Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 63
  1. #31
    UtterBlitz's Avatar
    UtterBlitz is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    3,439
    Rep Power
    40

    Re: Once and For All: The Difference Between the Rams' and Seahawks' Super Bowl Losses

    It is all about money and getting more consumers to watch the big game. It is very important to watch those Super Bowl commercials. That is were the money is made.

    Fat Pang... avenger was successful in slowing your response. Your response took a while.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  2. #32
    Curly Horns's Avatar
    Curly Horns is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    1st & Goal
    Posts
    2,557
    Rep Power
    58

    Re: Once and For All: The Difference Between the Rams' and Seahawks' Super Bowl Losses

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam
    Patriots: deliberately broke rules and got away with it because refs failed to enforce them.
    I don't think so.

    They played the way that the refs had been calling the rules for years. They did some chucking within the 5 yard zone which is within the rules. There were Rams receivers that were open downfield on numerous plays, but the QB often failed to find them or he was keying on a certain deep route.

    Maybe it is some kind of mystery as to how receivers are open on pass plays when they are supposedly being held or interfered with downfield?

    They lost because of turnovers and generally sloppy play. The biggest mistake the refs made was the non call on the brady intentional grounding. That play denied the football world of the first ever OT SB.









    ForEveryRamThatEarnsRegard

  3. #33
    txramsfan's Avatar
    txramsfan is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Poplar Bluff, MO
    Age
    50
    Posts
    7,266
    Rep Power
    64

    Re: Once and For All: The Difference Between the Rams' and Seahawks' Super Bowl Losses

    I have to agree with Ferter. If the Patriots were getting away with holding and such, the Rams should have done the same thing to them.

    The Rams got beat because Warner threw a pinpoint pass to Ty Law and a Ricky Proehl fumble near the end zone.

  4. #34
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    17,999
    Rep Power
    163

    Re: Once and For All: The Difference Between the Rams' and Seahawks' Super Bowl Losses

    This thread was never intended to explain why the Rams lost that game. I've said many times before that the Rams lost that game because they didn't execute and made too many mistakes.

    That said, the officiating didn't help.

    The point of this thread (I should know by now that any thread that goes more than two pages will stray from the original point) is that, while the Seahawks were merely on the short-side of some close calls (most of which, by the way, were called correctly), while the Rams were hurt by the fact that Patriots deliberately broke the rules (and no, they did not merely "chuck" within five yards) and got away with it (not just in that game either).

    So, looking back, I blame the Rams for the loss, I detest the Patriots for their "dirty play," and I'm disappointed in the refs for not enforcing the rules.

  5. #35
    r8rh8rmike's Avatar
    r8rh8rmike is online now Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    29 Palms, Ca.
    Age
    54
    Posts
    11,006
    Rep Power
    124

    Re: Once and For All: The Difference Between the Rams' and Seahawks' Super Bowl Losses

    Quote Originally Posted by txramsfan
    If the Patriots were getting away with holding and such, the Rams should have done the same thing to them.
    Agreed. This is the thing that bothers me most about how the game played out, failure or refusal on the Rams part to recognize the dynamics of the officiating, adjust accordingly and follow suit to keep things in check.

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam
    So, looking back, I blame the Rams for the loss, I detest the Patriots for their "dirty play," and I'm disappointed in the refs for not enforcing the rules.
    Very well said Av.

  6. #36
    Fat Pang's Avatar
    Fat Pang is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    1,603
    Rep Power
    64

    Re: Once and For All: The Difference Between the Rams' and Seahawks' Super Bowl Losses

    Quote Originally Posted by UtterBlitz
    It is all about money and getting more consumers to watch the big game. It is very important to watch those Super Bowl commercials. That is were the money is made.

    Fat Pang... avenger was successful in slowing your response. Your response took a while.
    Yeah I know it was a bit tardy, but I don't visit as much these days................

    (There's only so many mock drafts a man can take after all)




    Can someone also explain to me how this thread wasn't going to touch on our SB loss when there was a direct comparison made between the officiating in 36 and 40?

    Or should we, as the title of this thread infers accept the original post as definitive and just offer our thanks for having it pointed out to us?

  7. #37
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    17,999
    Rep Power
    163

    Re: Once and For All: The Difference Between the Rams' and Seahawks' Super Bowl Losses

    You don't have to agree with me. But if I post a thread titled "the sky is definitely blue" and you respond by saying "no, ice cream is cold" then its not a very good debate.

    For those who disagree that the Patriots deliberately broke (or, at least, severely bent) the rules, fine. That would be a disagreement with my point.

    But to respond to my point by saying "the Rams lost because they played poorly" is just taking the thread on a tangent that ignores the whole point of my original post.

    The one thing that nobody has argued is that the Steelers, in any way, deliberately bent or broke the rules. The fact that nobody has made that point validates my argument that there is a significant difference between reason why Ram fans complained after losing to the Patriots and the reason why Seahawk fans are complaining now.

  8. #38
    BlueTalon's Avatar
    BlueTalon is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Washington
    Age
    53
    Posts
    183
    Rep Power
    13

    Re: Once and For All: The Difference Between the Rams' and Seahawks' Super Bowl Losses

    I'll disagree with that. You may think it is significant that Patriots deliberately broke rules, I think it is immaterial. (Unless someone gets injured, then it's a big deal.) The refs are there for a reason, and if they are not making calls or making one-sided calls, then they are doing a crappy job of officiating! If the Patriots were deliberately breaking rules, then a large portion or your blame in the situation should lie with the refs who allowed it to happen. The fact that you choose to focus your attention and ire on the Patriots players instead of the refs does not mean there's any qualitative difference between other Rams fans' complaints about officiating and Seahawks fans' complaints about officiating. The difference is just in the details of the calls/non-calls.

  9. #39
    Curly Horns's Avatar
    Curly Horns is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    1st & Goal
    Posts
    2,557
    Rep Power
    58

    Re: Once and For All: The Difference Between the Rams' and Seahawks' Super Bowl Losses

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam
    The point of this thread (I should know by now that any thread that goes more than two pages will stray from the original point) is that, while the Seahawks were merely on the short-side of some close calls (most of which, by the way, were called correctly), while the Rams were hurt by the fact that Patriots deliberately broke the rules (and no, they did not merely "chuck" within five yards) and got away with it (not just in that game either).
    Yeah and like I said....I don't think so, as far as the pats deliberately breaking the rules. Once a person disagrees I don't see the harm in elaborating on ones own perspective.

    I just don't see deliberate acts on my copy of the game tape. I see a wide open aggressive passing offense, based on timing, on the part of the Rams. I see an aggressive defense designed to disrupt timing, with the legal bump, on the part of the pats.

    Maybe you could point out or be more specific as to these so-called deliberate acts? As it is, you just make a blanket statement that the pats deliberately broke the rules.



    If the Patriots were getting away with holding and such, the Rams should have done the same thing to them.
    Agreed. This is the thing that bothers me most about how the game played out, failure or refusal on the Rams part to recognize the dynamics of the officiating, adjust accordingly and follow suit to keep things in check.
    I think it is easier said than done. The pats were well schooled in their style of defense. The Rams did not play bump and run. I don't think you will have much success by going up to the defensive players on the bench or at halftime and tell them to start playing outside the system. That is forcing things and when you ask players to force things, outside of the way they have been taught, then there are going to be blatant mistakes made.

    Another thing to remember is that the Rams defense did not play bad at all within their system. There was no good reason for them to change the way they were playing, because they were shutting down the pats anemic offense. The one thing the pats did well on offense was to eat up the game clock. Classic Parcells style, which I'm sure Belichick learned from serving under Parcells.







    ForEveryRamThatEarnsRegard

  10. #40
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    17,999
    Rep Power
    163

    Re: Once and For All: The Difference Between the Rams' and Seahawks' Super Bowl Losses

    Quote Originally Posted by Ferter
    Maybe you could point out or be more specific as to these so-called deliberate acts? As it is, you just make a blanket statement that the pats deliberately broke the rules.
    After the game, Marshall was quoted as saying that he was pretty much held or tackled on every passing play. When Willie McGuinest was asked about it, he basically didn't deny it but said that its only a penalty if the refs call it.

    Here's a good article from a sportswriter from Pittsburgh. I think Steve Young's comments are also interesting.

    Collier: Cheating pays dividends for Patriots and Coach What's-his-name

    Friday, January 23, 2004
    By Gene Collier, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette


    Two questions override all eight bajillion hyperbolic aspects of the ramp-up to Super Bowl 38. That's right, 38. Unlike most, this column recognizes as official the fall of the Roman Empire.
    Question 1: How many Super Bowls will Bill Belichick have to win before the majority of Pittsburgh talk-show callers can reliably reproduce his actual name?
    Question 2: Will NFL officials enforce the rules as written or will they instead allow Belichick's Patriots to do everything short of pistol-whipping tight ends and receivers in the guise of "inspired pass defense?"
    We'll deal with the more important question first.
    Probably no one since Buddy Brewster (Bubby Brister) has had his good name mangled by our town's sports-besotted radio yakkers as has Bill Belichick, partly because his long NFL tenure includes a somehow deliciously unsuccessful stint with the rival Browns, and partly because the now equally detested Ravens are coached by Brian Billick, a linguistic and competitive juxtaposition that appears too demanding for native tongues.
    No kiddin'.
    Thus Belichick has been referred to alternately in broadcast sports talk hereabouts as Bill Bullock, Brian Bullock, Brian Belichick, Bill Billacheck, Brad Billick, Brian Billick, Brad Belleck, Bill Bilochuk and Bud Bellick.
    It's speculative, but I'm saying the answer to Question 1 therefore is, "at least two, though probably more."
    On the lesser issue, it's begun to emerge from a couple of notable radio interviews that the reason the Patriots are so successful stopping even the most sophisticated and accomplished passing offenses -- Peyton Manning had been dead solid perfect in these playoffs until he got to Massachusetts -- is really quite simple: They cheat.
    "It's not [Belichick's] genius," former Super Bowl quarterback Steve Young was telling ESPN's Dan Patrick the other day, "you know what's going to happen. The strong safety is going to line up over the tight end, and he's going to maul that guy the second the ball is snapped. Mug him, tackle him, whatever. And the other [defenders] are going to grab their guys just enough to disrupt your timing. We struggled against it when [Belichick] was in Cleveland. It's the same stuff."
    The formula seems to be similar to the one deployed by the ingenious basketball coach John Thompson in the golden era of Georgetown Hoya domination: Commit so many fouls the officials couldn't possibly call them all without making the time of game 7:18.
    The NFL is in a similar pickle, and the astute coaches know it. Nobody wants to tune into these playoffs and see 20 penalties, so it's not surprising that former Steelers and current Patriots linebacker Mike Vrabel confessed to repeated muggings in another morning sports show at midweek.
    "Muggings is probably a good word," Vrabel said. "You're allowed [to do it] for 5 yards, and that's what we were trying to do."
    While that's technically correct, the Patriots deploy plenty of illegal contact beyond the 5-yard cushion, and plenty of pass interference on most every passing down in almost every area of the field. It is not a revelation.
    When the Patriots beat the Rams in Super Bowl 36, Rams superstar Marshall Faulk was quoted afterward as saying: "I mean [linebacker Willie McGinest] tackled me. I was trying to run to the flat and he tackled me. But that was going on all day, for the most part. Every time I released, I got held. I got pushed and I got grabbed. It just so happened that we were on a part of the field where it's condensed and the line judge had an opportunity to see it."
    Faulk was talking about the one call that went against McGinest, who said: "I'm not the referee, so I don't know if it was holding or not. I played him the same way all game."
    This do-it-until-you-get-caught system isn't exclusive to the modern Patriots. The Jimmy Johnson-era Cowboys earned a similar reputation for flouting the rules.
    So what will happen a week from Sunday? Nothing. The next thing you hear of this will be from July's training camps, where a touring crew of officials will warn coaches and players of an imminent crackdown on illegal defensive tactics, all of which will be winked at by the time the playoffs roll around next season.
    But it might not be a bad idea to throw a flag early on that ingenious Patriots defense, nor would two in a row be counterproductive. To refresh, the following actions constitute defensive pass interference:
    Contact by a defender who is not playing the ball and such contact restricts the receiver's opportunity to make the catch.
    Using a crossbow to bring down a receiver running a "skinny post."
    Grabbing a receiver's arm(s) in such a manner that restricts his opportunity to catch a pass.
    Using a receiver in any attempt to re-create the Nancy Kerrigan incident.
    Hooking a receiver in an attempt to get to the ball in such a manner that it causes the receiver's body to turn prior to the ball arriving. Hooking a receiver in any manner previously featured on a fishing show.

  11. #41
    Curly Horns's Avatar
    Curly Horns is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    1st & Goal
    Posts
    2,557
    Rep Power
    58

    Re: Once and For All: The Difference Between the Rams' and Seahawks' Super Bowl Losses

    But that was going on all day, for the most part. Every time I released, I got held. I got pushed and I got grabbed.
    Yet when I watch the game tape I have to disagree with Faulk's sour grapes. He got open clean on many plays and he caught 4 passes for 54 yards.




    "It's not [Belichick's] genius," former Super Bowl quarterback Steve Young was telling ESPN's Dan Patrick the other day, "you know what's going to happen. The strong safety is going to line up over the tight end, and he's going to maul that guy the second the ball is snapped. Mug him, tackle him, whatever. And the other [defenders] are going to grab their guys just enough to disrupt your timing. We struggled against it when [Belichick] was in Cleveland. It's the same stuff."
    "Muggings is probably a good word," Vrabel said. "You're allowed [to do it] for 5 yards, and that's what we were trying to do."
    that's technically correct
    the Patriots deploy plenty of illegal contact beyond the 5-yard cushion, and plenty of pass interference on most every passing down in almost every area of the field. It is not a revelation.
    I guess it's just a revelation as to how an offense ever completes a pass against a defense that interferes on most every down in almost every area of the field.



    Man that former Rams QB must have been a true miracle worker in SB36. Somehow he completed 28 of 44 passes(63.6%) for 365 yards against a defense that deliberately cheats with interference on almost every down in almost every area of the field.



    ForEveryRamThatEarnsRegard

  12. #42
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    17,999
    Rep Power
    163

    Re: Once and For All: The Difference Between the Rams' and Seahawks' Super Bowl Losses

    Look, it all comes down to opinions and interpretations in the end (not like the Patriot players are going to come out and say "yeah, we cheated.").

    If you believe that the Patriots held the 2001 Rams (who had scored 1,500+ points in three yeards) to 20 points because of great defensive play and strategy, and without the assistance of illegal hits (and then similarly shut down the Colts offense repeatedly), fine.

    I, and many people, disagree.

    Among those who agree with me are the members of the NFL Competition Committee. Prior to the 2004 season, the committee - in response to the Patriots method of defending - instructed league officials to pay closer attention to illegal contact by DBs, and to enforce the rules as written. The result - illegal contact penalties went from 79 called in 2004 to 191 in 2005 (which shows that, as a result of their success, many teams were trying to adopt the Patriots style of defense).

    No reason to continue going back and forth here. Again, if you think the Patriots goal was to play within the rules, you're entitled to that belief.

    I strongly believe they intended to break rules to the extent they thought they could get away with it - and that is what separates them from this year's Steelers.

  13. #43
    Curly Horns's Avatar
    Curly Horns is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    1st & Goal
    Posts
    2,557
    Rep Power
    58

    Re: Once and For All: The Difference Between the Rams' and Seahawks' Super Bowl Losses

    Among those who agree with me are the members of the NFL Competition Committee. Prior to the 2004 season, the committee - in response to the Patriots method of defending - instructed league officials to pay closer attention to illegal contact by DBs, and to enforce the rules as written. The result - illegal contact penalties went from 79 called in 2004 to 191 in 2005 (which shows that, as a result of their success, many teams were trying to adopt the Patriots style of defense).
    I think you might want to look at who was on the competion committee and why and how they lobbied. The rules favor the offense and they have for a long time. Scoring sells tickets and creates interest during network telecasts.

    When a decision is made to place an emphasis on calling illegal contact or any other judgement call then there is naturally going to be an increase in the number of flags thrown.




    No reason to continue going back and forth here.
    You are correct, there is no reason. The reply button should be eliminated, on message boards, thereby negating a debate on any topic or point. A person could simply state his or her opinion and be done with it. No confusion, no debate, no one getting off topic, clean and neat. A true soapbox for those who only wish to hear the sound of their own voice.






    ForEveryRamThatEarnsRegard

  14. #44
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    17,999
    Rep Power
    163

    Re: Once and For All: The Difference Between the Rams' and Seahawks' Super Bowl Losses

    Quote Originally Posted by Ferter
    You are correct, there is no reason. The reply button should be eliminated, on message boards, thereby negating a debate on any topic or point. A person could simply state his or her opinion and be done with it. No confusion, no debate, no one getting off topic, clean and neat. A true soapbox for those who only wish to hear the sound of their own voice.
    No, Ferter. What I meant was, you essentially haven't said anything other than "I disagree" for the last three or four posts or so. Consequently, I have no interest in trying to impress upon you once again that I don't agree with the way you see things, and never will (and vice versa).

  15. #45
    bigredman's Avatar
    bigredman is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    El Paso, Texas
    Age
    56
    Posts
    1,815
    Rep Power
    61

    Re: Once and For All: The Difference Between the Rams' and Seahawks' Super Bowl Losses

    I agree Avenger......YAWN.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •