you want to touch. But you must'nt touch!

no, because he fumbled the ball while attempting to get up (i.e. kicking it out with his knee). if he stays down, his knee doesn't hit the ball, and is down by contact, with possession of the rock.

So your argument is that if he hadn't let go of the ball it wouldn't be incomplete?

early explanation from the nfl "The issue was whether he had possession. The ball came loose when he was getting up. Pete Morelli determined it wasn't a catch," NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said. "That was his judgment." Sounds like code for 'he fucked up'.

When they implemented replay, they had a rule that the ruling needed to be made in 90 or less. Did that go away? That took a long time and I think that in some way, that is the frustrating part cause it was almost like they were looking for a reason to make that call. And rob, I agree it is slightly over the top to think there was a fix, however the fact that a rational thinking person can even have that idea cross his or her mind is the issue.

Here is the sequence of events. 1. troy jumps route, dives and clearly catches the ball. 2. he hits the turf, possession in tact. 3. He gets up. 4. while getting up, holding the ball in his left hand, his left knee touches the ball, and it pops out. 5. he jumps back on it. My argument is this. If he stops at 2 and lays there, allowing an indy player to touch him, he is down by contact. This means that at event 2, he had possession of the ball. How at any point he can all of a sudden have the fact that he had possesion be changed by the fact that he attempted to get up is beyond me.

well, your sequence of events is off. #3 should be "He tries to get up." I think that's the distinction the ref made for whatever reason. He never actually got up (a football move), in the act of attempting to get up, he kneed it out.

moot. if he's touched after 2, he's down and has the ball. thanks for focusing on the important part of the argument. sure there weren't any typos in my statement you could have pointed out?

Ah, yes, the "football move." When the catch is made in the air, for it to be an actual catch, the receiver must maintain possession long enough to get both feet back on the ground and make a "football move." I will go on record and confess I don't have the foggiest idea of what constitutes a "football move." And most of these bozo announcers do not know either, yet we have all heard this phrase probably every game for the past two years. Does anyone know, do the rules actually use that terminology, and if so, do the rules make explicit what constitutes a football move? Because if the rules in any way, shape, or form justify the overturning of the call (as they did with the infamous tuck) than this offseason, as we'd say in Yinzburgh, that rule needs revisited.

I gotta agree with bordick on the best example of terrible refs - I was watching with like 12 people, and NO ONE could understand how they basically had a do-over in the middle of an NFL game. It boggles my (feeble) football mind. The best quote I heard was "if palamalu(sp?) had crawled into the end zone, then fumbled when he got up to celebrate, it would have been an incomplete pass?" I'm just glad they won so ryan won't have to call me every playoff sunday for the rest of my life and make sure I'm not watching the game.

i was just sayign that the ref's reason for overturning it was the craptastic "football move" idea. He lost possession of the ball before the "football move". I don't think the ref based his conclusion on anything other than that. If someone had touched him while he was down, that would have been the end of the play and the ref would have looked at it from the perspective of "did he maintain possession throughout the duration of the play. And bean, no one can ever explain a "football move" adequately because it doesn't make any fucking sense. I have heard it described as the player making "an act natural to the game of football"... but that is also crap.

again, i think the ref was making a distinction between what polamalu did in trying to intercept, and what he did after. His rolling around is a result of his momentum in trying to make a play on the ball and therefore not a football move. His attempt to get up, of his own volition, would have qualified as a football move, but his knee knocked the ball loose before he got his other knee off the ground. Again, let me restate, I think it's total and complete crap, but that's the kind of bullshit logic i think the ref used.

right, i think we all agree that we understand his logic. we're all arguing that the rule sucks. steve likes men. bob is short.

Worst call i've ever seen. Bar none. Things that upset me about the call (which may have been mentioned earlier): 1. It was ruled an INT and then overturned. Please explain to me how you find enough evidence of an Incomplete Pass (which was the final ruling) to OVERTURN the call on the field. 2. As I'm sure someone has pointed out... if you're on the ground and can be touched and signaled "down" with the ball, thats a catch. Why can it be changed to incomplete if you try to get up and knock the ball out of your own hand? 3. I'm not going to jump on the "fixed game" bandwagon, but this is as close as I've ever gotten. 5 min under the hood... what was he looking for? It sure does seem like he was looking for an excuse to give the colts the ball. Other notes: 1. I'm VERY relieved that Pittsburgh didn't have its own version of Ernest Byner... that play could have easily ruined Bettis's fantastic career. 2. That FG miss couldn't have happened to a more appropriate person. 3. Manning throwing his O-line under the bus after the game was classless... as Bradshaw stated, he was the QB and much of the fault was his own, so be a man and take it on the chin like a real man should. 4. "The Tackle" - thank god for Ben Roethlisberger. 5. The non-pass-interference-call on the deep Randle-el pass play was as bad as the made-up-pass-interference-call on asante samuel in the Pats game. Horrendous decisions. 6. I'm relieved that the Steelers are a) playing another road game this week, and b) are underdogs yet again... i'm tired of the home-field advantage, favorite role in the AFCC Game since we seem to screw it up every time. 7. This "football move" crap needs to be clarified and/or specified Here we go Steelers...

All this 'interpretation' crap sure does make you think about the fix. I hate what this has done to a great game. 1) No way Bus retires if that is his last play 2) Idiot drunk kicker 3) That is the second 'classy' individual to make classless comment at the end of a game against the Steelers. I was shocked with Manning and Lewis last week 4) “Immaculate Tackle” is what I've heard it called 5) The best argument for why this game wasn't fixed is that all you had to do was watch any of the other games and you'd see how atrocious the officials have become. I think that is the repercussions to video replay 6) Besides my obvious reasons for wanting them to lose, can anyone think that a superbowl with this broncos team would be entertaining? The last 'do-over' I've ever witnessed was when I was 7 and we played in the street. Anything short of a superbowl will mean you continue to get those calls BTH

They made a vague rule and it bit them in the ass. The refs needed some guide to establish possession, and that's where this "football move" idea came up. Where this ref probably fucked up is assigning a "football move" as something that's done while not on the ground. When a guy slips all by himself and tries to roll forward or crawl forward to get more yardage, that's a football move to me, and I'm sure the league office now feels the same way. I'm sure we'll see either an explicit definition in the rulebook of "football move" and when it is applicable, or they'll train the refs better in the offseason. Anyone remember when plax spiked the live football after a catch? if he spiked it before he got up, that's an incomplete pass too I guess.

A writer for the Indy Star calls the overturned INT call "The Immaculate Deceoption": http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID. . .

There are some really shitty rules in Pro Football, which, by the way, has the most rules of any sport on the planet. The replay rules basically limit the time that the official has to review video. If the video did not show "Indisputable" evidence to overturn the call on the field, then the call stands. What the replay procedure does not address is how long those bubbas can discuss the inanity of the term "Football move." Therefore, the only logical conclusion that can be made with regards to how long it took them to make that call was that they couldn't find the glossary with the rules explaining the term. I'm pretty sure I made "football moves" in the sack and I've made "sex acts" on the football field, but we won't talk about that.

Oh, my favorite player. http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/422338 What is his nickname? Crappo, Crappy, or just plain Crap.

can't find a link for it, but the little breaking news box on espn news reads "NFL says ref wrong on Polamalu call" right now... so there you go.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs05/news/sto. . .

More general talk about the NFL this past weekend: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/and. . . Some amusing comments in there.

Oh, and Will, I would have to say you made a good point about what would Steeler fans have done if they lost. Look how much shit has been stirred up - even after the Steelers WON.

One thing I've noticed in the past day - of the five or so Post Gazette articles and five or so espn/si articles I've read that talk about this game, Nick Harper is never mentioned without the inclusion of his wife having knifed him on Saturday. I guess it's funny only because he was well enough to play, or maybe because the injury (plus another knee injury in the first quarter) is probably the main reason a big slow white guy was able to tackle him there at the end, or maybe because it reminds of when Willie Green's girlfriend beat him up and then he was stopped for drunk driving while wearing nothing but a pair of shorts and one sock.

Classic: Denver fans ... enjoy this week, you'll be coming up with your own excuses after about three hours after the kickoff against the Steelers.

Which of course in my twisted Red-Hot-Chilli-Peppers-mind begs the question, where was the sock?

You love cock

And to think -- after this thriller, we got to watch the crap that was the bears/panthers game.

I believe it was actually on his foot. Sorry.

So the NFL says "we f'ed up". I just can't help but wonder and cringe at the thought of what it would have felt like to lose that game and then the next day have that response. I can actually feel the ulcer growing.

from vilas http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/football/nf. . .

anybody know this guy? http://www.post-gazette.com/steelersphoto/photos_. . .

Notice the order of things he's glad for: "The Steelers won the game and I'm still alive, so I guess I'm doing pretty good," he said. Classic.

I don't see what your point is.

Hey, this isn't football related, but for all of you Sports Guy fans, Isiah Thomas apparently threatened Bill Simmons on the radio.

i like how this column comes out, as opposed to anything football related this weekend.

there's also this story about how big ben and the bus make out with each other all the time... or something...

No, he also put out this column for ESPN the Magazine where he admits that the Patriots weren't a dynasty.

The fact that he's still alive came second to the steelers winning. I found that amusing. That is all.

why does he have an issue with the dynasty now, but he didnt before? the timing on this kind of pisses me off. they were an nfl dynasty but he is right, if they win next year, the dynasty is back on.

Its the typical Sports Guy reaction... act as if nothing happened to cover his ass. Then again, i'm pretty sure thats what I would do as well. All that matters is that he keeps picking against the steelers (although I don't see him doing that this weekend, he won't bet on Jake)... I clicked on one link in his archive and found this: "The Pats have evolved into the most successful NFL franchise of the decade, winning two Super Bowl rings and flaunting the most successful coach-QB pairing since Walsh and Montana." Sounds like he was buying into the dynasty thing a year ago...

The Jim Ross Award for Best Moment that Could Have Been Made into a Fantastic Story Line To Mike Vanderjagt for shanking that season-ending field goal, which looked like one of Ali Haji Sheikh's efforts if you were playing the 1982 Giants at the All-Madden Level and completely screwed up the kicking wheel. After all of Vanderjagt's problems with Manning over the years, I kept waiting for the postgame press conference when Vanderjagt pretended to be upset, answered a few questions, and then suddenly Bill Cowher's music started playing (with Cowher dressed as Sergeant Slaughter), followed by Vanderjagt breaking into a big smile, and then the two of them hugging as Jim Ross screamed "No! No! No! My God, no!" Then Vanderjagt would rip off his Colts jersey to reveal a Steelers jersey underneath. This would have been one of the five greatest moments in sports history. And you know what? There's still time. A fantastic Sports Guy column: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=s. . .

we are all suspects... http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/5257526

I like the Sports Guy, don't get me wrong, but you're last name doesn't give you a pass on these items: 1) The Peyton waving-the-punt-team-off is such a non-story. Didn't anybody watch the post-game interview with Dungy where he was asked explicitly about that, and he said he had decided to go for it and Peyton had overheard it and was just speeding things up by getting the right personnel on (and off) the field? Oh, I forgot. That's a boring story, so we should ignore it for the sake of media hype. 2) Boo-fricking-hoo on your Pats loss, or more specifically how the better team lost or how this is a No F'ing Way Game. So you lost a game that not only you were sure you could/should win, but also that the national sports media collectively thought you could/should win. Cry me a river. By my Karma scoreboard, the Pats are a few more losses of that type away before you'll get even a sniff of sympathy from Steeler fans. And they have to occur in the Brady era. So deal.

Beano, I know Dungy said that, but when you watched the play happen and saw the look on his face, didn't that seem to tell you that it wasn't a case of players running on the field even when they weren't supposed to. If that had really happened most, or all, coaches would have been jumping and waiving their arms to get players off, and he stood there with a look on his face that to me said he wasn't the one making this call. So I guess it's a matter of interpreting that play, but my initial reaction and reaction after hearing his explanation, was that Peyton was running that team. And that clearly isn't a good thing As fore Peyton throwing his line under the bus, I heard someone say something yesterday that was pretty good. Peyton needs to be careful with that talk because it wouldn't be that hard to go back and research the Colts history or even UT history and see that the players have certainly changed around him, but the results have not. No big wins in Indy, none at Tennessee and maybe the most incriminating is that Tennessee won that National Championship without him and with TEE MARTIN as a QB. So maybe he'd like to rethink his words about his line.

yeah, i wouldn't say that was a fantastic article. i got tired of reading it.... and this... As Las Vegas reader Kyle tells us, "I was at the Pats-Broncos game, sitting in Section 111, Row 7. That Bailey interception return came right at me. Let me tell you, that was a freaking touchback. But, there wasn't a ref or cameraman within 20 yards of the play. Even the Broncos fans knew it was a touchback and were screaming for Shanahan to get the play off. Oh, well that fuckin settles it. The guy in Row 7 thought it was a touchback. Way to end an article, you douche.

the man is a homer. that's why it's usually entertaining to read him. you think that's going to change anytime soon? i hope for a long pats losing streak so he can be his good old self deprecating self like he was circa aaron fucking boone.

Ryan, I'll concede that I thought Tony's comments at the end of the game could have just been damage control. But enough of that non-story, because you brought up the other one... Peyton did not throw his O-line under the bus. He actually paused for a moment, said "I'm trying to be a good teammate here," and then said "we had protection problems." Which could mean one or all of several things: His line and RB's weren't blocking guys (pointing the finger at teammates); the coaches didn't adjust the scheme (pointing the finger at coaches); he didn't make adjustments at the line (pointing the finger at himself). To me, it appeared he made way less adjustments at the line than he did in their MNF matchup. And, yes, you're not supposed to blast teammates or coaches, implicitly or explicitly, but he was vindicated a little last night when ESPN showed some totally screwy blocking schemes. Maybe I need another crash course in O-line from Nino, but how do you have guards pull around tackles to block outside blitzers (a play the Colts were repeatedly burned on by the Steelers), or if it's not working, how do you not change it up?! And, Jon, by Homer do you mean someone that is aggravating and embarrassing if taken too seriously, but amusing if taken half-heartedly?

Either way you slice it, for someone as 'polished' as Peyton, it isn't a comment he should be making. Same with Tiki the week before. We expect those things from Joey Porter, but not Peyton. And I think he makes a lot less adjustments in general, and for line blocking specifically, then people give him credit for. As for blocking, specifically who blocks who, there was a play (I think it was the Steelers game but I watched all 4 so it may have been another) where a center came all the way out to pick up a blitzing db. The issue is knowing who is assigned to what area and being able to read what a defense is doing. So if the db disguises his blitz, the center (or whoever is supposed to pick him up) can think he is free to help in another area and be totally wrong. That is why it is impossible for analysts or 'experts' to truly place blame on a play unless you knew the exact blocking play that was called and you know how the defense disguised it (or attempted to) And I have never played a down of 'real' football. All this knowledge (as useful as it is) comes from watching Merril Hodge on NFL Countdown.

Everytime someone on the Pittsburgh defense moved, even if it was just Casey Hampton eating a sandwich, Peyton started calling audibles. Hopefully this will be a feature next year on Madden, where no matter what play you call, digital Peyton will change it six times at the line, and will only let you punt when he feels like it.
<. . .
Having guards pull is a valid blocking scheme, especially if the tackles are crashing down. It makes more sense if you're running the ball, but it could work with pass blocking, especially on play action.

Bean, going onto a national TV press conference and saying that "we had protection problems" while your O-line (namely Tarik Glenn) is in the locker room absorbing all of the blame to the reporters counts (in my book) as throwing your line under the bus. There just isn't any constructive reason for saying anything like that. Tom Brady didn't go to the press conference after his loss and say that Kevin Faulk and Troy Brown had "ball control problems", he took it on the chin and said things that a QB/leader is supposed to say. Manning isn't capable of doing that. He should have also mentioned that he had completion problems and play-calling problems during the game. To be honest, it wasn't like the pressure was OVERWHELMING... Lebeau called off the dogs for the bulk of the 3rd and 4th quarters until the very end. Ryan, to add to your stats, I read somewhere that Peyton had something like 6 losses in HS football, 3 of which occured in the state championship game (he never won it). Thus, Peyton has never won a championship at any level HS or above, correct?

what foods start with "amburger"?

'amburger-helper, obviously.

JT, that high school football thing you read came from that fantastic sports guy article you linked to. "Joe Posnanski had an article about Manning in Monday's paper that included this tidbit: 'Manning lost only five games in Isidore Newman High in New Orleans, but three of those losses came in the state playoffs. He did not win a state championship. He lost only six games at Tennessee, but famously three of those losses were to Florida, and the Volunteers did not win the national championship until after he left.

let's face it, anytime anyone says, "I read it somewhere" it's from espn because we don't read anything else.

I thought it might have, i couldn't remember... also, will, i'm sorry you didn't think the article was fantastic... next time i call something "fantastic", I'll be sure to get your opinion first.

Yeah, I guess my main problem with any guy pointing the fingers anywhere when assigning blame for a loss is that it ignores the effort of your opponent. Maybe it wasn't as much as the Colts sucking as it was the Steelers just flat-out kicking their asses? But with the blocking schemes, I know guards pull for runs, I didn't realize they did so also for pass protection. I don't necessarily think ESPN was criticizing that specific scheme as they were criticizing its continued use throughout the game when it was repeatedly failing.

I just saw it on espn 10 minutes ago, and yes, they are criticizing the coaching staff for not making a simple adjustment. They also thought that the comment by Peyton was out of line.

how about we file this under "who gives a fuck?" we constantly complain how players only give canned answers to questions, and then jump to criticize anyone who doesn't. why can't espn just show sports? sports has become so gossippy and snippy that it seems like it belongs in the sorority house. show me some fucking highlights, limited analysis of the game, and be done with it.

thanks j.t., i'd appreciate it. my most recent use of "fantastic" was 80% so you'd know which article it came from and 20% continued dig at a sports guy article i didn't like. and i love the sports guy, i just dont like that he chose to focus much more attention on his favorite team losing than on one of the craziest and most memorable games in recent memory.

by the way, i am a *HUGE* fan of signing names that aren't actually people's names. To the casual observer, this thread must just look like a train wreck of movie quotes and bitching about football.

actually its funny that you said that mayes. a friend of mine lives in indy and likes the colts. He is always complaining about how peyton is all 'coach speak' and cliques and just the same lines over and over again. i find it funny that peyton chooses this exact moment and this exact way to break that mold but for the most part, i agree with your thoughts on espn

Mayes, i'm with you on the reduction of gossipy stories, but I'm a fan of the game analysis as long as it isn't coming from sean salisbury.

Sean Salisbury should have to begin every statement with, "I sucked as an NFL quarterback, but..." Also, I am now watching the NFL Films recap of Super Bowl XX - Bears vs Patriots. It is fantastic on so many levels, but especially for Jim McMahon's 2 headbands (one around his forehead, the other around his neck) and the 80s Super Bowl Shuffle-esque sountrack.

Good point Jon. Peter King in this week's Monday Morning Quarterback column for SI said about the same thing. We want honesty from people, but then when players give it (because although it may have been the non-PC thing to say, let's face it - Tiki and Peyton were correct) we nail them for pointing the finger. Cause you know what, it ain't always going to be the fault of the guy who's getting asked the questions. What's he supposed to do, lie? And Decker, where the hell are you that you are watching ESPN right now?

I'm still on break, but I'm in Ithaca. Now they're showing Super Bowl IX - Steelers vs Vikings.

Pittsburgh's up 2-0, having scored the first safety in Super Bowl history.

Nice decker. keep the updates coming. but why don't you turn the tv off right before super bowl XXX

Touchdown, Franco Harris. Pittsburgh 9, Vikings 0.

Touchdown Terry Brown off a blocked punt, missed PAT. Steelers 9, Vikings 6. There are some great plays in this SB. On a kickoff, the Steelers kicker slipped and accidentally squibbed the kick, but the Vikings fumbled it and the Steelers recovered. Also, Tarkenton had a pass batted back to himself, caught it and then made like a 20 yd completion. It was called back though, b/c apparently you can't complete a pass to yourself.

I think it was called back for two forward passes. But the rules were wacky back then (like the rule that would/could have made the Immaculate Reception illegal is no longer in play), so you could be right.

Touchdown Steelers, a short pass to a receiver that the NFL Films guy left unnamed. Then he called the 10 point lead "insurmountable." Steelers 16, Vikings 6.

Game over. Alright, hope you enjoyed the game. Gotta get to school, so you'll have to read about Super Bowl X (steelers Cowboys) somewhere else.

hey, we keep this up, maybe we'll break the posts records set by a previous carnival thread. Let's get oof to do some painting.

fantastic work dave. maybe we should try something like that where we all take turns taking a day off to inform others of what is going on on any given station. it's something to think about

Superbowl X was Lynn Swann's returnn from a concussionn inn the previous game against the raiders to winn the Super Bowl MVP. This is useless information for now, but will be retold countless times in the future in mandated Pennsylvania History classes in schools across Pennsylvania when they get to the part about him winning the Govenor Election.

I'm saying it here, I'm saying it now: if he wins I'm leaving the state (for more than 5 days a week).

Without knowing anything but what dp just said about him, he CAN'T be worse than the corruption currently there. That said, he can't win either.

He's republican, not that that makes a difference. And his Political backing group is called Team-88, named after his number. So he's got that going for him, which is nice.

so who would make a better governor... lance armstrong or michael vick?

definitely Marcus Vick.

I love Terry Bradshaw but I just read this and I'm floored by the stupidity. Yet I'm shocked by how many folks have said similar things. See if you spot the huge flaw in the arguement. Now, I wouldn't have done what Steelers coach Bill Cowher elected to do. There was 1:20 left in the game, and he had the ball on the Colts' 2-yard line. I would have taken a knee three straight plays and forced the Colts to use all of their timeouts. I might have even kicked a field goal, but taken a knee on fourth down? That should have left the Colts 97 yards away from a touchdown and less than 50 seconds to do it.

Shaun White

Oh, I get it, the time outs stop the clock and it wouldn't start until the snap. assuming a quick knee, the colts would have around 1:15 to jet down the field. I'd have just given the rock to joiner and let him run around for a while. that's always the classy thing to do.

wow that was hard huh. and this is some 3 or 4 days after the fact. wow. joiners play works at midfield. on the goal line, id give the ball to mullen let him make his way to the end zone, give him a sandwich so he doesn't eat the ball and then kick off with a 10 pt lead.

if bettis scores a touchdown there, I'd say the odds of the colts winning would roughly be zero percent. If they do the kneel down thing... that ups the colts chances to what? 15% percent? Odds of fumbling on a kneel down? Close to 0%. So if all of what I said makes sense... you only kneel down if you think there's a greater than 15% (or whatever) chance that Bettis would fumble. Personally, I'd have to go with a 1% to 3% chance Bettis fumbles on one of the running plays. I know I just made those numbers, up, but the point is people saying they should have kneeled down are stupid.

i think with that logic, you've got to take the $250,000 and the genital herpes. Then, you pay hendrix $1,000 to watch the AFC championship. You use the remaining $249,000 to bet on Denver, and viola, an extra $498,000 in your ING account.

I'd suggest watching your back mayes, I'm on my way up there

I'm amazed, after all the attention they've given Joey Porter, no one has mentioned that he's returning to the state where his ass got shot, in the ass.

It's been mentioned a few times on ESPN radio, with someone suggesting he needs bullet-proof pants Bad news JT, SportsGuy picked the Steelers

HAHA, i just came to the site to tell you the same thing...