That's it.
 

Congrats, Tom.


--



RCE

"Don't worry about the world coming to an end today. It's already tomorrow
in Australia ." (Charles Schulz)

That's it.
 

"RCE" wrote in message
...

Congrats, Tom.


--



RCE

"Don't worry about the world coming to an end today. It's already tomorrow
in Australia ." (Charles Schulz)


SeaHawks scored. 14-10. 21 minutes left to go. It is far from being
over.

That's it.
 

In article ,
says...
On Sun, 5 Feb 2006 20:32:53 -0500, "RCE" wrote:


Congrats, Tom.

it ain't over until its over.

although the good father had a couple of choice words on the
telephone.

hell have to see his confessor tomorrow. :)

and hes gonna owe me dinner. :)

Refs and the league got the outcome they wanted. Two insane calls to
take touchdowns away from Seattle.

The first in the end zone was a ticky tacky call, after the defensive
man had committed interference that wasn't called. The second play for
the reception on the 1 yard line by Jeremy Stevens called back on a
hold, for which there was no evidence on the replay.

I won't even dispute the called touchdown for the Steelers 'cause it
looked like the ball could have crossed the plane before quarterback was
tackled. The ref who made the call first indicated the ball was down
short and then changed his mind. Pretty dicey.

Tainted win for Steelers. Seattle gets purposely shafted by the refs.
Evidently there's just not enough money in a Seattle win.

jps

That's it.
 

On Sun, 5 Feb 2006 20:55:28 -0500, " JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT
comREMOVETHIS wrote:

SeaHawks scored. 14-10. 21 minutes left to go. It is far from being
over.

It was over from the very first yellow flag. Stealer, indeed.

bb

That's it.
 

In article ,
says...
On Sun, 5 Feb 2006 20:55:28 -0500, " JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT
comREMOVETHIS wrote:

SeaHawks scored. 14-10. 21 minutes left to go. It is far from being
over.

It was over from the very first yellow flag. Stealer, indeed.

Sad to see refs changing games in professional sports. It's a sign of
the times.

Just another example of those with control going to extraordinary
measures to make certain their interests are protected.

Small market teams are bad for leagues. The refs are part of the league
and I'm sure, at the very least implicitly, they firmly understand what
outcome serves them best.

jps

That's it.
 

On Sun, 05 Feb 2006 20:06:22 -0800, jps wrote:


Small market teams are bad for leagues.

Disregarding the game, I was curious. I don't think Seattle qualifies as
a "small market" anymore. In metro-area population, it ranks 13
nationally.

http://www.demographia.com/db-usmet2000.htm

As a city, 23.

http://www.demographia.com/db-uscity98.htm

That's it.
 

On Mon, 06 Feb 2006 08:04:20 -0500, thunder
wrote:

Small market teams are bad for leagues.

Disregarding the game, I was curious. I don't think Seattle qualifies as
a "small market" anymore. In metro-area population, it ranks 13
nationally.


I don't care enough to verify my opinion with facts, but I think the
difference is in small market and small market for the NFL. I'd think
as far as NLF paraphernalia goes, Steelers crap outsells Seahawks crap
10 to 1. The average Neanderthal, Joe Six-pack sports fan relates
much more to a gritty, dirty play team like the Steelers. What self
respecting redneck would support a bunch of sweater wearing, latté
sipping, book reading, free thinkers like them Seattle folks, whoever
their namby pamby team is. Hey Bubba, you really gonna wear that
Seahogs jersey to the NASCAR club? snicker.

I think those better known folks in this group who took sides in the
contest pretty well prove my point.

bb

That's it.
 

bb wrote:
On Mon, 06 Feb 2006 08:04:20 -0500, thunder
wrote:

Small market teams are bad for leagues.

Disregarding the game, I was curious. I don't think Seattle qualifies as
a "small market" anymore. In metro-area population, it ranks 13
nationally.


I don't care enough to verify my opinion with facts, but I think the
difference is in small market and small market for the NFL. I'd think
as far as NLF paraphernalia goes, Steelers crap outsells Seahawks crap
10 to 1. The average Neanderthal, Joe Six-pack sports fan relates
much more to a gritty, dirty play team like the Steelers. What self
respecting redneck would support a bunch of sweater wearing, latté
sipping, book reading, free thinkers like them Seattle folks, whoever
their namby pamby team is. Hey Bubba, you really gonna wear that
Seahogs jersey to the NASCAR club? snicker.

I think those better known folks in this group who took sides in the
contest pretty well prove my point.

bb

The Super Bowl has to sustain football fever for about 6 months until
the preseason games get underway.

Suppose you were writing the script for the event. You have two
choices:

1) One of the richest billionaires in the world accepts the Vince
Lombardi trophy on behalf of a city that 90% of the folks in the US
have never visited and many may only be half certain where it is
located. The physical location of the nearest competing team is about
700 miles away in the SF Bay area and there is no pro football at all
in three surrounding states and the adjoining Canadian province. There
are no blood feud rivalries with any teams that might get some help
selling out their stadiums when Seattle comes to town (You may as well
just send the trophy up on the Space Shuttle and bring it back in a
year for all the strategic good it would do the NFL.)

2) A little old guy whose family has owned the Steelers since the
invention of the pig, let alone the practice of making footballs from
pigskin, accepts the trophy and in the twilight years of his service to
the sport lays claim to being only the third team to win five Super
Bowl championships. Nobody likes billionaires, everybody likes a little
ol' grandpa figure.
Pittsburgh is within a few hours drive of any number of other football
cities, and while Seattle has so many civic assets and advantages that
an NFL team is just frosting on the cake, what the heck would you do in
Pittsburgh on a winter Sunday except root for the local football team?

A Steeler's win made much better television.

After watching the refs subtract a touchdown from Seattle and add one
for the Steelers yesterday, (and would have declared a phony "fumble"
if Holmgren didn't demand a relook at compelling video evidence to the
contrary) it occured to me why so many guys in the WWF are used up
players from the NFL.

The Steelers definitely won- but next year, I do think it would be
helpful if the referees were prohibited from betting on the game. :-)

That's it.
 

Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sun, 5 Feb 2006 20:06:22 -0800, jps wrote:


In article ,
says...

On Sun, 5 Feb 2006 20:55:28 -0500, " JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT
comREMOVETHIS wrote:


SeaHawks scored. 14-10. 21 minutes left to go. It is far from being
over.

It was over from the very first yellow flag. Stealer, indeed.

Sad to see refs changing games in professional sports. It's a sign of
the times.

Just another example of those with control going to extraordinary
measures to make certain their interests are protected.

Small market teams are bad for leagues. The refs are part of the league
and I'm sure, at the very least implicitly, they firmly understand what
outcome serves them best.


take it like a man - loser. :)


Thank God the NFL declared it wouldn't expand to Canada.
http://www.herald.ns.ca/Sports/482107.html

That's it.
 

wrote:
snip..
The physical location of the nearest competing team is about
700 miles away in the SF Bay area and there is no pro football at all
in three surrounding states and the adjoining Canadian province.
snip


** I'm not a fan of pro football...but fans of the BC Lions may argue
with your above statement.
http://www.bclions.com/ **

Pittsburgh is within a few hours drive of any number of other football
cities, and while Seattle has so many civic assets and advantages that
an NFL team is just frosting on the cake, what the heck would you do in
Pittsburgh on a winter Sunday except root for the local football team?
snip...

** This time of year, Pittsburgh fans should be more interested in
hockey and the new whiz kid from my hometown.
Football in February isn't natural... http://www.pittsburghpenguins.com/

That's it.
 

Chuck! I think you are on to something. There must have been a conspiracy.
The Seattle Seabirds must have gone to the mat to help the Steelers win. I
wonder how much the payoff was.
Jim
wrote in message
oups.com...

bb wrote:
On Mon, 06 Feb 2006 08:04:20 -0500, thunder
wrote:

Small market teams are bad for leagues.

Disregarding the game, I was curious. I don't think Seattle qualifies as
a "small market" anymore. In metro-area population, it ranks 13
nationally.


I don't care enough to verify my opinion with facts, but I think the
difference is in small market and small market for the NFL. I'd think
as far as NLF paraphernalia goes, Steelers crap outsells Seahawks crap
10 to 1. The average Neanderthal, Joe Six-pack sports fan relates
much more to a gritty, dirty play team like the Steelers. What self
respecting redneck would support a bunch of sweater wearing, latté
sipping, book reading, free thinkers like them Seattle folks, whoever
their namby pamby team is. Hey Bubba, you really gonna wear that
Seahogs jersey to the NASCAR club? snicker.

I think those better known folks in this group who took sides in the
contest pretty well prove my point.

bb

The Super Bowl has to sustain football fever for about 6 months until
the preseason games get underway.

Suppose you were writing the script for the event. You have two
choices:

1) One of the richest billionaires in the world accepts the Vince
Lombardi trophy on behalf of a city that 90% of the folks in the US
have never visited and many may only be half certain where it is
located. The physical location of the nearest competing team is about
700 miles away in the SF Bay area and there is no pro football at all
in three surrounding states and the adjoining Canadian province. There
are no blood feud rivalries with any teams that might get some help
selling out their stadiums when Seattle comes to town (You may as well
just send the trophy up on the Space Shuttle and bring it back in a
year for all the strategic good it would do the NFL.)

2) A little old guy whose family has owned the Steelers since the
invention of the pig, let alone the practice of making footballs from
pigskin, accepts the trophy and in the twilight years of his service to
the sport lays claim to being only the third team to win five Super
Bowl championships. Nobody likes billionaires, everybody likes a little
ol' grandpa figure.
Pittsburgh is within a few hours drive of any number of other football
cities, and while Seattle has so many civic assets and advantages that
an NFL team is just frosting on the cake, what the heck would you do in
Pittsburgh on a winter Sunday except root for the local football team?

A Steeler's win made much better television.

After watching the refs subtract a touchdown from Seattle and add one
for the Steelers yesterday, (and would have declared a phony "fumble"
if Holmgren didn't demand a relook at compelling video evidence to the
contrary) it occured to me why so many guys in the WWF are used up
players from the NFL.

The Steelers definitely won- but next year, I do think it would be
helpful if the referees were prohibited from betting on the game. :-)

That's it.
 

thunder wrote:
On Sun, 05 Feb 2006 20:06:22 -0800, jps wrote:


Small market teams are bad for leagues.

Disregarding the game, I was curious. I don't think Seattle qualifies as
a "small market" anymore. In metro-area population, it ranks 13
nationally.

http://www.demographia.com/db-usmet2000.htm

As a city, 23.

http://www.demographia.com/db-uscity98.htm


Large and small market is defined not only by the population, but also
by the distance (physical and cultural) from NYC. Did you know that
Caracas, Venezuela and New York City are geographically closer than are
Seattle and NYC? (By a couple of hundred miles, IIRC).

That's it.
 

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 5 Feb 2006 19:10:21 -0800, jps wrote:

In article ,
says...
On Sun, 5 Feb 2006 20:32:53 -0500, "RCE" wrote:


Congrats, Tom.

it ain't over until its over.

although the good father had a couple of choice words on the
telephone.

hell have to see his confessor tomorrow. :)

and hes gonna owe me dinner. :)

Refs and the league got the outcome they wanted. Two insane calls to
take touchdowns away from Seattle.

The first in the end zone was a ticky tacky call, after the defensive
man had committed interference that wasn't called. The second play for
the reception on the 1 yard line by Jeremy Stevens called back on a
hold, for which there was no evidence on the replay.

I won't even dispute the called touchdown for the Steelers 'cause it
looked like the ball could have crossed the plane before quarterback was
tackled. The ref who made the call first indicated the ball was down
short and then changed his mind. Pretty dicey.

Tainted win for Steelers. Seattle gets purposely shafted by the refs.
Evidently there's just not enough money in a Seattle win.

come on - take it like a man you loser. :)

Wattayouexpect. Northwet pansy.

That's it.
 

Don White wrote:
wrote:
snip..
The physical location of the nearest competing team is about
700 miles away in the SF Bay area and there is no pro football at all
in three surrounding states and the adjoining Canadian province.
snip


** I'm not a fan of pro football...but fans of the BC Lions may argue
with your above statement.
http://www.bclions.com/ **

Interesting web site. Just took a look, and it appears that several of
the players are not certain whether they will "turn out" for hockey or
football next year.

Like a lot of sports, (including minor league baseball), the games at
the lower levels are often more enjoyable than the "big league"
productions and fewer of the players need a wheelbarrow to haul around
either their egos or their rolls of cash. I'm sure the Lions games are
very enertaining. I guess I should have said "NFL" football, rather
than "pro" football.

That's it.
 

JIMinFL wrote:
Chuck! I think you are on to something. There must have been a conspiracy.
The Seattle Seabirds must have gone to the mat to help the Steelers win. I
wonder how much the payoff was.


This morning's press is not kind to the referees, and certainly not
just from Seattle.

Michael Wilbon, Washington Post, wrote:

Ben Roethlisberger's third-down dive into the end zone simply was not a
touchdown. Because less than two minutes remained, the call was
reviewed in the booth. And everybody in the stadium plus everybody at
home culd see, clear and conclusively, that Big Ben didn't get the ball
across the goal line. It wasn't a touchdown, plain and simple. Yet the
call stood and the Steelers had a touchdown.

Another penalty, assessed to the Seahawks early in the fourth quarter,
which negated a gain to the 1, also never happened. A penalty against
Hasselbeck for blocking below the waist when, in fact, he was trying to
tackly the interceptor, was also erroneous. It would be irresponsible
to say the officials were intentionally cheating Seattle, but the bad
calls killed the Seahawks.

**

Jason Whitlock, Kansas City Star, wrote:

The inevitable finally happened. A group of middle-aged executives
trying to keep pace with a group of highly trained 20-something
athletes destroyed America's sports holiday.

Pittsburgh's one-for-the-thumb Super Bowl will be remembered as the
game when physically overmateched referees and heads-buried NFL
executives flipped non-Steelers fans an XL middle finger.

**

Down your way, Mike Bianchi of the Orlando Sentinel wrote:

Any other conclusion and it would have been like "It's a Wonderful
Life" ending with Beorge Bailey actually jumping off the bridge and
drowning.

We wanted the Pittsburgh Steelers holding up that trophy. We needed the
Pittsburgh Steelers holding up that trophy.

If the Seattle Seahawks had won, it would have been the stuff of dull
documentaries. The Steelers winning was the stuff of fantastic
fairytales.

**

And then finally from Bob Simisk at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (who
naturally needs to be pretty careful with his choice of words):

This one wasn't the splendid domination the Steelers had shown in three
previous playoff games. This one, truth be known, was a bit
ugly.......By winning in such a fashion, the Steelers proved just how
good they are. It's takes a special team to win when it doesn't have
its "A" game.

***


Bob Simisk may be on to something. When the Steelers brought their "B"
game and a crew of less than objective referees, it was more than
Seattle could overcome with a "B" game of its own. Had Seattle played
up to its recent standards, even the lousy calls would not have
prevented the Seahawks from rolling over the "B" game of the Steelers.

That's it.
 

On Mon, 06 Feb 2006 16:55:38 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:


On Mon, 06 Feb 2006 14:05:54 GMT, bb wrote:

I think those better known folks in this group who took sides in the
contest pretty well prove my point.

excuse me?

Nice fit on that shoe, fella.

bb

That's it.
 

That's it.
 

Reggie Smithers wrote:
Chuck,
I agree that the Seahawks were robbed, I don't agree that their was a
conspiracy.


Conspiracy would be an overstatement.

The Seahawks had a good chance to win this thing, because Pittsburgh
was so lame.
Did the Steelers get more than one or two first downs in the entire
first half?

If Seattle had palyed up to its potential, it could have prevailed
against the team the Steelers put on the field yesterday, obviously
biased referees or not. Seattle did not.

If both teams had brought their best stuff (and neither did), it would
have been interesting to see whether the Seahawks could beat a team
with a few extra men on the field. :-)

That's it.
 

wrote in message
oups.com...

Reggie Smithers wrote:
Chuck,
I agree that the Seahawks were robbed, I don't agree that their was a
conspiracy.


Conspiracy would be an overstatement.

The Seahawks had a good chance to win this thing, because Pittsburgh
was so lame.
Did the Steelers get more than one or two first downs in the entire
first half?

If Seattle had palyed up to its potential, it could have prevailed
against the team the Steelers put on the field yesterday, obviously
biased referees or not. Seattle did not.

If both teams had brought their best stuff (and neither did), it would
have been interesting to see whether the Seahawks could beat a team
with a few extra men on the field. :-)

What the hell was with the Seahawks game management in the last two minutes
of each half? They looked utterly confused

That's it.
 

P. Fritz wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
Reggie Smithers wrote:
Chuck,
I agree that the Seahawks were robbed, I don't agree that their was a
conspiracy.

Conspiracy would be an overstatement.

The Seahawks had a good chance to win this thing, because Pittsburgh
was so lame.
Did the Steelers get more than one or two first downs in the entire
first half?

If Seattle had palyed up to its potential, it could have prevailed
against the team the Steelers put on the field yesterday, obviously
biased referees or not. Seattle did not.

If both teams had brought their best stuff (and neither did), it would
have been interesting to see whether the Seahawks could beat a team
with a few extra men on the field. :-)

What the hell was with the Seahawks game management in the last two minutes
of each half? They looked utterly confused




That might have been the most f/u 2 min drill I have ever seen.

--
Reggie
************************************************** *************
That's my story and I am sticking to it.

************************************************** *************

That's it.
 

Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
On Mon, 06 Feb 2006 16:00:35 GMT, Don White
wrote:


Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:

On Sun, 5 Feb 2006 20:06:22 -0800, jps wrote:



In article ,
says...


On Sun, 5 Feb 2006 20:55:28 -0500, " JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT
comREMOVETHIS wrote:



SeaHawks scored. 14-10. 21 minutes left to go. It is far from being
over.

It was over from the very first yellow flag. Stealer, indeed.

Sad to see refs changing games in professional sports. It's a sign of
the times.

Just another example of those with control going to extraordinary
measures to make certain their interests are protected.

Small market teams are bad for leagues. The refs are part of the league
and I'm sure, at the very least implicitly, they firmly understand what
outcome serves them best.


take it like a man - loser. :)


Thank God the NFL declared it wouldn't expand to Canada.
http://www.herald.ns.ca/Sports/482107.html


why would they want to? dont you guys play football with hockey
pucks?

Hah! It's a well known fact that our 'balls' are bigger than yours!
http://www.cfl.ca/

That's it.
 

On Mon, 06 Feb 2006 16:55:38 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:


On Mon, 06 Feb 2006 14:05:54 GMT, bb wrote:

I think those better known folks in this group who took sides in the
contest pretty well prove my point.

excuse me?

That was interesting. Hope you find out what he was talking about!
--
'Til next time,

John H

******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

That's it.
 

Don White wrote:
Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
On Mon, 06 Feb 2006 16:00:35 GMT, Don White
wrote:


Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:

On Sun, 5 Feb 2006 20:06:22 -0800, jps wrote:



In article ,
says...


On Sun, 5 Feb 2006 20:55:28 -0500, " JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT
comREMOVETHIS wrote:



SeaHawks scored. 14-10. 21 minutes left to go. It is far from
being over.

It was over from the very first yellow flag. Stealer, indeed.

Sad to see refs changing games in professional sports. It's a sign
of the times.
Just another example of those with control going to extraordinary
measures to make certain their interests are protected.

Small market teams are bad for leagues. The refs are part of the
league and I'm sure, at the very least implicitly, they firmly
understand what outcome serves them best.


take it like a man - loser. :)


Thank God the NFL declared it wouldn't expand to Canada.
http://www.herald.ns.ca/Sports/482107.html


why would they want to? dont you guys play football with hockey
pucks?

Hah! It's a well known fact that our 'balls' are bigger than yours!
http://www.cfl.ca/
Don,
Have you been measuring their balls?

--
Reggie
************************************************** *************
That's my story and I am sticking to it.

************************************************** *************

That's it.
 

In article . net,
says...

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 5 Feb 2006 19:10:21 -0800, jps wrote:

In article ,
says...
On Sun, 5 Feb 2006 20:32:53 -0500, "RCE" wrote:


Congrats, Tom.

it ain't over until its over.

although the good father had a couple of choice words on the
telephone.

hell have to see his confessor tomorrow. :)

and hes gonna owe me dinner. :)

Refs and the league got the outcome they wanted. Two insane calls to
take touchdowns away from Seattle.

The first in the end zone was a ticky tacky call, after the defensive
man had committed interference that wasn't called. The second play for
the reception on the 1 yard line by Jeremy Stevens called back on a
hold, for which there was no evidence on the replay.

I won't even dispute the called touchdown for the Steelers 'cause it
looked like the ball could have crossed the plane before quarterback was
tackled. The ref who made the call first indicated the ball was down
short and then changed his mind. Pretty dicey.

Tainted win for Steelers. Seattle gets purposely shafted by the refs.
Evidently there's just not enough money in a Seattle win.

come on - take it like a man you loser. :)

Wattayouexpect. Northwet pansy.

**** you, Bill.

Read the truth, if you can handle it:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs05/columns/story?
columnist=smith_michael&id=2320683

That's it.
 

On Mon, 06 Feb 2006 09:54:06 -0800, chuckgould.chuck wrote:


Michael Wilbon, Washington Post, wrote:

Ben Roethlisberger's third-down dive into the end zone simply was not a
touchdown. Because less than two minutes remained, the call was reviewed
in the booth. And everybody in the stadium plus everybody at home culd
see, clear and conclusively, that Big Ben didn't get the ball across the
goal line. It wasn't a touchdown, plain and simple. Yet the call stood and
the Steelers had a touchdown.

Uh, someone should tell this guy, it isn't getting "the ball across the
goal line". It's breaking "the plane" of the goal line. The difference
is close to two feet (the width of the painted line, plus the length of
the ball). FWIW, it looked like a touchdown to me.

That's it.
 

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 06 Feb 2006 09:54:06 -0800, chuckgould.chuck wrote:


Michael Wilbon, Washington Post, wrote:

Ben Roethlisberger's third-down dive into the end zone simply was not a
touchdown. Because less than two minutes remained, the call was reviewed
in the booth. And everybody in the stadium plus everybody at home culd
see, clear and conclusively, that Big Ben didn't get the ball across the
goal line. It wasn't a touchdown, plain and simple. Yet the call stood
and
the Steelers had a touchdown.

Uh, someone should tell this guy, it isn't getting "the ball across the
goal line". It's breaking "the plane" of the goal line. The difference
is close to two feet (the width of the painted line, plus the length of
the ball). FWIW, it looked like a touchdown to me.

Seeing that you focused on this one play, I guess you think all the other
lousy officiating was OK?

Let me guess...........you are a Steelers part time fan (whenever they make
it to the Superbowl, and when not you jump on the bandwagon of whatever team
won).........right? ;-)

I could really care less who won and I did see plenty of bad officiating,
mainly hurting the SeaHawks.

Pittsburgh did not play anywhere close to championship caliber. I don't
think even a true Steelers fan could be proud of that win.

That's it.
 

In article ,
says...
On Mon, 6 Feb 2006 13:56:07 -0800, jps wrote:

In article . net,
says...

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 5 Feb 2006 19:10:21 -0800, jps wrote:

In article ,
says...
On Sun, 5 Feb 2006 20:32:53 -0500, "RCE" wrote:


Congrats, Tom.

it ain't over until its over.

although the good father had a couple of choice words on the
telephone.

hell have to see his confessor tomorrow. :)

and hes gonna owe me dinner. :)

Refs and the league got the outcome they wanted. Two insane calls to
take touchdowns away from Seattle.

The first in the end zone was a ticky tacky call, after the defensive
man had committed interference that wasn't called. The second play for
the reception on the 1 yard line by Jeremy Stevens called back on a
hold, for which there was no evidence on the replay.

I won't even dispute the called touchdown for the Steelers 'cause it
looked like the ball could have crossed the plane before quarterback was
tackled. The ref who made the call first indicated the ball was down
short and then changed his mind. Pretty dicey.

Tainted win for Steelers. Seattle gets purposely shafted by the refs.
Evidently there's just not enough money in a Seattle win.

come on - take it like a man you loser. :)

Wattayouexpect. Northwet pansy.

**** you, Bill.

Read the truth, if you can handle it:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs05/columns/story?
columnist=smith_michael&id=2320683

and here is the truth - right from micheal "word" smith - read it and
weep you loser.

boo f'in hoo...

------------------------------------
Seattle had its share of goats: in particular, tight end Jerramy
Stevens, who dropped four balls, and kicker Josh Brown, who missed two
field-goal attempts. Almost to a man, the Seahawks pointed the blame
finger at themselves for converting only one of three red zone
attempts (when they had been the best in the league in that area,
scoring a touchdown on 71.7 percent of their trips inside the 20-yard
line); for allowing Ben Roethlisberger to improvise and complete a
37-yard pass to game MVP Hines Ward to the 1; for giving up a 75-yard
touchdown run to Willie Parker; and for getting beaten by a trick play
on Antwaan Randle El's pass to fellow receiver Ward for a touchdown, a
first in Super Bowl history. If you read between the lines, though,
they pretty much spelled out in bold letters that they had plenty of
help in handing Pittsburgh its fifth Lombardi Trophy.
------------------------------------

loser. :)

Pfffffttttt. **** you too, weenner.

Why don't you quote the whole article? I don't disagree with anything
Michael Smith said. The Seahawks clearly didn't play well enough to
overcome both Pittsburgh and the refs. Stevens and Josh Brown both had
off days. Bad choice of day to be off.

That said, no ref in a professional sport should change the outcome of a
game. As you have said yourself, the refs sucked in a big way and, as
you may have noticed, they happened to suck 7:3 against Seattle,
including two touchdowns and a difference of 11 points.

Go plant some ****in' crops for the foodbank in all that rich goddam CT
soil and stop bothering those of us who want to wallow.

jps

That's it.
 

On Mon, 06 Feb 2006 18:21:07 -0500, JimH wrote:


Seeing that you focused on this one play, I guess you think all the other
lousy officiating was OK?

I didn't watch the whole game. So, I couldn't comment on anything in the
second half.

Let me guess...........you are a Steelers part time fan (whenever they
make it to the Superbowl, and when not you jump on the bandwagon of
whatever team won).........right? ;-)

Actually, no, Jim, the teams I root for were a long, long, time gone.

That's it.
 

" JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT comREMOVETHIS wrote in message
...

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 06 Feb 2006 09:54:06 -0800, chuckgould.chuck wrote:


Michael Wilbon, Washington Post, wrote:

Ben Roethlisberger's third-down dive into the end zone simply was not
a
touchdown. Because less than two minutes remained, the call was
reviewed
in the booth. And everybody in the stadium plus everybody at home culd
see, clear and conclusively, that Big Ben didn't get the ball across
the
goal line. It wasn't a touchdown, plain and simple. Yet the call stood
and
the Steelers had a touchdown.

Uh, someone should tell this guy, it isn't getting "the ball across the
goal line". It's breaking "the plane" of the goal line. The
difference
is close to two feet (the width of the painted line, plus the length of
the ball). FWIW, it looked like a touchdown to me.

Seeing that you focused on this one play, I guess you think all the
other
lousy officiating was OK?

Let me guess...........you are a Steelers part time fan (whenever they
make
it to the Superbowl, and when not you jump on the bandwagon of whatever
team
won).........right? ;-)

I could really care less who won and I did see plenty of bad
officiating,
mainly hurting the SeaHawks.

Pittsburgh did not play anywhere close to championship caliber. I
don't
think even a true Steelers fan could be proud of that win.


I think it was a touchdown, the ball clearly crossed the plane. But I
don't think the pass interference call should have been made, nor the
"illegal block"......I still wonder how one make an illegal block when they
are on defense and trying to make a tackle. Didn't see the hold, but that
doesn't mean it didn't happen. I still am in amazement about the Seahawks
two minute drills.

That's it.
 

wrote in message
oups.com...

Reggie Smithers wrote:
Chuck,
I agree that the Seahawks were robbed, I don't agree that their was a
conspiracy.


Conspiracy would be an overstatement.

The Seahawks had a good chance to win this thing, because Pittsburgh
was so lame.
Did the Steelers get more than one or two first downs in the entire
first half?

If Seattle had palyed up to its potential, it could have prevailed
against the team the Steelers put on the field yesterday, obviously
biased referees or not. Seattle did not.

If both teams had brought their best stuff (and neither did), it would
have been interesting to see whether the Seahawks could beat a team
with a few extra men on the field. :-)


If the receiver could have caught the balls right to him, they may have
scored more.

That's it.
 

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 6 Feb 2006 13:56:07 -0800, jps wrote:

In article . net,
says...

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 5 Feb 2006 19:10:21 -0800, jps wrote:

In article ,
says...
On Sun, 5 Feb 2006 20:32:53 -0500, "RCE" wrote:


Congrats, Tom.

it ain't over until its over.

although the good father had a couple of choice words on the
telephone.

hell have to see his confessor tomorrow. :)

and hes gonna owe me dinner. :)

Refs and the league got the outcome they wanted. Two insane calls to
take touchdowns away from Seattle.

The first in the end zone was a ticky tacky call, after the defensive
man had committed interference that wasn't called. The second play
for
the reception on the 1 yard line by Jeremy Stevens called back on a
hold, for which there was no evidence on the replay.

I won't even dispute the called touchdown for the Steelers 'cause it
looked like the ball could have crossed the plane before quarterback
was
tackled. The ref who made the call first indicated the ball was down
short and then changed his mind. Pretty dicey.

Tainted win for Steelers. Seattle gets purposely shafted by the refs.
Evidently there's just not enough money in a Seattle win.

come on - take it like a man you loser. :)

Wattayouexpect. Northwet pansy.

**** you, Bill.

Read the truth, if you can handle it:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs05/columns/story?
columnist=smith_michael&id=2320683

and here is the truth - right from micheal "word" smith - read it and
weep you loser.

boo f'in hoo...

------------------------------------
Seattle had its share of goats: in particular, tight end Jerramy
Stevens, who dropped four balls, and kicker Josh Brown, who missed two
field-goal attempts. Almost to a man, the Seahawks pointed the blame
finger at themselves for converting only one of three red zone
attempts (when they had been the best in the league in that area,
scoring a touchdown on 71.7 percent of their trips inside the 20-yard
line); for allowing Ben Roethlisberger to improvise and complete a
37-yard pass to game MVP Hines Ward to the 1; for giving up a 75-yard
touchdown run to Willie Parker; and for getting beaten by a trick play
on Antwaan Randle El's pass to fellow receiver Ward for a touchdown, a
first in Super Bowl history. If you read between the lines, though,
they pretty much spelled out in bold letters that they had plenty of
help in handing Pittsburgh its fifth Lombardi Trophy.
------------------------------------

loser. :)

What he said.

That's it.
 

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 6 Feb 2006 22:21:44 -0500, "P. Fritz"
wrote:


" JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT comREMOVETHIS wrote in message
...

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 06 Feb 2006 09:54:06 -0800, chuckgould.chuck wrote:


Michael Wilbon, Washington Post, wrote:

Ben Roethlisberger's third-down dive into the end zone simply was
not
a
touchdown. Because less than two minutes remained, the call was
reviewed
in the booth. And everybody in the stadium plus everybody at home
culd
see, clear and conclusively, that Big Ben didn't get the ball across
the
goal line. It wasn't a touchdown, plain and simple. Yet the call
stood
and
the Steelers had a touchdown.

Uh, someone should tell this guy, it isn't getting "the ball across
the
goal line". It's breaking "the plane" of the goal line. The
difference
is close to two feet (the width of the painted line, plus the length
of
the ball). FWIW, it looked like a touchdown to me.

Seeing that you focused on this one play, I guess you think all the
other
lousy officiating was OK?

Let me guess...........you are a Steelers part time fan (whenever they
make
it to the Superbowl, and when not you jump on the bandwagon of
whatever
team
won).........right? ;-)

I could really care less who won and I did see plenty of bad
officiating,
mainly hurting the SeaHawks.

Pittsburgh did not play anywhere close to championship caliber. I
don't
think even a true Steelers fan could be proud of that win.


I think it was a touchdown, the ball clearly crossed the plane. But I
don't think the pass interference call should have been made, nor the
"illegal block"......I still wonder how one make an illegal block when
they
are on defense and trying to make a tackle. Didn't see the hold, but that
doesn't mean it didn't happen. I still am in amazement about the
Seahawks
two minute drills.

just to add fuel to the fire, Rothlesberger admitted that he didnt
make it over the goal line. :)

If he indeed said that he is really an ahole.

That's it.
 

On Tue, 7 Feb 2006 07:42:40 -0500, " JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT
comREMOVETHIS wrote:


just to add fuel to the fire, Rothlesberger admitted that he didnt
make it over the goal line. :)

If he indeed said that he is really an ahole.

More than likely, just a lame attempt at a troll. Nothing anywhere
else about it.

bb

That's it.
 

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 07 Feb 2006 13:03:50 GMT, bb wrote:

On Tue, 7 Feb 2006 07:42:40 -0500, " JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT
comREMOVETHIS wrote:


just to add fuel to the fire, Rothlesberger admitted that he didnt
make it over the goal line. :)

If he indeed said that he is really an ahole.

More than likely, just a lame attempt at a troll. Nothing anywhere
else about it.

try letterman - its been on the radio and espn all morning.

and troll this dumbass...


Got a link?

That's it.
 

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 6 Feb 2006 22:21:44 -0500, "P. Fritz"
wrote:


" JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT comREMOVETHIS wrote in message
...

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 06 Feb 2006 09:54:06 -0800, chuckgould.chuck wrote:


Michael Wilbon, Washington Post, wrote:

Ben Roethlisberger's third-down dive into the end zone simply was
not
a
touchdown. Because less than two minutes remained, the call was
reviewed
in the booth. And everybody in the stadium plus everybody at home
culd
see, clear and conclusively, that Big Ben didn't get the ball across
the
goal line. It wasn't a touchdown, plain and simple. Yet the call
stood
and
the Steelers had a touchdown.

Uh, someone should tell this guy, it isn't getting "the ball across
the
goal line". It's breaking "the plane" of the goal line. The
difference
is close to two feet (the width of the painted line, plus the length
of
the ball). FWIW, it looked like a touchdown to me.

Seeing that you focused on this one play, I guess you think all the
other
lousy officiating was OK?

Let me guess...........you are a Steelers part time fan (whenever they
make
it to the Superbowl, and when not you jump on the bandwagon of
whatever
team
won).........right? ;-)

I could really care less who won and I did see plenty of bad
officiating,
mainly hurting the SeaHawks.

Pittsburgh did not play anywhere close to championship caliber. I
don't
think even a true Steelers fan could be proud of that win.


I think it was a touchdown, the ball clearly crossed the plane. But I
don't think the pass interference call should have been made, nor the
"illegal block"......I still wonder how one make an illegal block when
they
are on defense and trying to make a tackle. Didn't see the hold, but that
doesn't mean it didn't happen. I still am in amazement about the
Seahawks
two minute drills.

just to add fuel to the fire, Rothlesberger admitted that he didnt
make it over the goal line. :)

That is just cruel :-)

That's it.
 

On Tue, 7 Feb 2006 08:17:14 -0500, " JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT
comREMOVETHIS wrote:


try letterman - its been on the radio and espn all morning.

and troll this dumbass...


Got a link?

No, but he will call you a dumbass............

bb

That's it.
 

On Tue, 07 Feb 2006 13:12:57 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

try letterman - its been on the radio and espn all morning.

Just did a search on espn.com, nothing, hmmmm.

and troll this dumbass...

troll that? hehh, better sprinkle a little grow powder on that thing.

bb

That's it.
 

he didn't say he didn't get in your moron. Just after the play, he
told cowher he didn't "think" he got in. Everyone sitting at home
watching on TV had 100x the view that Roethlisberger did. Trolling
morons. Stop trying to blame everyone else for Seattle's ineptitude.

That's it.
 

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 7 Feb 2006 08:17:14 -0500, " JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT
comREMOVETHIS wrote:


"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
. ..
On Tue, 07 Feb 2006 13:03:50 GMT, bb wrote:

On Tue, 7 Feb 2006 07:42:40 -0500, " JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT
comREMOVETHIS wrote:


just to add fuel to the fire, Rothlesberger admitted that he didnt
make it over the goal line. :)

If he indeed said that he is really an ahole.

More than likely, just a lame attempt at a troll. Nothing anywhere
else about it.

try letterman - its been on the radio and espn all morning.

and troll this dumbass...


Got a link?

http://www.cbs.com/latenight/lateshow/exclusives/wahoo/

And what about that touchdown which Ben ran for? Was it really a
touchdown? Ben says he didn't think he got in but wasn't going to
argue with the referee when he called it a touchdown. Ben says the
Steelers were ready to go for the TD on 4th down if they had to, with
Ben suggesting he was to run it again.

Thanks.

That's it.
 

Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
On Tue, 7 Feb 2006 08:17:14 -0500, " JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT
comREMOVETHIS wrote:


"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
. ..

On Tue, 07 Feb 2006 13:03:50 GMT, bb wrote:


On Tue, 7 Feb 2006 07:42:40 -0500, " JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT
comREMOVETHIS wrote:



just to add fuel to the fire, Rothlesberger admitted that he didnt
make it over the goal line. :)

If he indeed said that he is really an ahole.

More than likely, just a lame attempt at a troll. Nothing anywhere
else about it.

try letterman - its been on the radio and espn all morning.

and troll this dumbass...


Got a link?


http://www.cbs.com/latenight/lateshow/exclusives/wahoo/

And what about that touchdown which Ben ran for? Was it really a
touchdown? Ben says he didn't think he got in but wasn't going to
argue with the referee when he called it a touchdown. Ben says the
Steelers were ready to go for the TD on 4th down if they had to, with
Ben suggesting he was to run it again.


From a foot out?
Isn't that where they use the 'quarterback sneak'?