Excellent viewpoint on SBXL refs

[paynomind]

Michael Smith

Here is my favorite point:

"10 accepted penalties between the teams. Seven were against the Seahawks, though, a team that tied with Indianapolis for the second-fewest penalties (94) in the regular season. "

Ridiculous.

[black_gold_capone]

I seen about 10 holding calls that should have been made that wasn't last night against the Seahawks. Mostly Locklear....

[TLChandler]

That was a great article, may be biased, but I agreed 100% with all his points. The officials didnt lose the game for Seattle, but they prevented them from a lot of momentum and a few scoring oppurtunites. They definately hurt my precious Hawks.

[BuddyLane]

I know that there has been poor officiating through out the playoffs. However, the Seahawks were not able to win the game do to their own performance and the Steelers restricting them to what they could do. The Refs didn't keep Seattle from winning.

[ROCHitman]

The officials did not blow this game for Seattle. Plain and simple.

[CJR]

The Refs didn't keep Seattle from winning.

You're right, they just stopped them from getting enough points.

[FiddySicks]

The Refs didn't keep Seattle from winning.

You're right, they just stopped them from getting enough points.

Two, possibly three scores taken away on bad calls. Not good that 41% of ESPN voters said they will remember Super Bowl XL for poor officiating

[agentrygraphics]

Ah, but it's very easy for 100% of us Steeler fans to say we'll remember super bowl XL because WE WON. You can have your polls...we'll have our trophy...

[Hat Boy]

The Refs didn't keep Seattle from winning.

You're right, they just stopped them from getting enough points.

Mike Holmgren is to blame as much as any of the refs. Seattle screwed up their 2-minute drill at the end of both halves. Plus, playing for the field goal following the pass interference call in the endzone.

For as much as people love to hail this guy as a genius, he is a Desmond Howard away from being 0-3 in the Super Bowl.

[lilgump]

which would mean hes been to three superbowls with 2 different teams, that takes some talent.

Also I think I agree with Steve Young with what he said after the game. Dont have the exact quote but he said that he wished that the refs didnt have such a big impact on the game that they did. And to say that the steelers played better is bologne, look at the stats. To say they made more plays and took advantage of their situation is completely right.

[ROCHitman]

2 missed field goals.

Two 2-minute drills that could have taken 5 minutes to execute.

Dropped passes.

Those are the reasons Seatlle couldn't get enough points.

[Brian in Boston]

I'm a die-hard Seattle Seahawks fan. I've been rooting for this team since they entered the league. I wanted them to win Super Bowl XL as much as I've ever wanted any of my favorite teams to capture the championship in their respective sports. That said, the officials did not cost the Seahawks a win last night.

Were there some egregious mistakes made by the officiating crew? Absolutely. That said, it doesn't directly follow that the officials' mistakes cost Seattle the game. I believe that the Seahawks could have overcome the poor officiating if they had played a consistently good game. Not a great game, mind you. A consistently good game. Simply put, the Seahawks needed to play up to something at least approaching their full potential for the duration of the game. Unfortunately, they didn't... not even when the officials weren't making mistakes.

* The refs didn't overthrow the pass that resulted in the interception by Ike Taylor. That was Hasselbeck's responsibility. Even Holmgren has been quoted as saying, "... that one went up for grabs." It wasn't Hasselbeck's only overthrow of the night.

* The refs didn't drop four crucial Seahawk passes in the game. Those balls were dropped by Jerramy Stevens.

* The refs didn't blow the coverage on the 28-yard pass to Ward, miss tackles on Willie Parker's 75-yard run or bite on the reverse to Randle El that resulted in the 43-yard "gadget" touchdown. Despite playing quite well for the rest of the game, it was the Seahawk defense that got burned on those three plays - plays that provided/led to all 21 of Pittsburgh's points.

* The refs didn't punt the ball into the endzone time after time after time. Tom Rouen and the punt coverage team were responsible for the Steelers starting several drives at their own 20-yard line.

* The refs didn't fail to field a playable punt only to see it downed at the Seattle 1-yard line. That was Peter Warrick's miscue.

* The refs weren't responsible for squandering drives at the end of both halves through a combination of horrendous clock management and piss-poor play-calling. Mike Holmgren, the Seattle offensive coaching staff and Matt Hasselbeck must shoulder the blame for those miscues.

In short, one of Bobby Engram's comments following the game sums things up quite succinctly:

You have to give them (Pittsburgh) credit. But I don't think we played up to our potential.

What a horrible admission to have to make in the wake of the biggest game an athlete has ever played. How a team can take the field at the Super Bowl - arguably America's greatest sports spectacle - and not muster the ability to play up to their potential... well, I'll never know. Still, that's precisely what the Seahawks did. They simply did not give it their best effort. Period.

The true frustration is that after 29 years of what amounted to a fairly mediocre history, the Seahawks franchise - as embodied by the 2005 team - had seemingly come to the realization that it possessed the talent to do great things... if only they executed their game plan. Unfortunately, Seattle failed to execute their game plan at even a "consistently good" level last night. And that failure to execute their game plan didn't just occur because some calls went against them. No, the Seahawks "shot themselves in the foot" just as much as the officials frustrated them.

[Brian in Boston]

For as much as people love to hail this guy as a genius, he is a Desmond Howard away from being 0-3 in the Super Bowl.

I've always said that Holmgren is over-rated as an NFL coach. In my opinion, he benefitted greatly from the talent that Ron Wolf assembled for him in Green Bay.

As for his supposed Super Bowl prowess, he's 1 - 2 in the big game. The win came against an overmatched Patriots team whose head coach was distracted by the behind-the-scenes power struggle he was engaged in with the franchise's owner. The first loss was to a team that the Packers should have beaten if not for questionable coaching decisions on Holmgren's part. The second loss was a result of his team not playing up to their potential, as well as his own inability to effectively manage the clock and call plays in the closing minutes of both halves.

Meanwhile, Paul Allen will sign the fraud to a contract extension based upon Holmgren's "leading them to the Super Bowl" and establishing a "championship-calibre team" for the forseeable future.

All of the "happy talk" will soon begin about getting back to the Super Bowl next year. What Allen, Holmgren and most Seahawks fans seem to forget is that the vast majority of Super Bowl losers don't get back to the big game the following season. It has only happened six times in the Super Bowl's forty-year history... and the Buffalo Bills' run from 1991 to 1994 accounts for three of those return trips. The others were the Dallas Cowboys ('71 and '72), the Minnesota Vikings ('74 and '75) and the Denver Broncos ('87 and '88). Only the Cowboys managed a win in their return to the Super Bowl.

In other words, a team is best served by taking care of business when it gets to the Super Bowl, 'cause there's no guarantee as to when they're going to get back into the game if they don't.

[jkrdevil]

All of the "happy talk" will soon begin about getting back to the Super Bowl next year. What Allen, Holmgren and most Seahawks fans seem to forget is that the vast majority of Super Bowl losers don't get back to the big game the following season. It has only happened six times in the Super Bowl's forty-year history... and the Buffalo Bills' run from 1991 to 1994 accounts for three of those return trips. The others were the Dallas Cowboys ('71 and '72), the Minnesota Vikings ('74 and '75) and the Denver Broncos ('87 and '88). Only the Cowboys managed a win in their return to the Super Bowl.

In other words, a team is best served by taking care of business when it gets to the Super Bowl, 'cause there's no guarantee as to when they're going to get back into the game if they don't.

Well the Miami Dolphins lost Super Bowl 6 and got beck the next year to win Super Bowl 7. Although that was back in the 70's as well.

But yeah you are right if you make it to the Super Bowl it's best to win it.

[Brian in Boston]

Ah, yes. I'd forgotten about the Dolphins. Okay... seven Super Bowl losers made it back the following year, two won. It doesn't improve the odds much.

[zoneranger]

CCSLC Word of the Month!

See, if you had read this thread it would have been the perfect opportunity to use the Word of the Month. .........................."I think there was some jiggery-pokery going on with those Super Bowl refs"

[Lonewolf-Superbeast]

With as many seahawks "fans" that I have heard from saying they were robbed, it's refreshing to see real fans saying that their team made mistakes. The steelers made miscues also... (see big Ben's floater that was intercepted at the goalline.) This was an equally matched super bowl. With equally matched QBs although at times neither seemed to have gotten in a groove. We got to see the emergence of "Fast" Willie Parker rushing for 98 yards. Hines Ward finally getting an award that he deserved. On the flip side, we got to see an extremely talented seahawks defense that showed exactly what they were capable of...It's a shame that the offense and special teams never showed up...

All in all I'm satisfied with how well the game went, even with questionable officiating.

Both teams deserve a hand for remarkable seasons...

[NJTank]

The refs were bad and hurt teh Seahawks allot but they hurt themselves as well, if teh refs had been better would teh Seahawks have won? Im not sure, I think the Steelers stil woudl have eeked out a 3 point win or so.

[DaytonBlue]

Seattle lost the game. The officials didn't help, but Seattle had chances and didn't come through.

What the league SHOULD be worried about is why they cannot get these calls right. It simply leaves too much area for fans to start conspiracy theories and the like. There should not be so many people questioning calls...referees should not be the story.

And this seems to be a problem growing in all four major sports leagues (yes im counting the NHL as major, for now.)

[Joshawaggie]

Seattle played poorly, but had the refs officiated better, poorly would have been enough to at least send the game to OT I think.