PDA

View Full Version : steelers


Skppr05
01-04-2006, 05:23 PM
how do you guys think the steelers will fair in the NFL playoffs?

PM_
01-04-2006, 07:01 PM
not good 8)

oscar_2424
01-04-2006, 07:06 PM
who cares go dolphins!!!!!!!!!:cool:

Freedom
01-04-2006, 07:19 PM
who cares go dolphins!!!!!!!!!:cool:

w00t!

PM_
01-04-2006, 07:21 PM
Dolphins??????????????
I didn't know they made the playoffs...:neutral: :(

oscar_2424
01-04-2006, 07:26 PM
Dolphins??????????????
I didn't know they made the playoffs...:neutral: :(

it doesnt matter they rock, miami rocks;)

Freedom
01-04-2006, 07:26 PM
Yeah...

+10

Phil
01-04-2006, 08:09 PM
how do you guys think the steelers will fair in the NFL playoffs?

They'll win their first round game. After that, their chances are slim. They can't beat New England to save their lives.

Mr.Federer
01-05-2006, 08:28 AM
I hope the steelers crash and burn...

Phil
01-05-2006, 08:54 AM
I hope the steelers crash and burn...

If you're by any chance a Bengal fan, you'll be watching the Stillers play in the second round a week from this coming Sunday (or you won't).

NoBadMojo
01-05-2006, 09:29 AM
They'll win their first round game. After that, their chances are slim. They can't beat New England to save their lives.

The Seelers thumped...and i mean killed the Patriots during the regular season last season. Game was essentially over at the end of the first Q. Lots of teams have trouble beating the Patriots having something to do with them winning a few SuperBowls.

Mr.Federer
01-05-2006, 10:35 AM
If you're by any chance a Bengal fan, you'll be watching the Stillers play in the second round a week from this coming Sunday (or you won't).

No, I'm not really much of a Bengals fan, I'm just anti-steelers... I guess.

Phil
01-05-2006, 10:46 AM
The Seelers thumped...and i mean killed the Patriots during the regular season last season. Game was essentially over at the end of the first Q. Lots of teams have trouble beating the Patriots having something to do with them winning a few SuperBowls.

That Pats beat them when it counted, in the post season, and that was a thumping-not even close. I'm not deluded enough to think the Steelers are going to win it, or even go to the Big Game, but their "D" is nasty enough to pee on anyone's party. They may be serious spoilers, if not big winners.

NoBadMojo
01-05-2006, 01:06 PM
sure Phil..whatever you say.

Phil
01-05-2006, 01:18 PM
sure Phil..whatever you say.

WTF???

Freedom
01-05-2006, 05:10 PM
Seattle will beat Indy in the Superbowl...that's all you need to know.

Oh, and the 1972 Dolphin record still stands!

MackSamuelHustovisics
01-05-2006, 05:25 PM
The Steelers are ****ed at Indy. If they should meet, that would be great, and beneficial for the Patriots (if the Pats move along of course).

The Steeler's smashmouth style bangs up all of their opponents. If they
meet Indy, that would help out the Pats, because the biggest challenge for any AFC teams I think is to get passed Indy. So the Pats were smart for losing last week s game on purpose. Now they'll meet the Jags rather than the much tougher Steelers. The Pats are capable of beating Pitts, but it would be a headache + there would be a high risk of injuries (as banged up as their defense already is as always. They still find ways to win somehow, due to the best field general NFL has ever seen!). Plus, Pitts are bound to get revenge back some day so it would be better to avoid Pitts. Let them bang up the Colts so that it would be easier fot the Pats, reguardless if Pitts wins or loses.

In the end, the Patriots will become champs once again. They will beat the SeaHawks in the superbowl.

MackSamuelHustovisics
01-05-2006, 05:29 PM
Seattle will beat Indy in the Superbowl...that's all you need to know.

Oh, and the 1972 Dolphin record still stands!

Good pick with Sea in the Bowl. Bad choice about Indy in the bowl. Bad choice about Sea winning it all. Good choice about Sea over Colts at least though!:)

MackSamuelHustovisics
01-05-2006, 05:35 PM
They'll win their first round game. After that, their chances are slim. They can't beat New England to save their lives.

You are right.

Like I posted earlier, it would be a scary thing for NE to face Pitts though. It's always a physical match=more prone to injuries for the Pats. They need more defensive starters to have a good chance against Indy (especially D-backs). Plus, I think that there's a slight chance Pitts can take a win from NE (not most likely but that it could happen. Sort of like the gamblers fallacy, "if it was heads 20 times in a row, it will more like be tails next time"---*not true BTW*).

MackSamuelHustovisics
01-05-2006, 05:38 PM
I hope the steelers crash and burn...I hope the Steelers get far enough to at least face Indy, to pre-bash them for the Pats.

MackSamuelHustovisics
01-05-2006, 05:45 PM
The Seelers thumped...and i mean killed the Patriots during the regular season last season. Game was essentially over at the end of the first Q. Lots of teams have trouble beating the Patriots having something to do with them winning a few SuperBowls.NE was banged up that game, no surprise. I think they even lost Rodney Harrison from injury in that game. Brusci wasn't back yet either. I don't recall Dillon playing as well.

The Pats found themselves in trouble early in the season because of injuries (they had more injuries this yr that last yr BTW. It's like over 30 something players). They knew, however, that they did not need to win consecutive games and be as impressive as Indy though, because they calcualted the odds within their own division and took each game one by one accordingly. They have a "crappy" division. They just needed to stay above Mia, NYJ, and BUF. Plan worked.

NoBadMojo
01-05-2006, 06:00 PM
NE was banged up that game, no surprise. I think they even lost Rodney Harrison from injury in that game. Brusci wasn't back yet either. I don't recall Dillon playing as well.

The Pats found themselves in trouble early in the season because of injuries (they had more injuries this yr that last yr BTW. It's like over 30 something players). They knew, however, that they did not need to win consecutive games and be as impressive as Indy though, because they calcualted the odds within their own division and took each game one by one accordingly. They have a "crappy" division. They just needed to stay above Mia, NYJ, and BUF. Plan worked.

Ya man, but New England had an undefeated streak going back then which i believe they would have wished to continue. we also had a rookie quarterback back then right? And the game earlier this year was a 23-20game and there was a big problem w. the clock at the end of that game. We're a better team this year than last. Also, our record at home in the title games is abyssmal...we neeed to have your coach! because ours sucks when it really counts. So maybe it is good the Steelers are a road team this playoff season. We're pretty healthy and Ben's throwing the ball really well now...Fast Willie and the Bus are a great running tandem, etc. and our D is always very present. should be an interesting game....dont think Jax has a prayer against your Pats and think we can beat the Bungholes, so let's hook up and make a bet on the Steeler/Pats game after we get by this weekend ok?

Freedom
01-05-2006, 06:50 PM
Wow MackSam, a 5-post chain.

But I agree with your analysis for the most part.

MackSamuelHustovisics
01-08-2006, 04:27 PM
Looks like things are going as I expected so far. New England advances no surprise and PIT wins still early 4th quart. and anything can still happen but I know Steerlers will win .

As expected, the Steeler's opponent got banged up Carlson's season ender, too bad.

The tough prediction is going got be the PIT at Indy game. As I predicted correctly, Pit will meet them looks that way so far . PIT will help NE by either eliminating INDY or at least give them a headache. I still cannot decide whether or not PIT can pull an upset over INDY. That appears to be the toughest call out of all of the games so far. Any ideas anyone?

Go Steeler!!!

MackSamuelHustovisics
01-08-2006, 04:31 PM
It's over, 4:12 remaining, and PIT picked off Kitna. You should see THE BUS start to milk the clock. Good night Cincy.

PM_
01-08-2006, 04:33 PM
Steelers, Pats, Broncos, Colts, they're all intangibles because SEATTLE WILL WIN THE SUPER BOWL!!!!!!

Skppr05
01-08-2006, 07:03 PM
wait, so who won? steelers or bengals? i missed the score DOH!

ShooterMcMarco
01-08-2006, 08:31 PM
steelers won, plummer went out with a torn ACL. how bout them giants, lol. they got jake delowned

Muse
01-08-2006, 09:22 PM
steelers won, plummer went out with a torn ACL. how bout them giants, lol. they got jake delowned


ahahahaha, punny.:D And it was Palmer who went down, Plummer is with the Broncos. Though after the pats roll through denver, he'll probably wish he couldn't play.:) go pats!

MackSamuelHustovisics
01-08-2006, 11:54 PM
ahahahaha, punny.:D And it was Palmer who went down, Plummer is with the Broncos. Though after the pats roll through denver, he'll probably wish he couldn't play.:) go pats!

I know, his post confused me for a second as well. I thought maybe Jake the Snake injured himself during practice or something and that raised my spirits a bit, thinking that Plummer was going to be out for the game against the Pats.

BTW, thank you for the support. I will send you some clam chowdah.

ibemadskillzz
01-09-2006, 12:33 AM
Washington Redskins will beat the seahawks very easy. I guarantee this victory by the redskins. Redskins have the best defense out of all the teams in the playoffs. Shaun Alexander will be shut down, there will be no running game for the seahawks. And of course Hasselbeck will be sacked and beat up by the redskins D. He will also have a lot of interceptions and fumbles.

ShooterMcMarco
01-09-2006, 01:11 AM
ahahahaha, punny.:D And it was Palmer who went down, Plummer is with the Broncos. Though after the pats roll through denver, he'll probably wish he couldn't play.:) go pats!

my bad, it all sounds the same :p

i disagree about the skins having the best defense. its the bears.

Andy Hewitt
01-09-2006, 01:18 AM
The Bears shall best all.

atatu
01-09-2006, 07:58 AM
Washington Redskins will beat the seahawks very easy. I guarantee this victory by the redskins. Redskins have the best defense out of all the teams in the playoffs. Shaun Alexander will be shut down, there will be no running game for the seahawks. And of course Hasselbeck will be sacked and beat up by the redskins D. He will also have a lot of interceptions and fumbles.

I would love that. But the Skins have trouble with good RB's, see their performance against Tomlinson in the game with SD, and the secondary is depleted at this point. Hopefully Sean Taylor won't go anything stupid this week. Gibbs needs to do something about the offense !

stc9357
01-09-2006, 02:35 PM
The steelers got lucky. If plamer hadn't been injured they would have gotten a royal ***** whopping!

Phil
01-09-2006, 08:13 PM
The steelers got lucky. If plamer hadn't been injured they would have gotten a royal ***** whopping!

Palmer or lack of Palmer thereof had nothing to do with the Steelers scoring 31 points.

MackSamuelHustovisics
01-10-2006, 04:04 PM
Palmer or lack of Palmer thereof had nothing to do with the Steelers scoring 31 points. Exactly. The thing that isn't known is how many points Cincy "should've/would've/could've" scored.

NoBadMojo
01-10-2006, 04:18 PM
Exactly. The thing that isn't known is how many points Cincy "should've/would've/could've" scored.

Or how many points the Steelers would have scored if our QB didnt have a broken thumb......also the Steelers could have scored even more except they chose to run the ball to sit on a comfortable lead...if ands and buts..they could have scored even less points as our D was prepared for a different QB and Kitna did a good job. The reality is the Steelers pushed the Bungholes all around the field on both sides of the ball throughout the 2nd half when it counted ...oh i guess you could say that the Bungholes were sad because their quarterback went down, but that's kind of part of football, and that point kinda sounds sour grapes just like the Bungholes coach sounded when interviewed after the game..bunch of crybabies..and what happened to the Bungholes smack talkin' wide recever....didnt back anything up at all, and i guess you could blame that one on injured QB too....bah ;O
oh, none of this is rippin' you Mack..i'm just randomizing here ok?

♥ n a t a l i a
01-10-2006, 05:07 PM
who are the steelers?

ShooterMcMarco
01-10-2006, 05:30 PM
diamond traders who work for De Beers.

MackSamuelHustovisics
01-10-2006, 06:42 PM
Or how many points the Steelers would have scored if our QB didnt have a broken thumb......also the Steelers could have scored even more except they chose to run the ball to sit on a comfortable lead...if ands and buts..they could have scored even less points as our D was prepared for a different QB and Kitna did a good job. The reality is the Steelers pushed the Bungholes all around the field on both sides of the ball throughout the 2nd half when it counted ...oh i guess you could say that the Bungholes were sad because their quarterback went down, but that's kind of part of football, and that point kinda sounds sour grapes just like the Bungholes coach sounded when interviewed after the game..bunch of crybabies..and what happened to the Bungholes smack talkin' wide recever....didnt back anything up at all, and i guess you could blame that one on injured QB too....bah ;O
oh, none of this is rippin' you Mack..i'm just randomizing here ok?

Why did you have to point out that you weren't ripping me? Did you think that I was a whiner thinking the Steelers had an unfair advantage? In one of the posts I did state that I wanted PIT to win.

These are just rhetorical questions... OK?

NoBadMojo
01-10-2006, 07:13 PM
Why did you have to point out that you weren't ripping me? Did you think that I was a whiner thinking the Steelers had an unfair advantage? In one of the posts I did state that I wanted PIT to win.

These are just rhetorical questions... OK?

No man..just was trying to make sure because lots of people around here take very general expressions made and somehow make them into something personal

atatu
01-10-2006, 09:22 PM
Or how many points the Steelers would have scored if our QB didnt have a broken thumb......also the Steelers could have scored even more except they chose to run the ball to sit on a comfortable lead...if ands and buts..they could have scored even less points as our D was prepared for a different QB and Kitna did a good job. The reality is the Steelers pushed the Bungholes all around the field on both sides of the ball throughout the 2nd half when it counted ...oh i guess you could say that the Bungholes were sad because their quarterback went down, but that's kind of part of football, and that point kinda sounds sour grapes just like the Bungholes coach sounded when interviewed after the game..bunch of crybabies..and what happened to the Bungholes smack talkin' wide recever....didnt back anything up at all, and i guess you could blame that one on injured QB too....bah ;O
oh, none of this is rippin' you Mack..i'm just randomizing here ok?

Wow, and I thought the University of Texas fans were bad winnners. Kind of surprising, especially the comments regarding Palmers injury.

NoBadMojo
01-10-2006, 09:29 PM
Atatu .... i'm not a bad winner at all. i guess you saw the game and heard the comments and the interview with the Bengals coach afterwards and are qualified to speak to this subject . in fact, i didnt mention anything bad about their quarterback at all other than he went down and that is part of football..so what is your point here? i was also partly responding to the previous poster who said the Steelers would have been killed if their QB wasnt injured...judge me as you like though and label me a bad wnner...thanks so much...nice move

Phil
01-10-2006, 09:33 PM
Or how many points the Steelers would have scored if our QB didnt have a broken thumb......also the Steelers could have scored even more except they chose to run the ball to sit on a comfortable lead...if ands and buts..they could have scored even less points as our D was prepared for a different QB and Kitna did a good job. The reality is the Steelers pushed the Bungholes all around the field on both sides of the ball throughout the 2nd half when it counted ...oh i guess you could say that the Bungholes were sad because their quarterback went down, but that's kind of part of football, and that point kinda sounds sour grapes just like the Bungholes coach sounded when interviewed after the game..bunch of crybabies..and what happened to the Bungholes smack talkin' wide recever....didnt back anything up at all, and i guess you could blame that one on injured QB too....bah ;O
oh, none of this is rippin' you Mack..i'm just randomizing here ok?

Actually, the reality (And I'm a BIG Stillers fan) is that a second string QB put 17 points on the board against the 'lers' swiss cheese secondary. The Steelers scored 31 points, but they also scored 31 in an earlier loss to Cincy. With Palmer on the field for the entire game, the Steeler offense may not have had the time or opportunities to score like that, or maybe they would have-we'll never know.

I'm glad they won, but they got a lucky ahhh....break. Let's face it. Unless the defensive line can hound Manning and force him into mistakes, they're in for a long day next Sunday. And Manning hasn't been able to throw the ball at will just because he's a stud-he's got a great offensive line protecting him. Cowher is usually the one who screws up in these big games-I'm hoping he keeps the boneheaded and timid play calling under his hat on Sunday.

Now I'm waiting for "Whatever you say, Phil.":)

NoBadMojo
01-10-2006, 09:40 PM
I have nothing much to say Phil...we were discussing the Bengals game here and not the upcoming game. I think I know how the Colts play and how the Steelers play, but whatever you say Phil.

atatu
01-10-2006, 09:51 PM
Atatu .... i'm not a bad winner at all. i guess you saw the game and heard the comments and the interview with the Bengals coach afterwards and are qualified to speak to this subject . in fact, i didnt mention anything bad about their quarterback at all other than he went down and that is part of football..so what is your point here? i was also partly responding to the previous poster who said the Steelers would have been killed if their QB wasnt injured...judge me as you like though and label me a bad wnner...thanks so much...nice move

Well, um, I don't know if calling the Bengals the bungholes is a great example of sportsmanship, but maybe I'm old fashioned ? I've seen worse this past week, for sure. I tell my six year old after he scores a goal in soccer, "act like you've been there before" but I don't see many adults acting that way. As for the previous poster, it was obviously some kid who had nothing else to add, not sure it's really necessary to respond to that. As for calling the players a bunch of crybabies, I assumed you were referring to Kitna's comments about being "in tears" when he saw Palmer go down. That seems a little harsh, when you're talking about an injury that is fairly serious and could effect Palmers career.

NoBadMojo
01-10-2006, 09:57 PM
no atatu is was referring to the bengals coach comments who insisted the hit should have been a penalty (which it wasnt) and to some of the bengals who insisted the hit was a cheapshot <which it wasnt>. i was also referrring to their coaches comments which were bitter in defeat and where he somehow called our quarterback a crybaby...so i would say they werent gratious in defeat and were crybabies. as to the Bungholes...that's what their nickname is sometimes and is pretty harmless i would think unless someone wishes to turn it into something vile..if this is all you have on me, that's a pretty lame reason to call someone a poor winner and i would like to tell you that i dont apreciate your labeling me that way

Phil
01-10-2006, 09:59 PM
I have nothing much to say Phil...we were discussing the Bengals game here and not the upcoming game. I think I know how the Colts play and how the Steelers play, but whatever you say Phil.

Bengals game is over; what's left to discuss? The Steelers aren't resting on their laurals-they have a real opponent next week.

atatu
01-10-2006, 10:14 PM
no atatu is was referring to the bengals coach comments who insisted the hit should have been a penalty (which it wasnt) and to some of the bengals who insisted the hit was a cheapshot <which it wasnt>. i was also referrring to their coaches comments which were bitter in defeat and where he somehow called our quarterback a crybaby...so i would say they werent gratious in defeat and were crybabies. as to the Bungholes...that's what their nickname is sometimes and is pretty harmless i would think unless someone wishes to turn it into something vile..if this is all you have on me, that's a pretty lame reason to call someone a poor winner and i would like to tell you that i dont apreciate your labeling me that way

Ok, well my apologies, I guess I'm a bit old fashioned when it comes to these things, didn't know about the nickname, must be a regional thing. And yes, the Bengals were bitter in defeat, but shouldn't the winning them be above that ? This entire past week I've been listening to Longhorn fans gloat and rip the USC QB for his comments in defeat, and my comment has been "Act like you've been there before" there's not need for the winning team to gloat, be happy that you won and move on.

NoBadMojo
01-11-2006, 08:45 AM
Atatu i have no idea what i could possibly have to do with the Longhorns and sorry my posting was less than perfect in your judgmental eyes. Indeed it was most everything you didnt know about this, but that sure didnt stop you from labeling me with something negative.
Phil I agree the game is over, but think the Bengals were a real opponent, altough one lacking in playoff experience. I agree we're going to have a very tough time with the Colts and am not a fan of Cower until he can start winning the big games. His winning record in Conference championship games is abyssmal as you lilley know and I think he has the team wired too emotional(ly) to perform at their best in big moments...that's my opinion anyway..really talented athletic hard hitting team though and a great deal of fun to watch win or lose.

Craig Carter
01-11-2006, 09:14 AM
..really talented athletic hard hitting team though and a great deal of fun to watch win or lose.

I agree. The Steelers play like an old style smash mouth team and are enjoyable to watch. I would rather watch a hard hitting, grinding game with solid defense and a good running/passing mix than some of the "greatest show on turf" teams of late (although the Colts offense can sometimes be amazing). Nothing beats a good Patriots/Steelers game in January though! :)

atatu
01-11-2006, 09:27 AM
Atatu i have no idea what i could possibly have to do with the Longhorns and sorry my posting was less than perfect in your judgmental eyes. Indeed it was most everything you didnt know about this, but that sure didnt stop you from labeling me with something negative.
Phil I agree the game is over, but think the Bengals were a real opponent, altough one lacking in playoff experience. I agree we're going to have a very tough time with the Colts and am not a fan of Cower until he can start winning the big games. His winning record in Conference championship games is abyssmal as you lilley know and I think he has the team wired too emotional(ly) to perform at their best in big moments...that's my opinion anyway..really talented athletic hard hitting team though and a great deal of fun to watch win or lose.

I think you're pretty much proving my point here, you can't even accept an apology with grace. By the way, I emailed a buddy of mine in Cincy about the nickname for the Bengals, needless to say, he does not agree, so maybe you're the one who doesn't really know...

NoBadMojo
01-11-2006, 10:23 AM
Nice piece of espionage/fact finding there Atatu, and I suggest your Cincy friend is from Cincy and is not from a place other than Cincy, so maybe that nickname may not be used in Cincy as I dont think they would call their own team 'The Cincy Bungholes' ;O, but is obviously used in other places..cool beans you found something so insignificant to be a reason to research,send emails, and bust someone's chops about. By the way, yours wasnt a real apology..it was an 'i am sorry but'...a conditional apology one that implies you were actually right and i was wrong because you are old fashioned and somehow more pure. Since you are the preacher here and tell me how you are raising your kids so wonderfully and labeling me a poor winner and a person sans grace, why dont you teach them to not be like you and tell them not to judge people, label people, make assumptions about people, write things without knowledge, stick their nose into things uninvited with the only content beng to give an unwarranted criticism, give conditional apologies, suggest you think you are better and holier than others, etc as you do. Another nickname for the Bengals is the Bungles. Feel free to research that one as you like too.
You may have last word in this as you like and preach as you like...but i really do suggest you dont pass on these things to your kids as that's not instilling great virtues in my opnion. Have a nice day...no need to respond if course unless you must. if so, knock yourself out, but i think it best i just add you to the ignore list
Anyone can easily see that you started ths with your name calling. If you wouldnt have felt the need to ridiclue nothing would have happened..so maybe think abou passing that along to your kids as well and suggest to them that you shoulnt call peoplenames merely because they are poking a little harmless fun

Phil
01-11-2006, 06:12 PM
Phil I agree the game is over, but think the Bengals were a real opponent, altough one lacking in playoff experience. I agree we're going to have a very tough time with the Colts and am not a fan of Cower until he can start winning the big games. His winning record in Conference championship games is abyssmal as you lilley know and I think he has the team wired too emotional(ly) to perform at their best in big moments...that's my opinion anyway..really talented athletic hard hitting team though and a great deal of fun to watch win or lose.

I agree-Bengals were a real opponent, but one who, over the years, has not given the Steelers all that much of a problem and with their limited playoff experience, they were sure to fall. Cowher has screwed-up big time in the post season, but this game is winnable. Achilles heel is the Steelers' secondary-it's mediocre and the only thing that prevents the DB's from being humiliated every week is the pressure that the line and linebackers put on the opposing QB.

Yep, they hit hard and play basic ball, but they haven't had a good deep coverage secondary worth a crap for years-that's what's lost them a lot of games.

BTW, when I lived in Pittsburgh-for the first 22 years of my life-I never heard the word "Bungholes". Guess times change, but back in those days Cincy was just another divisional doormat and the truely disliked teams were the Raiders and Browns (the real ones).

NoBadMojo
01-11-2006, 06:45 PM
Phil I would have no idea why people would think i would lie about the term 'Bungholes' or why you would feel the need to even bring it up after this other than to just be small and nitpick....but whatever you say Phil
But back to the game. last Indy game was Bens first game back after injury and he was clearly rusty throwing 2 or 3 picks I believe, the Steelers D gave up the usual long bomb early and we got behind quick..through all that we were only down 6 at the half. start of the 2nd half bonehead Cower runs an onside, we dont come up with the ball..they score..game over for all purposes. I think we have a good secondary other than giving up the early long bomb...the secondary is often forced to work without lots of linebacker help as there's a whole bunch of blitzing a and linebacker and secondary stunts going on which sticks the secondary in very difficult positions
I think we've a good chance at winning if we just play Steeler ball and dont give up the bomb early or otherwise give up a TD on the first drive as we usually do. and Cower can find a way to get the team psyched to the right performence level.
This is the first time since I've ben around the TW board that I can recall being in a 'conversation' with you which you arent calling people names and insulting them. in spite of this, quite honestly, I cant really say I enjoyed this at all ;O Assuming you were this way when you were a kid in theBurgh, I bet you spent much time in the Emerency Rooms after being beaten up cuz people from the Burgh dont tolerate people like you very well generally.

Phil
01-11-2006, 07:17 PM
Phil I would have no idea why people would think i would lie about the term 'Bungholes' or why you would feel the need to even bring it up after this other than to just be small and nitpick....but whatever you say Phil
But back to the game. last Indy game was Bens first game back after injury and he was clearly rusty throwing 2 or 3 picks I believe, the Steelers D gave up the usual long bomb early and we got behind quick..through all that we were only down 6 at the half. start of the 2nd half bonehead Cower runs an onside, we dont come up with the ball..they score..game over for all purposes. I think we have a good secondary other than giving up the early long bomb...the secondary is often forced to work without lots of linebacker help as there's a whole bunch of blitzing a and linebacker and secondary stunts going on which sticks the secondary in very difficult positions
I think we've a good chance at winning if we just play Steeler ball and dont give up the bomb early or otherwise give up a TD on the first drive as we usually do. and Cower can find a way to get the team psyched to the right performence level.
This is the first time since I've ben around the TW board that I can recall being in a 'conversation' with you which you arent calling people names and insulting them. in spite of this, quite honestly, I cant really say I enjoyed this at all ;O Assuming you were this way when you were a kid in theBurgh, I bet you spent much time in the Emerency Rooms after being beaten up cuz people from the Burgh dont tolerate people like you very well generally.

Well geez, and I thought we were fast becoming good buddies, or at least on good terms. Wow, was I wrong. I didn't say you "lied" about the word "Bunghole"-once again, your reaction is overly-sensitive knee jerk...and over...nothing. All I said was that the word wasn't used when I was growing up. Now I realize why; it's from Beavis & Butthead, which wasn't around back then. I'm sure you must feel very wise in obtaining your language skills from B&B.

Now, it's nice to discuss something with you in a civilized manner, as we seemed to been doing; although there WAS the requisite tension that you bring to every discussion that you engage-UNTIL...for some inexplicable reason, the creepy little cheap shot that you felt the need to take at the end of your post. But, as you obviously know nothing about "the 'burg" or me, no harm done...ever (except to your self respect).

You didn't "enjoy" this little exercise because you can't get through a discussion without, somehow, being insulted. You feel that ANY challenge to what you say, even if it is made in a non-confrontational and non-challenging manner, is a challenge of your manhood and all you hold dear in life, or something...by rule, these exchanges must BECOME confrontations, with you playing the poor little victim.

You are a weak and overly-sensitive little wall flower, and it sounds like that hasn't changed. You create "arguments" out of nothing.

It's funny, NoBad that you're always telling me how "evil" you think I am, and argumentative, and nasty, etc., and yet, I have seen almost nothing BUT arguments between you and other posters over the past several weeks-many of these give-and-takes are filled with more rancor than I could or would want to dredge up. And a lot of negative comments about how you "know it all". Now why is that? Why is it that you are involved in so many "scuffles" with so many posters? Is it because you're simply an a-hole? A sensitive little jerk who cannot stand to be questioned on his "expertise"? Yes and yes. I am certainly capable of engaging someone in a discussion without having my feelings hurt or without it degenerating into a cat fight and without hurling lame insults, but you don't seem to be capable of this. If you lived in Pgh or NYC, you'd end up living under a bridge, crying yourself to sleep, ya big pansy. Now go along and play with Bungalow Bill or somone else. You have "power" and "authority" issues to contend with, and frankly, you don't belong in my sphere.

NoBadMojo
01-11-2006, 07:53 PM
now there's the Phil that I know. I did grow up in theBurgh so you are wrong once again and lived there for many years and thats why I can tell you that if people went around calling other people names the way you do and insulted others the way you do, and be just plain rude and obnoxious as you are, they did end up beaten up in some way or another until they didnt behave that way again, so that leads me to believe that without the keyboard to hide behind, you were likely far less bold or you were a spolied brat or something along those lines. I can tell you that I only used the Bunghole thing as a segway to tell you what i wanted to tell you..you were actually fine in this thread..it's the thousands of others you are involved in where you are clearly not.
I've tried to like you Phil..to find something to like about you. I just cant do it man. see ya. hope you agree there is no reason to continue our 'conversation'.

Phil
01-11-2006, 08:29 PM
Whatever you say, Nomojotosavehislife.

Rory G
01-11-2006, 08:34 PM
Man, the Steelers (terrible towels and all :rolleyes: ) always manage to choke in the playoffs lately. Every year they trash talk during the week up to the Patriot's game...LOSE IN THEIR OWN HOUSE...and then whine about how "they were the better team". Cower's goofy WWF chin is getting old too. Sure, they have a decent team and had a good year; but the inevitable loss to the Colts or most certainly the Broncos or Patriots is on schedule. Then they will whine about how they "should have won" and somehow were the better team.

Aside from that...BadMojo dude; your postings have been even more surly than ever lately. Always inciting an argument, picking at fellow posters, acting like the victim, becoming extremely personal, adding to an enormous ignore list, etc. Are you OK hoss? (Although I assume that you are not reading this because I am also on your ignore list:( )

Phil
01-11-2006, 09:23 PM
Man, the Steelers (terrible towels and all :rolleyes: ) always manage to choke in the playoffs lately. Every year they trash talk during the week up to the Patriot's game...LOSE IN THEIR OWN HOUSE...and then whine about how "they were the better team". Cower's goofy WWF chin is getting old too. Sure, they have a decent team and had a good year; but the inevitable loss to the Colts or most certainly the Broncos or Patriots is on schedule. Then they will whine about how they "should have won" and somehow were the better team.

Aside from that...BadMojo dude; your postings have been even more surly than ever lately. Always inciting an argument, picking at fellow posters, acting like the victim, becoming extremely personal, adding to an enormous ignore list, etc. Are you OK hoss? (Although I assume that you are not reading this because I am also on your ignore list:( )

If a team loses, they lose-I've never paid much heed to whinning teams that say they should have won after the fact (when they lost). The Steelers HAVE choked in many post season games-even in their only Super Bowl appearance under Cowher, when they pushed Dallas all over the field for 59 minutes and their QB choked the game away. You're right-fact is, until a perennial playoff team can finally win it, they aren't going to rid themselves of the "choker" label.

jhhachamp
01-11-2006, 09:55 PM
Mojo, I think you are being too harsh with atatu. I don't see anything at all offensive in any of his posts. What I see is you overreacting over almost nothing. I know I am not involved here, but I don't like to see posters chastised without good reason.

Rabbit
01-12-2006, 05:34 AM
I'm with Steve on this one. I didn't see anything, from Phil either, that warrants responses like that, mojo.

Rabbit
01-12-2006, 05:34 AM
duplicate post....sorry

NoBadMojo
01-12-2006, 08:20 AM
I agree Rabbit..in fact I said that Phil was actually being nice, and that's what I said earler in this thread. It's the thousands of his other posts which I find obnoxious, and the reasons for finding them obnoxious seem really obvious and I dont think require explanation. Dude doesnt ever even seem to talk about tennis. Phil seems to think he is so brilliant, yet he is so predictable and it is so easy to pull his strings as you can see within this thread
This thread was just a convenient way for me to tell him my opinion..sorry for being derisive and using the 'bunghole' thing to create an opportunity to have this 'discussion' with Phil. I'm going to excuse myself from this thread, but wanted to explain to the Rabbit what was going on. If people want to twist this all about and apply it to me, that seems to be the norm around here..feel free and enjoy it.

Dedans Penthouse
01-12-2006, 08:25 AM
Mojo, I think you are being too harsh with atatu. I don't see anything at all offensive in any of his posts. What I see is you overreacting over almost nothing. I know I am not involved here, but I don't like to see posters chastised without good reason.
Here! Here! I agree with the man from Ithaca. Nobad, why on earth are you being so harsh with atatu? First off (word to the wise): NEVER make reference to a man's "kids" ...... that is a definate Bozo-no-no; it's NOT CRICKET. A man's offspring? Come on Nobad, you know better than that--that is neither here nor there. Ed, respectfully, you're being (in Steeler palance) a "TERRIBLE TOWEL" in this one. Don't make "an issue out of a tissue." Off the bat, you laid a "whatever you say Phil" comment at the end of your first post--what was that all about? First off, you and Phil from the get-go were pretty much fraternal as it was from a "provincially Pittsburgh" standpoint and besides, you both agreed that the team had its relative strengths and weaknesses (playoffs-Bill Cowher).....I mean, I don't get why you'd feel compelled came out of the chute with a comment as needlessly provocative as "whatever you say Phil..." Where and how did that coyly worded swipe factor in the proceedings. Not a flame Nobad, just perplexed on that one....

Back on topic: as for the other teams, watch out for the Panthers.
Panthers-Bears: Panthers have cheesey uniforms and a so-so offense (besides the mecurial WR, albeit T.O.-esque obnoxious showboat Steve Smith), but do take note that they were not-so-long-ago in the Super Bowl and they gave the Pats all they could handle as recently as 2003. Jack DelHomme (sp?) is a funny bird: he's a quarterback that you do not want hanging around in the 4th quarter--he'll may play a so-so (11-for 25, 125 yds.) type of game for the first 3 quarters, but being the very good (a q.b. "x" factor--very good competitor) Delhomme also has this habit of rising up and "biting" you in the 4th if you let him stick around long enough--good competitor. Foster (formerly of UCLA note) their featured running back is serviceable--Giants tackling (lack thereof) last week against DeShawn Foster looked like the "G-Men" were the K.C. Chiefs in disguise.

I see the da' Bears bottling Foster up. If the Bears in fact want to first and foremost stop the run and force Jake Delhomme to beat them (like the Panthers did against the Giants and their "kid" quarterback, Eli Manning: that is, first stop Tiki Barber-make the "kid" Q.B. Eli beat them), the Bears may be able to do just that in so much as the Bears pass rush can generate enough heat from their FRONT FOUR ALONE which would allow Brian Ullhacher (sp?) and the other linebackers to run sideline to sideline as well as being able to assist the DB's on passing downs by dropping into coverage. Again, that'll obviously help out the corners who would've been hard pressed to contain Steve Smith had they kept their corners out "on an island." THAT game is an intriguing one. Plus, Rex Grossman is an "X" factor that the Bears didn't have with Kyle Orton running the show. With Orton it was "hand the ball off...and let our defense win the game 17-10." Don't know what the weather holds for the weekend in Chicago, but if it's supposed to be lousy like it is in N.Y., than I like the Bears because they're at home.....then again, watch out for the Panthers. Is "Rex" really going to be able to beat them by himself. The Panthers will definitely go "8 in the box" and play "stop run" first. This is a tough one....a real tough one to call.

Pats-Broncos: the emerging dangerous Pats...Jimmy Johnson's darlings....everybody's re-energized threat.....now reverting to form. Was surprised the Jaguars laid down the way they did. Byron Lefwitch came back from an injury and that didn't help matters....nor did the resurgent Pats pass rush (Richard Seymour played like he was 50 going on 25 yrs. old) help the Jags as well--Byron no mobility. However, what was surprising was the passiveness the Jags showed, i.e. the lack of physical-ness if you will. Say what you want, the one thing that the Jags usually did (win or lose) was physically let you know you were in a football game--that is, after you played them, the whirlpool was more crowded on Monday morning than usual. Pretty toothless effort by Jacksonville, imo.

Denver (like the Panthers) another team not being talked about much. Pats are a gritty resiliant team and Brady is A-1 in my book. Sidebar: to the N.E. guy who dubbed him "greatest field general of ALL TIME" ..... whoa sailor. I love the Brady....the guy's great....but for now, let's put him in the Fed category....in other words, let's hold off on "GOAT" and not "go there" until the conclusion of his career. Montana? Roger Staubach? Give Tom all the credit in the world, but take a look at his "book" in toto: in particular, you might want to TAKE A CLOSER LOOK AT BRADY'S RECORD/STATS IN DENVER. Broncos are very dangerous at home-period. Last time they met, Broncos won 28-20 after leading 28-3. Shannahan is a good coach (2-2 vs. Belicheck) and has put in a system that doesn't force Jake Plummer to try and "force" the ball as much as when he was with the Cardinals=fewer interceptions. If the Pats contain Tillis (RB) and keep Plummer "in-the-pocket" I see New England winning a tight one. Too much grit....the Pats aren't the same banged up team they were in October. BUT, they must get a great effort from the front 7 and they probably will--those guys just have too much character not too--in order to keep Plummer from being able to make big plays. Pats 27-Broncs 17.

Seahawks: "Let's close the roof and make noise" ..... Strong points are that they (like Indy) have earned homefield advantage. Out in Seattle (fairly recently) the N.Y. Giants should've beaten them and would have had kicker Jay Feeley not mistaken the goal post uprights for palms trees during Hurricane Andrew on 3 separate occassions in crunch time. Up until then, the Giants more-than-contained Shawn Alexander while Tiki Barber was running pretty free. I see a number of defenses gearing up to stop Alexander and making Matt Hasselbeck (a good, not great QB) beat them with a good but not steller core of wideouts (Joe Jurevicius is a good Ed McCafferty type receiver--solid but not a game breaker from any point on the field). I just don't know if Washington has enough offense to get the job done....was the 'Skins offense offensive last week or what? They're fortunate to even be playing in this game, however "way to go, Joe Gibbs" you might want to spin it. Yeah, the 'Skins "D" is picking up the slack, but that same 'Skins team lost to the G-men on the road 36-0. Note: zero points; shutouts where weather isn't a factor (wasn't on that day) are a rarity. Is Mark Brunell REALLY healthy? I see him taking one shot and some "sort of healed" gremlin possibly forcing him to the bench, though Ramsey isn't chopped liver as a back-up; a pretty capable guy himself. I don't see the winner of this game getting past next week.

Steelers-Colts: The Steelers imo, would be better off playing on NATURAL "turf" instead of the carpet. Better for their style to play "plant, load and bang!" Indy's "D" off the line for Bettis to hammer. On the carpet, Indy's improved (but still "soft") defense doesn't have to win the "1 on 1" physical matchups and instead can use the "carpet-turf" to use their speed (Freeley et al) to slide-and-glide in order to put "numbers/helmets" (i.e. swarm/gangtackle) to the ball instead of trying to physically match up one-on-one. As for Indy's offense, pick your poison: Edgerrin, Marvin or Manning? Curious to see if Pittsburgh plays the opposite of "stop run first" defense and instead focuses on keeping Harrison from having an 8-catch, 145 yard, 2-3 T.D. game....that is, to let Edgerrin rack up a "quiet" 125 yard game and keep the clock going. That is, Pitt might want to force Indy to "go the field" with long, sustained drives as opposed to quick strike T.D.'s and in doing so, shorten the game --- i.e. reduce the number of times Indy's "O" is on the field. Pitts' running game will also have a big say in how that pans out. Steelers (not surprisingly) MUST be able to run the ball; Big Ben throwing it 40 times is going to play into Indy's hands--Steelers dont' want to engage (imo) in a shootout; they're not built for that.

Texans: "with the first pick.....the Houston Texans pick......"

Who cares about futbawl anyway. Hey!!!.....did anyone catch the Ming Tsai on the Food Network this morning? First off, isss the guy buff or what? He made the most faaabulous Chiffon and LemonGrasssss quiche that I ever could imagine (swoon!).

atatu
01-12-2006, 08:35 AM
Mojo, I think you are being too harsh with atatu. I don't see anything at all offensive in any of his posts. What I see is you overreacting over almost nothing. I know I am not involved here, but I don't like to see posters chastised without good reason.

All I can say is that I now understand what the whole Bungalo Bill thing is about...

NoBadMojo
01-12-2006, 09:38 AM
All I can say is that I now understand what the whole Bungalo Bill thing is about...

The reality is that Bungalo Bll stalked everyone of my posts , and when I put him on the ignore list his response was 'oh good, now I can pick everything he says apart because he wont be able to see'. i find that much less than acceptable, and another case where you are passing judgment sans good information

but

<start apology>
dearAtatu,
I am sorry for having overrreacted. While I didnt appreciate being called a bad winner mostly because I am not, I made the choice to respond and I apologize
<end apology>

MackSamuelHustovisics
01-12-2006, 11:49 AM
Here! Here! I agree with the man from Ithaca. Nobad, why on earth are you being so harsh with atatu? First off (word to the wise): NEVER make reference to a man's "kids" ...... that is a definate Bozo-no-no; it's NOT CRICKET. A man's offspring? Come on Nobad, you know better than that--that is neither here nor there. Ed, respectfully, you're being (in Steeler palance) a "TERRIBLE TOWEL" in this one. Don't make "an issue out of a tissue." Off the bat, you laid a "whatever you say Phil" comment at the end of your first post--what was that all about? First off, you and Phil from the get-go were pretty much fraternal as it was from a "provincially Pittsburgh" standpoint and besides, you both agreed that the team had its relative strengths and weaknesses (playoffs-Bill Cowher).....I mean, I don't get why you'd feel compelled came out of the chute with a comment as needlessly provocative as "whatever you say Phil..." Where and how did that coyly worded swipe factor in the proceedings. Not a flame Nobad, just perplexed on that one....

Back on topic: as for the other teams, watch out for the Panthers.
Panthers-Bears: Panthers have cheesey uniforms and a so-so offense (besides the mecurial WR, albeit T.O.-esque obnoxious showboat Steve Smith), but do take note that they were not-so-long-ago in the Super Bowl and they gave the Pats all they could handle as recently as 2003. Jack DelHomme (sp?) is a funny bird: he's a quarterback that you do not want hanging around in the 4th quarter--he'll may play a so-so (11-for 25, 125 yds.) type of game for the first 3 quarters, but being the very good (a q.b. "x" factor--very good competitor) Delhomme also has this habit of rising up and "biting" you in the 4th if you let him stick around long enough--good competitor. Foster (formerly of UCLA note) their featured running back is serviceable--Giants tackling (lack thereof) last week against DeShawn Foster looked like the "G-Men" were the K.C. Chiefs in disguise.

I see the da' Bears bottling Foster up. If the Bears in fact want to first and foremost stop the run and force Jake Delhomme to beat them (like the Panthers did against the Giants and their "kid" quarterback, Eli Manning: that is, first stop Tiki Barber-make the "kid" Q.B. Eli beat them), the Bears may be able to do just that in so much as the Bears pass rush can generate enough heat from their FRONT FOUR ALONE which would allow Brian Ullhacher (sp?) and the other linebackers to run sideline to sideline as well as being able to assist the DB's on passing downs by dropping into coverage. Again, that'll obviously help out the corners who would've been hard pressed to contain Steve Smith had they kept their corners out "on an island." THAT game is an intriguing one. Plus, Rex Grossman is an "X" factor that the Bears didn't have with Kyle Orton running the show. With Orton it was "hand the ball off...and let our defense win the game 17-10." Don't know what the weather holds for the weekend in Chicago, but if it's supposed to be lousy like it is in N.Y., than I like the Bears because they're at home.....then again, watch out for the Panthers. Is "Rex" really going to be able to beat them by himself. The Panthers will definitely go "8 in the box" and play "stop run" first. This is a tough one....a real tough one to call.

Pats-Broncos: the emerging dangerous Pats...Jimmy Johnson's darlings....everybody's re-energized threat.....now reverting to form. Was surprised the Jaguars laid down the way they did. Byron Lefwitch came back from an injury and that didn't help matters....nor did the resurgent Pats pass rush (Richard Seymour played like he was 50 going on 25 yrs. old) help the Jags as well--Byron no mobility. However, what was surprising was the passiveness the Jags showed, i.e. the lack of physical-ness if you will. Say what you want, the one thing that the Jags usually did (win or lose) was physically let you know you were in a football game--that is, after you played them, the whirlpool was more crowded on Monday morning than usual. Pretty toothless effort by Jacksonville, imo.

Denver (like the Panthers) another team not being talked about much. Pats are a gritty resiliant team and Brady is A-1 in my book. Sidebar: to the N.E. guy who dubbed him "greatest field general of ALL TIME" ..... whoa sailor. I love the Brady....the guy's great....but for now, let's put him in the Fed category....in other words, let's hold off on "GOAT" and not "go there" until the conclusion of his career. Montana? Roger Staubach? Give Tom all the credit in the world, but take a look at his "book" in toto: in particular, you might want to TAKE A CLOSER LOOK AT BRADY'S RECORD/STATS IN DENVER. Broncos are very dangerous at home-period. Last time they met, Broncos won 28-20 after leading 28-3. Shannahan is a good coach (2-2 vs. Belicheck) and has put in a system that doesn't force Jake Plummer to try and "force" the ball as much as when he was with the Cardinals=fewer interceptions. If the Pats contain Tillis (RB) and keep Plummer "in-the-pocket" I see New England winning a tight one. Too much grit....the Pats aren't the same banged up team they were in October. BUT, they must get a great effort from the front 7 and they probably will--those guys just have too much character not too--in order to keep Plummer from being able to make big plays. Pats 27-Broncs 17.

Seahawks: "Let's close the roof and make noise" ..... Strong points are that they (like Indy) have earned homefield advantage. Out in Seattle (fairly recently) the N.Y. Giants should've beaten them and would have had kicker Jay Feeley not mistaken the goal post uprights for palms trees during Hurricane Andrew on 3 separate occassions in crunch time. Up until then, the Giants more-than-contained Shawn Alexander while Tiki Barber was running pretty free. I see a number of defenses gearing up to stop Alexander and making Matt Hasselbeck (a good, not great QB) beat them with a good but not steller core of wideouts (Joe Jurevicius is a good Ed McCafferty type receiver--solid but not a game breaker from any point on the field). I just don't know if Washington has enough offense to get the job done....was the 'Skins offense offensive last week or what? They're fortunate to even be playing in this game, however "way to go, Joe Gibbs" you might want to spin it. Yeah, the 'Skins "D" is picking up the slack, but that same 'Skins team lost to the G-men on the road 36-0. Note: zero points; shutouts where weather isn't a factor (wasn't on that day) are a rarity. Is Mark Brunell REALLY healthy? I see him taking one shot and some "sort of healed" gremlin possibly forcing him to the bench, though Ramsey isn't chopped liver as a back-up; a pretty capable guy himself. I don't see the winner of this game getting past next week.

Steelers-Colts: The Steelers imo, would be better off playing on NATURAL "turf" instead of the carpet. Better for their style to play "plant, load and bang!" Indy's "D" off the line for Bettis to hammer. On the carpet, Indy's improved (but still "soft") defense doesn't have to win the "1 on 1" physical matchups and instead can use the "carpet-turf" to use their speed (Freeley et al) to slide-and-glide in order to put "numbers/helmets" (i.e. swarm/gangtackle) to the ball instead of trying to physically match up one-on-one. As for Indy's offense, pick your poison: Edgerrin, Marvin or Manning? Curious to see if Pittsburgh plays the opposite of "stop run first" defense and instead focuses on keeping Harrison from having an 8-catch, 145 yard, 2-3 T.D. game....that is, to let Edgerrin rack up a "quiet" 125 yard game and keep the clock going. That is, Pitt might want to force Indy to "go the field" with long, sustained drives as opposed to quick strike T.D.'s and in doing so, shorten the game --- i.e. reduce the number of times Indy's "O" is on the field. Pitts' running game will also have a big say in how that pans out. Steelers (not surprisingly) MUST be able to run the ball; Big Ben throwing it 40 times is going to play into Indy's hands--Steelers dont' want to engage (imo) in a shootout; they're not built for that.

Texans: "with the first pick.....the Houston Texans pick......"

Who cares about futbawl anyway. Hey!!!.....did anyone catch the Ming Tsai on the Food Network this morning? First off, isss the guy buff or what? He made the most faaabulous Chiffon and LemonGrasssss quiche that I ever could imagine (swoon!). Whoa!!! You assumed I was referring to Brady as the field general. A field general doesn't have to be playing. Belichick is the field general. You can disagree whether or not he's the greatest. In my book, he is. Think about salary cap and all other factors. The coach's three rings are worth more than 10 rings of any other previous coach. This league is a different kind of league.

Rabbit
01-12-2006, 11:52 AM
College football is over...it's time to move on...

Dedans Penthouse
01-12-2006, 12:36 PM
Whoa!!! You assumed I was referring to Brady as the field general. A field general doesn't have to be playing. Belichick is the field general. You can disagree whether or not he's the greatest. In my book, he is. Think about salary cap and all other factors. The coach's three rings are worth more than 10 rings of any other previous coach. This league is a different kind of league.
I did think you were talking about Brady; but at the same time do note that I am on the same page with any Brady-phile; I think the guy's the cat's meow. As for Belicheck, he's obviously (in a relatively short period of time) went from:

1. "so-so" record (and fired) with the Cleveland Browns
2. Bailing on the Jets within 48 hours (a very...er "wierd?" move),

to:
3-time Super Bowl winning HEAD coach (not counting his rings with Parcells). No question he's Hall of Fame bound. And yes, it is tough to keep a team around what with the salary cap, etc.. Ironically, despite the Steeler fans who are not enamored with Bill Cowher, I was always pretty impressed the way he would keep a tough "D" on the field; it seemed like they'd lose 2/3rds of their all-Pro linebacking crew. What would "3" rings be worth today?....always subject to debate. I'll start the 'bidding' by saying that 3=10 "yesterday rings" might be rich in the conversion factor department, but I'm not going to nit-pick a few words out of the other 10,000 words in my TRENCHANT*** NFL prognostication post. ;-)

As for college football, this just in:
Florida - 75
MSU - 60

***"TRENCHANT" used by permission c2006-Phil

Phil
01-12-2006, 04:57 PM
I agree Rabbit..in fact I said that Phil was actually being nice, and that's what I said earler in this thread. It's the thousands of his other posts which I find obnoxious, and the reasons for finding them obnoxious seem really obvious and I dont think require explanation. Dude doesnt ever even seem to talk about tennis. Phil seems to think he is so brilliant, yet he is so predictable and it is so easy to pull his strings as you can see within this thread
This thread was just a convenient way for me to tell him my opinion..sorry for being derisive and using the 'bunghole' thing to create an opportunity to have this 'discussion' with Phil. I'm going to excuse myself from this thread, but wanted to explain to the Rabbit what was going on. If people want to twist this all about and apply it to me, that seems to be the norm around here..feel free and enjoy it.

NoBadAnything - For such a hyper-sensitive guy who claims at every turn to hate confrontations, you were certainly LOOKING for one here. Man, how lame is THAT?. So, now your "methodology" is exposed. You had a little agenda-you admit that our discussion was quite civil, and yet you had the need, out of left field, to harp at me for my perceived "sins" over the last however many years. Lame. What'd you THINK I would say? You were looking for an argument, and now you're staying back playing victim again. Well, it proves, once again, that hypocrites always end up exposing themselves for what they really are-doesn't take long.

And as Atatu and Steve said, the "fight" with BB is totally understandable. And the CLASS posters of this board, Dedans and Rabbit are even calling you on it. You would have been better off not posting this...really shows you for what you are. Oh, you "TAUGHT ME A LESSON" allright...you taught me that not only are you a troubled individual, but that you're trash.

And I DOUBT you're from MY city-I'm sure you're from some ugly-*** suburb just close enough that you can CLAIM to be from there. Put me back on your ever-expanding ignore list. Please.

ibemadskillzz
01-12-2006, 06:18 PM
Palmer or lack of Palmer thereof had nothing to do with the Steelers scoring 31 points.

It had to do a lot with steelers scoring. get it through your head. If cincy had control of the ball and the clock, steelers would not have the chance to score, and the momentum would be on the bengals side if palmer and the bengals had longer possesion of the ball because of their greatoffensive plays which they have done all season long.

Phil
01-12-2006, 06:37 PM
It had to do a lot with steelers scoring. get it through your head. If cincy had control of the ball and the clock, steelers would not have the chance to score, and the momentum would be on the bengals side if palmer and the bengals had longer possesion of the ball because of their greatoffensive plays which they have done all season long.

Cincy is not a ball control offense-even with Palmer, they don't have the ground game to eat up the clock. And besides, the Steelers scored 31 points the game before, when Palmer played the entire game. Why don't you explain that one, smart guy?

Rabbit
01-13-2006, 05:40 AM
As for college football, this just in:
Florida - 75
MSU - 60

***"TRENCHANT" used by permission c2006-Phil

Ehhhhh...wouldn't that score be basketball? Basketball is that other sport, the one with the Round ball? Played indoors? Net? Wood floors? Any of this ringing a bell? You've been indoors too long, Dedans.....

State lost its first five last year. The pundits are saying, and this may not be true. But, next year, State is going to be a force in the SEC West for sure, the whole conference probably and may even make a return to the later rounds of the tournament.

atatu
01-13-2006, 08:15 AM
Wow, just read in the paper today that Palmer's injury involves numerous ligament tears, a shredded ligament, damaged cartilage, and a dislocated kneecap. It is potentially career ending.

prestige gĦrl
01-13-2006, 03:02 PM
I agree Rabbit..in fact I said that Phil was actually being nice, and that's what I said earler in this thread. It's the thousands of his other posts which I find obnoxious, and the reasons for finding them obnoxious seem really obvious and I dont think require explanation. Dude doesnt ever even seem to talk about tennis. Phil seems to think he is so brilliant, yet he is so predictable and it is so easy to pull his strings as you can see within this thread
This thread was just a convenient way for me to tell him my opinion..sorry for being derisive and using the 'bunghole' thing to create an opportunity to have this 'discussion' with Phil. I'm going to excuse myself from this thread, but wanted to explain to the Rabbit what was going on. If people want to twist this all about and apply it to me, that seems to be the norm around here..feel free and enjoy it. So right NoBad. I don't see any of his posts commenting on tennis. Sometimes he'll have a discussion about a player or a current event in the world of tennis, but even so he goes on arguing with other posters, puts them down and so forth, having little or no comments on the subject of tennis itself. I read your tips. You actually contribute. Nothing wrong with not contributing, but when someone bashes another person and they themselves don't give then that's just wrong.

Go Broncos!!

Skppr05
01-13-2006, 03:20 PM
can't wait for this sunday.....go money!...i mean....steelers!

prestige gĦrl
01-13-2006, 03:30 PM
can't wait for this sunday.....go money!...i mean....steelers! Where's Halloweentown? Is it Salem?

Phil
01-13-2006, 03:32 PM
So right NoBad. I don't see any of his posts commenting on tennis. Sometimes he'll have a discussion about a player or a current event in the world of tennis, but even so he goes on arguing with other posters, puts them down and so forth, having little or no comments on the subject of tennis itself. I read your tips. You actually contribute. Nothing wrong with not contributing, but when someone bashes another person and they themselves don't give then that's just wrong.

Go Broncos!!

As if you've been around here long enough to even know what you're talking about, you...who...are...you...you...you...uggh, I've...got to...

BURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRP!!!!!!

prestige gĦrl
01-13-2006, 04:01 PM
Does tennis manners apply to tennis message boards people?

Skppr05
01-13-2006, 04:29 PM
Where's Halloweentown? Is it Salem?
your funny, lol, HALLOWEENTOWN resides in the master tim burton's mind.lol

Rabbit
01-14-2006, 06:58 AM
So right NoBad. I don't see any of his posts commenting on tennis. Sometimes he'll have a discussion about a player or a current event in the world of tennis, but even so he goes on arguing with other posters, puts them down and so forth, having little or no comments on the subject of tennis itself. I read your tips. You actually contribute. Nothing wrong with not contributing, but when someone bashes another person and they themselves don't give then that's just wrong.

Go Broncos!!

My, my, my, we're so quick to judge. And where are your contributions to the discussion of tennis? Are you not guilty of the same offense that you accuse our brother Phil of? Should we not cast stones lest stones be cast at us even though it takes some real stones to cast stones at Phil? (That last part was a compliment.) I think you should take your hands of the keyboard, take a deep breath, and ask youself "what have I done lately to really elevate the discussion on TW's boards lately?" Only when you have truthfully answered that question can you call youself truly free. And, as we all know, if you really love something set it free.

ShooterMcMarco
01-14-2006, 05:13 PM
wooooo hawks, all without shawn alexander

ShooterMcMarco
01-14-2006, 06:42 PM
omg, c'mon NE, so many fumbles.

jhhachamp
01-15-2006, 10:51 AM
So right NoBad. I don't see any of his posts commenting on tennis. Sometimes he'll have a discussion about a player or a current event in the world of tennis, but even so he goes on arguing with other posters, puts them down and so forth, having little or no comments on the subject of tennis itself. I read your tips. You actually contribute. Nothing wrong with not contributing, but when someone bashes another person and they themselves.

The thing is that in this thread, Phil did not really say anything controversial. Mojo actually admitted that he wanted to go after Phil and provoke an argument over nothing. Go back and read all the posts and see if you still think that Phil is at fault here.

armand
01-15-2006, 11:44 AM
Hold on. I went through all the posts on this last page by Phil, Rabbit, and Dykstra and I still can't decipher it: Are you guys for or against the Steelers?

Skppr05
01-15-2006, 11:55 AM
wow, steelers are doing well right now...i have my fingers crossed

MackSamuelHustovisics
01-15-2006, 12:10 PM
Go Steelers!!!!!!!! Watch out for a tearful Manning at the end of the game.

MackSamuelHustovisics
01-15-2006, 12:11 PM
Congratulations Patriots!!!

I don't think any other team could have made it as far as the Pats made it, considering the obtacles they faced. They had 45 injured players this season. They literally played without a first rate secondary.

About my thoughts about last night's game, all I have to say is that it seemed like someone bribed a (few) ref(s) in last nights Denver game. BS call on pass interference in the end zone. Congratulations Broncos.

Pats had a better defense throughout the game. The goal line stand was incredible. It was great coaching that enabled the stand.

At least New Englanders will now appreciate the Pats more than ever. Winning has been a given up here for the past few years and has been taken for granted.

The Pats can only improve in the coming years under Coach Bill "Belichick" (note the correct spelling BTW). I mean, what are the odds that we'll face having 45 players being injured? Very slim. I believe they are a better team this year than last. We'll take another trophy home for the 2006 season.

Making it to the post season was enough to prove that they have champoinship caliber. If they had Rodney Harrison then perhaps they could've been stronger. If they had a full strength roster throughout most of the regular season then perhaps they could've clinched a playoff home game.

They will be back better than before as long as they can stay healthier than this year. Now the Patriots Nation will have to wait for three more years in order to witness the first 3 in a row superbowl victory by one team, which is going to be the Patriots. It's all about patience from here on for New Englanders. Just wait and watch more and more records get broken.

FedererUberAlles
01-15-2006, 01:03 PM
Steelers just got f'ing robbed. Biased refs in Indianapolis.

hummer23
01-15-2006, 01:16 PM
omg. why the hell didnt the take the knee? waht is wrogn with bettis? jesus.

Muse
01-15-2006, 01:25 PM
wow, god must have been smiling on the steelers today. That was a great tackle by Rothlisberger though.

Skppr05
01-15-2006, 01:31 PM
unfair calls in indo. but steelers still came out on top! WOO HOOOOO!

Skppr05
01-15-2006, 01:31 PM
omg. why the hell didnt the take the knee? waht is wrogn with bettis? jesus.
wouldn't have mattered, colts had three timeouts

MackSamuelHustovisics
01-15-2006, 01:32 PM
Steelers just got f'ing robbed. Biased refs in Indianapolis.What a turn of events! Yes those refs need to be reevaluated if they are going to continue working for the NFL. That last interception was clearly an interception. I saw full control and then the ball slipped. I would be the same as a receiver making a reception and then intentionally spiking it into the ground for a celebration.

Well deserved victory for the Steelers. Poor Manning. I've always predicited that he is going to be a Dan Marino with the pretty wins and stats but with no rings to tie it all together.

armand
01-15-2006, 01:40 PM
wow, god must have been smiling on the steelers today. That was a great tackle by Rothlisberger though.Agreed. It looked like Doss changed direction because he thought a Steeler was behind him when in fact it was his own player. Doss avoided him but couldn't avoid Rothlishambooger.
So many other tiny things to decide this huge game. Gotta love athletic competition. Go sports!

MackSamuelHustovisics
01-15-2006, 01:43 PM
wouldn't have mattered, colts had three timeoutsAgreed. THe Colts had enough timeouts for another possession anyways. What Bettis should have done was be more careful and not try to force a touchdown. I know that at that point he was excited and wanted to mark the end of the game with a exclamation point. He should've realized, "Hey, it's only 1st down. We can keep pounding bit by bit and milk the clock as much as possible. If we can't penetrate, go for 3 points." Should've/could've/would've. In the end, they lucked out. Vanderjagt chocked at home, in the dome with no wind, and no hostile distractions.

jhhachamp
01-15-2006, 01:58 PM
Hold on. I went through all the posts on this last page by Phil, Rabbit, and Dykstra and I still can't decipher it: Are you guys for or against the Steelers?

I was rooting for the Colts today, though I never had stated that here. But wow, that was probably the craziest game I have ever seen!

Rabbit
01-15-2006, 04:08 PM
I think Phil is a Philly Homer. While growing up in San Diego, I was a die hard Oakland fan. Now, I lean more toward college sports, but I do like the Bolts and da Bears.

Phil
01-15-2006, 05:58 PM
I think Phil is a Philly Homer. While growing up in San Diego, I was a die hard Oakland fan. Now, I lean more toward college sports, but I do like the Bolts and da Bears.

Yep, I used to BREATHE black-and-gold and although I only see the games now on tape, because I live overseas, I'm still a big "Stiller" fan.

The reason Adely is confused is because there were some Steeler fans here making fairly realistic and non-partisian comments/analysis on the game, and then, one of those purported Stiller fans completely hijacked the thread with a peresonal agenda, turning a civil discussion into a flame war. Too bad-hope this thread can get back on track because the 'lers have AT LEAST another week of football left.

ShooterMcMarco
01-15-2006, 06:03 PM
lol the bus had popped a tire. at least it didnt screw them over.

so guys, broncos vs steelers, who takes it? panthers vs seahawks?

GO HAWKKKKS

Phil
01-15-2006, 06:04 PM
." Should've/could've/would've. In the end, they lucked out. Vanderjagt chocked at home, in the dome with no wind, and no hostile distractions.

No one "lucked out" here; the Steelers did exactly what they had to do to win-and in the Colts' house; they took an early lead and KEPT IT, harassed Manning and his receivers and totally shut down Indy's running game, and and won the game despite a rip-off call-back of the Manning interception which gave Indy another chance to score.

That's not luck. LUCK is Indy and Manning having their arses kissed all year by the media and actually being considered a favorite to win the Bowl. Peyton Manning...meet Dan Marino. Oh wait, Dan at least MADE IT to the Bowl once. And in his second year as a pro.

MackSamuelHustovisics
01-15-2006, 06:40 PM
No one "lucked out" here; the Steelers did exactly what they had to do to win-and in the Colts' house; they took an early lead and KEPT IT, harassed Manning and his receivers and totally shut down Indy's running game, and and won the game despite a rip-off call-back of the Manning interception which gave Indy another chance to score.

That's not luck. LUCK is Indy and Manning having their arses kissed all year by the media and actually being considered a favorite to win the Bowl. Peyton Manning...meet Dan Marino. Oh wait, Dan at least MADE IT to the Bowl once. And in his second year as a pro. What was luck was the missed field goal. If Vanderjagt made it then the Steelers would've had to work more in OT. Everybody at least people in touch with realityknows that PIT played better and that wasn't luck.

It's just that it seemed like PIT had the game at the end, then all of a sudden Bettis fumbles (rare occurance) and then Indy runs downs the field with great field position, making it seem as though they were potentially going to end the game (C'mon, give Manning 3 downs to work with in PIT territory, of course that would give Steelers fans rapid heartbeats.)

Phil
01-15-2006, 07:03 PM
What was luck was the missed field goal. If Vanderjagt made it then the Steelers would've had to work more in OT. Everybody at least people in touch with realityknows that PIT played better and that wasn't luck.

It's just that it seemed like PIT had the game at the end, then all of a sudden Bettis fumbles (rare occurance) and then Indy runs downs the field with great field position, making it seem as though they were potentially going to end the game (C'mon, give Manning 3 downs to work with in PIT territory, of course that would give Steelers fans rapid heartbeats.)

You're right-the ball bounces in strange directions. And on the other side, if Bettis had scored from the 2, as he usually does and Troy's interception had been allowed as it should have-and the Steelers had taken advantage of that turnover to score-then the game may have been a blow-out. Fact is, though, they held Manning to under 20 points; something very few teams-if any-have been able to do all year. I'm happy for another week of slam- bam AFC football.

ibemadskillzz
01-16-2006, 08:59 PM
you look like a nerd phil in your profile.

Phil
01-16-2006, 09:11 PM
you look like a nerd phil in your profile.

ibemadskillzz = Absolutely nothing to say.

Just as I thought.

Kaptain Karl
01-16-2006, 10:02 PM
The Steelers played very well. And the Broncos are going to the Super Bowl.

- KK

MackSamuelHustovisics
01-21-2006, 07:53 PM
The Steelers played very well. And the Broncos are going to the Super Bowl.

- KKYes, I will have to agree with you.
Now the steelers are a tough team. They are like bears, physically crushing and intimidating their opponents. The thing is, I don't think the Steelers' players' talents are good enough to beat a Broncos team talent and coaching talent.

It will be a good match. Offense vs defense.

The Broncos have a great balanced offense that can drive down the field. Shanahan is a bonus to top off the team's players' talent. I see him as a genius like Bill Belichick except his specialty is on the offense.

I think the only way PIT can win is if they bang up the DEN receivers and scare them. They need to jam up those guys at the line. PIT needs to stop the running game too. I don't expect DEN to get like 100 team total rushing yards but they will get enough to have PIT honor the run. That should be just enough to set up Plummer with big plays, the play action fakes.

PIT will attempt to keep pounding the ball. After the first half, I think they will abandon the run for the most part because DEN would be stopping them from getting the big gains. PIT would be trailing by a couple of scores and so the ball would be in the hands of Burger so that they can attempt to catch up. I don't think Hamburger will have a great game. This is why PIT will lose. Cowher tries the best he could but just not enough. Typical post season Steelers.

Docalex007
01-22-2006, 08:10 AM
I'm sick of hearing about the Broncos and Steelers.

GO PANTHERS!

Kaptain Karl
01-22-2006, 11:15 AM
This game starts in 45 minutes. My prediction? 24 - 20
.
.
.
.
.
Broncos!

- KK

Skppr05
01-22-2006, 11:16 AM
This game starts in 45 minutes. My prediction? 24 - 20
.
.
.
.
.
Broncos!

- KK
the star ledger made the same exact prediction...but for the steelers!

MackSamuelHustovisics
01-22-2006, 11:54 AM
I'm sick of hearing about the Broncos and Steelers.

GO PANTHERS!

Maybe you should start your own thread about them. Read the "specific" title of this thread before you complain.

(Great football game analysis and or predictions by the way!)[sarcasm]

MackSamuelHustovisics
01-22-2006, 12:00 PM
The Panthers are going to lose anyways. Seahawks will face the Broncos in the 2005 Superbowl. As for the predictions of who's going to be the world champs?.... I still haven't analyzed that one yet. It's been tough making predictions this year.

MackSamuelHustovisics
01-22-2006, 01:28 PM
Whoa. Looks like Cowher was really prepared. They came into the game passing on first downs, passing when run is expected. Smart game plan. Shanahan ran a lot of play actions (just I as expected) but it's not effective if you can't even sell the run to begin with! Things are looking to be opposite as I predicted. PIT is up by a few scores going into the half.

Andy Hewitt
01-22-2006, 01:31 PM
Steelers are doing good, way better than the Bears. God the Bears suck.

MackSamuelHustovisics
01-22-2006, 03:10 PM
Okay, it's more like PIT vS SEA at the Superbowl.

Skppr05
01-22-2006, 03:59 PM
steelers=smartest team in NFL with heavy hitters. payday in two weeks gentlemen hopefully)

Docalex007
01-22-2006, 04:05 PM
Okay, it's more like PIT vS SEA at the Superbowl.

You've already been wrong with one prediction. Your Seattle prediction is also wrong....as you will see when the Panthers whoop some *** tonight!

BRING IT ON BABY!

MackSamuelHustovisics
01-22-2006, 04:59 PM
You've already been wrong with one prediction. Your Seattle prediction is also wrong....as you will see when the Panthers whoop some *** tonight!

BRING IT ON BABY!At least I attempted to make predictions and elaborate some game details, not just stating who is going to win. What have you stated about football? Nothing!

By the way, SEA is going to win, and I'm sticking to it.

PM_
01-22-2006, 05:24 PM
*YAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWNNNN*
Seattle up 20-7 half-time.
I already told everbody a cazillion times they're taking it all the way.

Bettis, you'd better stick around another year.

Skppr05
01-22-2006, 05:31 PM
hmm, i want carolina to win this game. Seahwaks will make it hell for the steelers in the superbowl

Muse
01-22-2006, 06:12 PM
Seattle baby! Smith's been a non-factor and they're down to their 4th RB, so it's really not suprising they're getting smacked.

My money's on Seattle winning in the superbowl.

PM_
01-22-2006, 06:24 PM
Seattle baby! Smith's been a non-factor and they're down to their 4th RB, so it's really not suprising they're getting smacked.

My money's on Seattle winning in the superbowl.
That's right bro. I posted a thread the start of the season saying they'd take it all the way to the top and lookie here:mrgreen: :mrgreen:

Phil
01-22-2006, 07:12 PM
The Steelers played very well. And the Broncos are going to the Super Bowl.

- KK

Sure, Karl-if they have tickets to the game;-)

Kaptain Karl
01-22-2006, 10:50 PM
Ouch!

The Steelers beat us in *every* category. They really played well and deserved the win. Cowher's been great at having that team peak at just the right pace. Nice job!

Now go pluck those Seahawks in the Big One!

- KK

MackSamuelHustovisics
01-23-2006, 12:38 PM
Ouch!

The Steelers beat us in *every* category. They really played well and deserved the win. Cowher's been great at having that team peak at just the right pace. Nice job!

Now go pluck those Seahawks in the Big One!

- KKYes, Cowher did have a great gameplan. He focused on scoring early (much like against the Colts), ran passing plays early, and played mangament footabool i the end without being overly-conservative. They depressed the home team fans.

MackSamuelHustovisics
02-05-2006, 09:35 AM
After looking over things over a bit, my prediction is that the Steelers will become the World Champs. As far as winning by how much, I'll go with a 3 point victory.

Skppr05
02-05-2006, 11:25 AM
today is the the day! woot! i ordered a three-foot long sub and buffalo wings for the occasion. lol. the steerlers have progressed further than the majority thought this year. I really want them to win so Bettis can get the ring.

Skppr05
02-05-2006, 07:24 PM
Woooo Hoooo! Steelers Baby!

dmastous
02-05-2006, 07:51 PM
Steelers + zebras = superbowl victory :D
While I thought the steelers would win this game (27-10), I do believe the were handed numerous breaks and things would have been different had some different calls been made. Like the offensive pass interference taking away a Seahawk TD. And the 'Berger's "touchdown" just before the half.

Kaptain Karl
02-06-2006, 06:25 AM
Steelers + zebras = superbowl victoryMethinks you're just trying to be a "pot-stirrer". (Remember, my team was the Broncos....) The officials were not nearly the meddlers that the "sour grapes" crowd may be claiming. (I noticed on ESPN, the panel was split: The ex-NFC players were saying the Refs made too many calls. The ex-AFC players thought it was a well-called game. Hmmm....

That offensive pass interference was a legit call ... especially as pointed out, Jackson did it right in front of the Ref.

I don't know how any objective viewer of that replay can claim #7 did not score. The ball certainly *looked* as if it came in contact with the plane of the End Zone. That's all that needs to happen for a TD.

<edit> The Refs overturning Hasselback's fumble was a good call, right...?

The most idiotic segment of the game? The Seattle series just before the Half ... bizarre! Really poor Clock Management. </edit>

Good game, Steelers. Congrats!

- KK

dmastous
02-06-2006, 11:54 AM
Methinks you're just trying to be a "pot-stirrer". (Remember, my team was the Broncos....) The officials were not nearly the meddlers that the "sour grapes" crowd may be claiming. (I noticed on ESPN, the panel was split: The ex-NFC players were saying the Refs made too many calls. The ex-AFC players thought it was a well-called game. Hmmm....

That offensive pass interference was a legit call ... especially as pointed out, Jackson did it right in front of the Ref.

I don't know how any objective viewer of that replay can claim #7 did not score. The ball certainly *looked* as if it came in contact with the plane of the End Zone. That's all that needs to happen for a TD.

<edit> The Refs overturning Hasselback's fumble was a good call, right...?

The most idiotic segment of the game? The Seattle series just before the Half ... bizarre! Really poor Clock Management. </edit>

Good game, Steelers. Congrats!

- KK

No question the Seahawks shot themselves in the foot. How many passes were dropped in the red zone and even in the end zone.
I thought that pass interference play was ticky-tack. 9 times out of 10 it's not called and if is, it's called on the defence.
I though the 'berger TD was not a TD. The ref came into spot the ball and then 'berger brought the ball over the goal line after he was down and the ref put the other arm up and call a TD.
A phantom holding call costing the Seahawks another TD.
That exchange at the end of the half changed the momentum of the game. Seahawks going in to score making it 10-0 instead it's 3-7.
Yes that was the correct over-rule on the fumble, but I thought that ticky tack too. Foote just touched Hassleback but he tripped and fell. That should have been Steeler ball. But I know, like the "tuck rule" you have to call it according to the book. And the book says he was touched so it down by contact.
As for the end of half dance, it didn't hold a candle to the end of game hash up the Seahawks had.
The Steelers played a poor game the Seahawks were better (statistically), but not enough to overcome the bad calls.
You don't have to be objective to know that the officiating during these playoffs as a whole has been very bad. They've made numerous questionable calls.
The Palamolo interception dissallowed??
The "off sides, no not offsides, uh, noone crossed the line of scrimmage so no foul" fiasco?
The pass interference call on the Pat's DB??? That should have been offensive interference.
The Troy Brown muff where he was knocked off the ball before it hit the ground.
There were calls in the Panther/Seahawk game that were questionable as well. I just don't remember them. I think there was a similar touchback off a fumble or interception that was incorrectly ruled in that game (like it was in the Pat's/Broncs game).
These are supposed to be the best referees of the year. It's just hard for me to believe that's true.
And to set the record straight, I'm a Cowboy fan from my youth and a 49er fan to boot. I root against the Steelers after watching the beat the Cowboys in the '70s, and have enjoyed their playoff frustration until now, so I'll admit that.

Kaptain Karl
02-06-2006, 12:25 PM
And to set the record straight, I'm a Cowboy fan from my youth and a 49er fan to boot. I root against the Steelers after watching the beat the Cowboys in the '70s, and have enjoyed their playoff frustration until now, so I'll admit that.Thank you for your candor. That explains a lot. (I still have nightmares about Starr/Pearson TD's against my Colts. I hate the 'boys.)

You and I have very different assessments of the quality of the officiating in these playoffs. (That's life....)

- KK

dmastous
02-06-2006, 12:57 PM
Thank you for your candor. That explains a lot. (I still have nightmares about Starr/Pearson TD's against my Colts. I hate the 'boys.)

You and I have very different assessments of the quality of the officiating in these playoffs. (That's life....)

- KK

Which Pearson? Preston, or Drew? Starr was the Packer's QB. Staubach was the Cowboy's. Staubach and Criag Morton.
The Cowboys lost to the Colts in '70, and can't have played the Colts more than once every 3 or 4 years if the current scheduling system was in place in the '70s (playing everyone in your div 2x 3 teams from each of the other div once and then 3 from an opp conference div on a rotating basis).
Your nightmares can't be too bad.
My nightmare is seeing that shrink-wrapped Jerry Jones taking a helicopter to tell Tom Landry he's fired during a round of golf the day he bought the team. My nightmare continues to this day :mad:

Phil
02-06-2006, 06:36 PM
No question the Seahawks shot themselves in the foot. How many passes were dropped in the red zone and even in the end zone.
I thought that pass interference play was ticky-tack. 9 times out of 10 it's not called and if is, it's called on the defence.
I though the 'berger TD was not a TD. The ref came into spot the ball and then 'berger brought the ball over the goal line after he was down and the ref put the other arm up and call a TD.
A phantom holding call costing the Seahawks another TD.
That exchange at the end of the half changed the momentum of the game. Seahawks going in to score making it 10-0 instead it's 3-7.
Yes that was the correct over-rule on the fumble, but I thought that ticky tack too. Foote just touched Hassleback but he tripped and fell. That should have been Steeler ball. But I know, like the "tuck rule" you have to call it according to the book. And the book says he was touched so it down by contact.
As for the end of half dance, it didn't hold a candle to the end of game hash up the Seahawks had.
The Steelers played a poor game the Seahawks were better (statistically), but not enough to overcome the bad calls.
You don't have to be objective to know that the officiating during these playoffs as a whole has been very bad. They've made numerous questionable calls.
The Palamolo interception dissallowed??
The "off sides, no not offsides, uh, noone crossed the line of scrimmage so no foul" fiasco?
The pass interference call on the Pat's DB??? That should have been offensive interference.
The Troy Brown muff where he was knocked off the ball before it hit the ground.
There were calls in the Panther/Seahawk game that were questionable as well. I just don't remember them. I think there was a similar touchback off a fumble or interception that was incorrectly ruled in that game (like it was in the Pat's/Broncs game).
These are supposed to be the best referees of the year. It's just hard for me to believe that's true.
And to set the record straight, I'm a Cowboy fan from my youth and a 49er fan to boot. I root against the Steelers after watching the beat the Cowboys in the '70s, and have enjoyed their playoff frustration until now, so I'll admit that.

Yes, the Steelers really beat up on the Cowboys throughout the 70's, even in exhibition games. They simply disliked "America's Team" and KNEW they were better than the Cowboys, by a lot, and demonstrated this,decisively, on the field.

Your post is mainly sour grapes.

The Steelers did not play a good game, but give the "hawks some credit; they were probably the toughest team the Steelers faced all season (other than, I think, New England). They outplayed the Steelers for a half and were STILL behind-that's when I was sure the game was over, that the Steelers had it in the bag.

Ben called some bad plays, and the "D" didn't pressure the QB like they are famous for. But...the refs didn't lose this game. The interference call was, technically, the right call-the guy clearly pushed off, and pushing off is, technically, a penalty. Why would the ref turn a blind eye to this, if it was right in front of him?

Great teams, like great tennis players, find ways to win even when not at their best, and even against the best...The game came down to big plays. The Steelers made them and Seattle didn't. Seattle's kicker missed two field goals-not chip shots, but not record breakers either. Even with tons of time, Hasslebeck couldn't find open receivers, and over/under threw several passes. His passing stats aren't as good as they look on paper. Cowher coached a hell of a game.

Not the prettiest SB ever played, but not a bad one either-the game wasn't really "decided" until there were 6 minutes left to play.

dmastous
02-06-2006, 07:18 PM
Yes, the Steelers really beat up on the Cowboys throughout the 70's, even in exhibition games. They simply disliked "America's Team" and KNEW they were better than the Cowboys, by a lot, and demonstrated this,decisively, on the field.

Your post is mainly sour grapes.

The Steelers did not play a good game, but give the "hawks some credit; they were probably the toughest team the Steelers faced all season (other than, I think, New England). They outplayed the Steelers for a half and were STILL behind-that's when I was sure the game was over, that the Steelers had it in the bag.

Ben called some bad plays, and the "D" didn't pressure the QB like they are famous for. But...the refs didn't lose this game. The interference call was, technically, the right call-the guy clearly pushed off, and pushing off is, technically, a penalty. Why would the ref turn a blind eye to this, if it was right in front of him?

Great teams, like great tennis players, find ways to win even when not at their best, and even against the best...The game came down to big plays. The Steelers made them and Seattle didn't. Seattle's kicker missed two field goals-not chip shots, but not record breakers either. Even with tons of time, Hasslebeck couldn't find open receivers, and over/under threw several passes. His passing stats aren't as good as they look on paper. Cowher coached a hell of a game.

Not the prettiest SB ever played, but not a bad one either-the game wasn't really "decided" until there were 6 minutes left to play.

No sour grapes here. I had sour foods.
I agree Seattle did not take their opportunities when they had them. Mr. Talk Talk Stevens dropped three passes that would have given them scoring opportunities. Yes the kicker missed two field goals, one because of the 2nd quarter last second mishaps with the clock that cost them over 20 seconds.
My rant is that the officiating throughout the playoffs was BAD. I even cited two calls against the Steelers that were bad calls.
I do think though that if not for those plays, two TDs called back due to penalties (one ticky tack and the other nonexistent), and the phantom touchdown for the Steelers were enough to had that game to the Steelers.
Just my opinion.

Phil
02-06-2006, 07:34 PM
No sour grapes here. I had sour foods.
I agree Seattle did not take their opportunities when they had them. Mr. Talk Talk Stevens dropped three passes that would have given them scoring opportunities. Yes the kicker missed two field goals, one because of the 2nd quarter last second mishaps with the clock that cost them over 20 seconds.
My rant is that the officiating throughout the playoffs was BAD. I even cited two calls against the Steelers that were bad calls.
I do think though that if not for those plays, two TDs called back due to penalties (one ticky tack and the other nonexistent), and the phantom touchdown for the Steelers were enough to had that game to the Steelers.
Just my opinion.

Rothlisberger's TD was...a TD. It was close, but the ball broke the plain of the goal line by inches. That's ALL it takes. A 99-yard bomb or a QB sneak that BARELY succeeds-six points is six points, no matter how it's done.

Kaptain Karl
02-07-2006, 12:36 PM
Yeah. I meant "Staubach". Starr was the *other* ST.... QB who was a rival back then.

- KK

Ben42
02-08-2006, 08:50 AM
The only really bad call I saw was the low block personal foul on Hasselback. The others, including the ones that went against the Steelers were just normat calls that happen in every football game.

I thought the hold was a good call. The linebacker had gotten a good jump on the snap and was around the lineman. Lineman had to hook his arm around linebacker’s shoulder pad from behind. That’s holding.

Jackson had his hand on the DB’s chest and moved left by fully extending his arm while his hand stayed in contact. He did it in the end zone right in front of the ref. That’s going to get called most of the time.

The Rothlisberger TD was a two inch call. He either got stopped by an inch, or got in by an inch. If the original call had gone the other way it couldn’t have been overruled either. Also, everyone is so sure the Seattle would have scored a touchdown from the two or three yardline after the “phantom holding call,” but they don’t think Pitt could punch it in from the 1 inch line?

I thought Seattle was famous for microbrews, not whine.