Friday, February 10, 2006

Now I'm Angry

Not at the officials, that ended as soon as I went to bad following Super Bowl XL, as in, Extra Large Fix. Not at the players, that ended the next day, as I began mentally preparing for the off-season, also known as, "What are the Angels up to?"

I am angry with the sportswriters. The "Stop the Whining" authors. The, "No one will remember in 4 years who lost this Super Bowl" crowd. I am angry with Gene Wojciechowski of ESPN. Ask anyone from Buffalo who lost the Super Bowl in 1991-1994. I am sure they know.

How can you be so AMAZINGLY shortsighted? " The Seahawks had their chances... to overcome the Steelers and, if they insist, the refs, too." Oh really Gene (Wojciechowski of ESPN)? The same Seahawks that were four point dogs to the POWERFUL Steelers defense? The same Seahawks that had only gotten to the Super Bowl through a 'cake' schedule of the NFC Worst? Those Seahawks are now capable of beating not just the Steelers and a hostile crowd, but the Officials of the game too? Wow, how quickly a bottle of Jack Daniels and some Rose colored (courtesy NFL) glasses can change your perspective!
(please don't sue the poor)

I wonder at what point of the game were the Seahawks to suddenly overcome the mistakes? After throwing a TD pass to Darrell Jackson, the Steelers’s defense shifting their coverage, and the Seahawks now in a 1st and 25, all they have to do is throw another pass in the end zone? Is that all you have to do? I guess that is why you write about football, because you clearly know nothing about the game. Going from a 1st and 10 resulting in a touchdown and now having to go 25 yards for a first down as well as having a now MORE aggressive defense that just got rewarded for bumping a receiver in the end zone; doesn't normally result in a TD.

"The striped shirts didn't cause the Seahawks defense to give up a Steelers first down on a third-and-28 situation (which later led to the Roethlisberger disputed TD)." Sure they did, by not calling a hold on any of the Steelers’s lineman on that play. You watch that play again and tell me there are no holds, as defined by the ref's themselves when they called Sean Locklear for it twice. Sorry Gene, but wrong again.

"The striped shirts didn't cause the Seahawks defense to give up the longest touchdown run in Super Bowl history." The fact the Steelers’s by the second half realized there would be no penalties against them helped them push the envelope on 'blocking' on this play. To say the ref's had no influence on a run of 75 yards against a defense that had held the Steelers to virtually 0 yards in the first half is ridiculous. Yeah Gene, wrong again.

"Or cause Seahawks quarterback Matt Hasselbeck to throw a killer interception with nearly 11 minutes left in the game and Seattle trailing by only four points." Actually they did, by calling the worst ever holding call in the history of the Super Bowl. And they even helped the reverse pass TD by calling a bogus penalty on Hasselbeck, the one where he low blocked someone he didn't touch, instant awesome field position. Wow Gene, suddenly your conversion rate in your article's "Red Zone" is worse than the Seahawk's.

Your 'lone Touchdown' Gene actually occurs earlier in the article. It is short and sweet and correct, "No one can deny there were questionable calls during the game." Why do you then defend the practice of making questionable calls? All the 'Latte Nation' wants is a little recognition that they deserved a better chance at a championship. Perhaps the reason for your defense of the officiating can be found in your earlier articles, like this one, "Bettis' homecoming should have happy ending"

Perhaps you should remind everyone that, "I found a seat on the Steelers bandwagon after the AFC wild-card victory at Cincinnati -- and I'm staying there." before you start instructing fans anywhere to stop whining about a game you clearly are biased about. Also, write an intelligent article for once and spare ESPN the embarassment of having your idiocy on its front page.