Official Super Bowl Thread?!

[GrnBay007]

Ugh! 7 months will we see football again. :(

[red]

Ugh! 7 months will we see football again. :(

after this season i think we could all use a nice vacation from the sport

and the longer we have to wait, the more time the team has to fix the problems from this year

[Partial]

Anyone else think the SB loser is going to miss the playoffs yet again next year? Crazy how often that happens.

Nope. That team is playing pretty well right now.

Pats certainly played well enough despite losing the MVP to make the playoffs. Can't blame them for getting screwed by the system (not that I think there is a better solution than what they have).

[GrnBay007]

Oh well, got my son's baseball draft next weekend to look forward to.

[red]

LOL, now thats how you start off a show

[Partial]

See, that was just moronic. That's not funny. 30 Rock is funny. That's in-your-face-slapstick-not-sophisticated-humor.

[red]

See, that was just moronic. That's not funny. 30 Rock is funny. That's in-your-face-slapstick-not-sophisticated-humor.
you telling me you didn't laugh when michael was trying to break the window with a chair to escape, and kevin was trying to smash the glass on the vending machine?

they are both funny imo, 30 rock is a more sophisticated humor though

[Zool]

THE FIRE IS SHOOTING AT US!!!

If you didnt laugh at that line, you're specifically trying to make it not funny.

[Partial]

THE FIRE IS SHOOTING AT US!!!

If you didnt laugh at that line, you're specifically trying to make it not funny.

See, I don't find that funny, I find that really stupid. It's very SNL-Will Ferrell like. I'm over that.

[Zool]

THE FIRE IS SHOOTING AT US!!!

If you didnt laugh at that line, you're specifically trying to make it not funny.

See, I don't find that funny, I find that really stupid. It's very SNL-Will Ferrell like. I'm over that.

Wow, its gonna be a long 60 years P if you get your nose that high in the air.

[Partial]

THE FIRE IS SHOOTING AT US!!!

If you didnt laugh at that line, you're specifically trying to make it not funny.

See, I don't find that funny, I find that really stupid. It's very SNL-Will Ferrell like. I'm over that.

Wow, its gonna be a long 60 years P if you get your nose that high in the air.

Not with great shows like 30 Rock to keep me entertained. I love laughing, but that is not funny. If Jerry Seinfeld is a 10... Will Ferrell was like an 8 in his prime... and now like a 4... since he's been doing the same stupid predictable act for years.

The office is just like Will Ferrell. Started out very good, at about an 8, and is now about a 4.

[Guiness]

See, I gotta agree with Partial here.

I'm watching this, and going to bear it out. There have been a few snickers, but overall I think it's stupid. It's just making me cringe for the most part.

[packinpatland]

Let's just agree on one thing..............the half time was pretty good.

[GrnBay007]

Let's just agree on one thing..............the half time was pretty good.

I was happy with it.

[packinpatland]

I can sleep with that. :lol:

[MOBB DEEP]

praise God for the Rooney rule......

brothers gettn it done

NCAA should be ashamed of themselves and the good ol boy network in 2009

[Harlan Huckleby]

Let's just agree on one thing..............the half time was pretty good.


ya, it was a preview of Springsteen's Las Vegas act when he goes into semi-retirement. But that's OK, you have 16 minutes to make a splash, might as well bring-out Zigfried & Roy and the tigers.

Musically, I thought it was excellent, can't do much better for SB crowd.

[GrnBay007]

I think Nickelback orRascal Flats would do a good show.

I would like to see Nickelback.

[Kiwon]

Hated the penalities and missed calls but overall it was a very competitive and entertaining game.

I was pulling for the Cards but one has to give credit to the Steelers. They won the game when they had to.

The last two games were won are last minute scores. Time to revise the old addage, "Defense wins championships?"

[mission]

I think Nickelback orRascal Flats would do a good show.

I would like to see Nickelback.

Negative.

[Bretsky]

I missed Janet Jackson

[Bossman641]

I didn't read through the game thread, but is it safe to assume Partial placed the blame for this loss solely on the shoulders of Warner and the Cardinal offense? After all, if they had scored more than a measly 23 points, the defense never would have been in the precarious position of being expected to hold a lead with 2.5 minutes left.

[KYPack]

Holmes catch is being touted as "The Greatest in Super Bowl History".

David Tyree didn't have a long time in the sun with his grab last year. He didn't win the game, but that was a helluva grab he made, too.

I think the Giants win goes down as the greatest SB game, based on the big upset. Was this one the most exciting?, yeah maybe. Two great games, for sure.

Good performance from the 'ol Boss.

I thought the commercials were the only thing that was even mildly dissappointing.

I need a last second win for the Packers to top these two great games.

[mraynrand]

I didn't read through the game thread, but is it safe to assume Partial placed the blame for this loss solely on the shoulders of Warner and the Cardinal offense? After all, if they had scored more than a measly 23 points, the defense never would have been in the precarious position of being expected to hold a lead with 2.5 minutes left.

Why not? Warner threw an INT that was returned for a TD. That was a ten, possibly 14 point turn around. That they stayed in the game following that was remarkable. The number of teams that win following an INT returned for TD is somewhere around 10% or less, if I remember correctly. It was a devastating mistake.

[Zool]

I think Nickelback orRascal Flats would do a good show.

I would like to see Nickelback.

Negative.

Holy shit 1000 times no. Might as well put Buck Cherry.

[red]

yeah, thats a big NO to nickelback

they suck hard

[mission]

I loved the E-trade baby commercial... "Shankapotomous" lol

[red]

I loved the E-trade baby commercial... "Shankapotomous" lol

i thought the ads were overall very horrible this year. seems they were just trying way to hard

[Cheesehead Craig]

I thought Bruce was outstanding and was the best halftime show I can remember at the SB. Say what you want about his vocal stylings, but the man is a performer.

This sums up the halftime show the best. This is by Matthew J Darnell over at Yahoo!
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/blog/shutdown_corner/post/The-Super-Bowl-halftime-show-and-why-no-one-trul;_ylt=AvUNchN6ZqzJFrKp5cdScCs5nYcB?urn=nfl,137 928

There's not a single performer on the planet who would please everyone as the selection to provide the Super Bowl's halftime entertainment. Not one. There's not even a group of people that everyone would be happy with.

You could have Bruce Springsteen out there giving Aretha Franklin a piggyback ride as she held one of the Jonas brothers in her arms like a baby, while Toby Keith, the Plain White T's, Barbra Streisand, Andrea Bocelli, R. Kelly and Miley Cyrus (okay, maybe it's a bad idea to pair up those last two) did the hokey-pokey on the other side of the stage, all while the ghost of Tupac hovered over everyone ... and someone like my dad would still say, "I guess that was okay, but where was John Prine?"

Next year will be a country music themed one, IMO. It may very well be a couple of artists performing together. It's been a while since they've had a country star there.

[LL2]

I sure was hoping to see the Cardinals win this game, but they blew it. They had over 100 yards in penalties and most were stupid mistakes. That defense reminded me of last years Packers defense...couldn't contain when it needed to. That INT by Warner was very costly, but yet didn't necessarily cost them the game. Now we will have an offseason wondering if two old farts, Warner and Favre, will come back.

[Freak Out]

Hell of a game....some horrible penalties by the Cards for sure....and I'm not sure why they changed up the defense on that last drive...but that was one hell of a drive by Big Ben and company at the end. The throw and catch at the end was a thing of beauty.

[Zool]

Think of that TD at the end of the first half. If that goes the other way, the Cards are prolly champions of the NFL. How weird would that be? That would be like the Seahawks having won a Superbowl.

[mraynrand]

Now we will have an offseason wondering if two old farts, Warner and Favre, will come back.

I've decided not to wonder.

[mraynrand]

yeah, thats a big NO to nickelback

they suck hard

http://www.packerrats.com/ratchat/viewtopic.php?t=16600&start=0

[red]

Think of that TD at the end of the first half. If that goes the other way, the Cards are prolly champions of the NFL. How weird would that be? That would be like the Seahawks having won a Superbowl.

oh that was massive. you're looking at a minimum of a 10 point swing and maybe a 14 point swing just with that one play. plus arizona was going to get the ball right back at the start of the second half

it would have been a totally different game i think

[Partial]

I didn't read through the game thread, but is it safe to assume Partial placed the blame for this loss solely on the shoulders of Warner and the Cardinal offense? After all, if they had scored more than a measly 23 points, the defense never would have been in the precarious position of being expected to hold a lead with 2.5 minutes left.

See... this is where you come off as a jag..

Fact: The Texans were the 22nd ranked defense.
Fact: The Jaguars were the 17th ranked defense.
Fact: The Vikings were the 6th ranked defense.
Fact: The Titans were the 7th ranked defense.

In all of those games, are offensive performances were terrible.

Fact: Against Tennessee.. We scored one touchdown. The Cardinals scored 3 against a far superior defense.

Fact: Against Minnesota, we scored one offensive touchdown right away and couldn't get anything going for the rest of the game. We stayed in the game based on defensive touchdowns and special teams. The Cardinals scored 3 touchdowns against a far superior defense.

Fact: Against Houston, we put up 3 touchdowns. They are one of the very worst defenses in the league, and we were supposed to be one of the dominant offensively. To contrast, The Cardinals scored 3 against a far superior defense.

Fact: Against Jacksonville, we scored 1 touchdown. They are a below average defense. To contrast, The Cardinals scored 3 against a far superior defense.

I'm not seeing the correlation in your argument. I don't think we would have put up anywhere near the offensive performance that the Cards did against the Steelers. We would have been blown out.

I don't blame the offense for the Cardinals because they put up 23 points against the #1 defense in the league... Not the 22nd or 17th.. (where we scored less).

IMO, That is a pretty successful offensive day against the #1 ranked defense, where putting up 16 and 20 points against the 22nd and 17th ranked defenses is a poor offensive day. Can't really complain about the 23 points, and you certainly cannot compare the Packers struggling offensively against by in large average defenses to the Cardinals playing the far and away premiere defense of the NFL.

[SkinBasket]

blah blah blah blah blah

Boring.

[cpk1994]

blah blah blah blah blah

Boring.But yoiu have to give him credit for changing his arguement every time he gets owned and his stick-to-it-ness.

[Bossman641]

I'm just messing Partial. We've gone over this enough. You have your beliefs, I have mine. I didn't mean to rehash an argument, I just wanted to see if you still were willing to let defenses off the hook based on the offense's performance or if you expected the D to make a stop at the end of the game.

[Freak Out]

Did they review that fumble at the end of the game? I can't remember and it sure looked like he was throwing? It seems they made the decision pretty damn fast.

[Partial]

It was mentioned by the announcers they went under the hood, reviewed quick, and then came back.

It was a fumble in my opinion. Ball was out before the arm came forward.

[Bossman641]

Did they review that fumble at the end of the game? I can't remember and it sure looked like he was throwing? It seems they made the decision pretty damn fast.

No they didn't review it and I feel the same way. At the very least I thought they would have reviewed it. With Fitzgerald out there, who knows.

[Freak Out]

It was close....that's for sure....but I thought it odd that Pitt was on the field so fast and was able to get the ball snapped. Look at it and make sure....it's the damn SB.

But it wasn't the Packers so screw it. :lol:

[red]

they didn't review it, but the officials upstairs had plenty of time to take a look at it and decide whether they needed to take a closer look.

the officials upstairs were the ones to make the call, i guess they decided it wasn't close enough to take any make time

[Guiness]

I think it was the right decision not to review it.

It was up to the booth to decide if they wanted to review it. They had plenty of time to take a quick look at it, and decide it wasn't close. Any delays would just have led to an anti-climatic ending to a great game.

[pack4to84]

I felt like I was watching a Packer game the way the game finished. Warner drives the team down for a TD and the lead. Only to have the defense get it up in under 2 minutes.

[GBRulz]

What is this LeBron chalk move that Holmes did that people are bitching about now? Apparently, he used the football as a prop, which is a 15 yard penalty on the kick-off, that was never enforced.

Call me dumb, but I care about the NBA as much as I care about NASCAR, but what exactly is this chalk move?

[Cheesehead Craig]

What is this LeBron chalk move that Holmes did that people are bitching about now? Apparently, he used the football as a prop, which is a 15 yard penalty on the kick-off, that was never enforced.

Call me dumb, but I care about the NBA as much as I care about NASCAR, but what exactly is this chalk move?
I remember KG doing this where he puts a ton of chalk on his hands by the scorers table, then claps his hands and gets the guys there all covered with it.

LeBron has decided to do the same except he now throws it up in the air like a mushroom cloud because he simply doesn't have enough attention still.

[Bossman641]

Is that what Holmes was supposed to be doing? I couldn't figure out what that was.

[oregonpackfan]

I didn't read through the game thread, but is it safe to assume Partial placed the blame for this loss solely on the shoulders of Warner and the Cardinal offense? After all, if they had scored more than a measly 23 points, the defense never would have been in the precarious position of being expected to hold a lead with 2.5 minutes left.

Why not? Warner threw an INT that was returned for a TD. That was a ten, possibly 14 point turn around. That they stayed in the game following that was remarkable. The number of teams that win following an INT returned for TD is somewhere around 10% or less, if I remember correctly. It was a devastating mistake.

That was a 14 point turnaround and perhaps the biggest defensive play in the history of the Super Bowl.

I would not necessarily call it a mistake by Warner. If you recall, Harrison was faking a blitz. Instead of blitzing, he retreated a couple of steps. He got himself in position for a quick slant-in pass to the receiver(Fitzgerald?). Had Harrison blitzed, the pass probably would have been completed for a touchdown.

[Gunakor]

I'm not seeing the correlation in your argument. I don't think we would have put up anywhere near the offensive performance that the Cards did against the Steelers. We would have been blown out.

Remind me again Partial, how many times were we blown out this season? One? Against the top rated offense in the NFL at the time? At their place?

How many top teir defenses did we play against this season? Were we blown out in any of those games?

I don't think we'd have been blown out here either.

[Partial]

Are you kidding me? Our anemic offense wouldn't put up more than a score or two against the Steelers.

If you noticed, the big plays the Cards had came over the middle. How many times did A-Rod use the middle this season? Very rarely.

I'm not going to get into it as I did a detailed analysis earlier of how the offense fared in CRUCIAL games this season.

[Gunakor]

Are you kidding me? Our anemic offense wouldn't put up more than a score or two against the Steelers.

If you noticed, the big plays the Cards had came over the middle. How many times did A-Rod use the middle this season? Very rarely.

I'm not going to get into it as I did a detailed analysis earlier of how the offense fared in CRUCIAL games this season.

Just like our anemic offense wouldn't have been able to keep pace with the Panthers. Or the Titans. Seeing as how those and any of the other games we lost this year could be considered crucial games, I don't buy your arguement. Furthermore, I can't understand you describing an offense which produced a 1200 yard RB, a 4000 yard QB, and (2) 1000 yard WR's as "anemic".

[SnakeLH2006]

...Just jumping in here, but yeah that is asinine as our O was pretty good this year. If anything, our front 7 on D was anemic. Just sayin....

[mraynrand]

What is this LeBron chalk move that Holmes did that people are bitching about now? Apparently, he used the football as a prop, which is a 15 yard penalty on the kick-off, that was never enforced.

Call me dumb, but I care about the NBA as much as I care about NASCAR, but what exactly is this chalk move?
I remember KG doing this where he puts a ton of chalk on his hands by the scorers table, then claps his hands and gets the guys there all covered with it.

LeBron has decided to do the same except he now throws it up in the air like a mushroom cloud because he simply doesn't have enough attention still.

He does it before every home game. We are all witnesses.

[Partial]

Are you kidding me? Our anemic offense wouldn't put up more than a score or two against the Steelers.

If you noticed, the big plays the Cards had came over the middle. How many times did A-Rod use the middle this season? Very rarely.

I'm not going to get into it as I did a detailed analysis earlier of how the offense fared in CRUCIAL games this season.

Just like our anemic offense wouldn't have been able to keep pace with the Panthers. Or the Titans. Seeing as how those and any of the other games we lost this year could be considered crucial games, I don't buy your arguement. Furthermore, I can't understand you describing an offense which produced a 1200 yard RB, a 4000 yard QB, and (2) 1000 yard WR's as "anemic".

This team is very solid within the 30s but it cannot score when it needs to. It's a finesse offense. I outlined the offensive struggles in this thread. Go back and look at them. I don't count scoring 45 points against Detroit and 15 against Tennessee to average 30 points a game. I think of it as one good game and one bad game.

[Gunakor]

I don't count scoring 45 points against Detroit and 15 against Tennessee to average 30 points a game.

Maybe, but that's you. The NFL adds 45 to 15, divides by two, and comes up with an average of 30 points a game. That simple formula for coming up with scoring averages has worked flawlessly for eons.

Note that the Titans have a top tier defense in the NFL - #1 at the time of the game - while the Lions do not. If you expect to score as many points against the Titans as you do against the Lions you are bound to be disappointed. The difference in scoring in those two games is completely understandable. That's why they keep track of scoring averages in the first place.

[Partial]

And that is why actuaries make the big bucks. Because that sort of statistic is too simplistic to have any sort of value.

Looking at the total scoring per game is really stupid. You've got to look at the performance as a singular object. We did not perform adequately at all, by any stretch of the imagination, in the games I listed.

You can argue it until you're blue in the face, but you'd look awfully silly. How many attempts did we have to score? Why didn't we capitalize? Sure, they have a good defense, but that does not excuse poor execution. Obviously it is more of a challenge to step up and win.

One offensive touchdown in key games is completely unacceptable. It's pathetic to try and justify anything else. For having two top 12 receivers and pretty good back and TE groups, it's even sadder!

We'll see what happens next year, but I suspect we're about average yet again.

[Bossman641]

And that is why actuaries make the big bucks. Because that sort of statistic is too simplistic to have any sort of value.

Looking at the total scoring per game is really stupid. You've got to look at the performance as a singular object. We did not perform adequately at all, by any stretch of the imagination, in the games I listed.

You can argue it until you're blue in the face, but you'd look awfully silly. How many attempts did we have to score? Why didn't we capitalize? Sure, they have a good defense, but that does not excuse poor execution. Obviously it is more of a challenge to step up and win.

One offensive touchdown in key games is completely unacceptable. It's pathetic to try and justify anything else. For having two top 12 receivers and pretty good back and TE groups, it's even sadder!

We'll see what happens next year, but I suspect we're about average yet again.

Wouldn't it make more sense then to look at where the opposing defenses were ranked when we played them and not where they finished the year at, which are the numbers you used? The NFL is a league of trends, teams go on hot streaks. Look at the Giants last year.

Aren't looking at stats for the whole season too simplistic overall? Maybe we should break it down into chunks. Fact - the Houston team we played at the end of the year was certainly not the same Houston team that was playing the rest of the year. They gave up 29 ppg thru 10 and only 17.83 over their last 6. The Jaguars were pretty consistently bad so their average works pretty well. The Titans and their defense were playing better than anyone in the league at the time we played them. The Vikings struggled to a 3-4 start and an average of 23.86 ppg allowed before turning it around and going 7-2 while only giving up 18.44 ppg.

Maybe rather than judging teams based on defensive statistics we should only look at their win-loss record. After all, that's all that matters right (cough*Vince Young*cough). If a team is that good and has a dominating ball-control offense (Titans and Vikings), that certainly gives your offense less chances to score. Maybe we should go through and weigh every team's stats to standardize them all, after all how is it fair to compare stats for the teams in the NFC South against the pathetic NFC and AFC West.

You choose to ignore statistics when they go against your argument and then turn around and argue them to the death when they do.

One last thing, do we have a good offense or a bad offense? I've seen you call them anemic, and then turn around and tout the greatness of the WR's and TE's. If so, who do you blame?

[Partial]

So Minne and Tenn both have "dominating ball control offenses" and when we played them we held them to relatively low point totals, so clearly our defense did it's job. Nice.

However, we scored one offensive touchdown in each of those games. Is that good, or is that bad, BM? If you were the coach of a team with a dynamic, difference making receiving corps, a 4th year vet 1st round pick at QB, and a running back who finished the previous year as well as anybody in the league, would you settle for this?

I surely would not. The offense underachieved any way you slice it.

As for who I blame.. I have noted numerous times how MM is not the answer as a HC. His play calling sucked this year compared to last. Likewise, the limitations of going from a savvy veteran quarterback who can read defenses to an average quarterback who struggled big time with reading defenses obviously contributed to the change in style of play calling.

[mraynrand]

I didn't read through the game thread, but is it safe to assume Partial placed the blame for this loss solely on the shoulders of Warner and the Cardinal offense? After all, if they had scored more than a measly 23 points, the defense never would have been in the precarious position of being expected to hold a lead with 2.5 minutes left.

See... this is where you come off as a jag..

Fact: The Texans were the 22nd ranked defense.
Fact: The Jaguars were the 17th ranked defense.
Fact: The Vikings were the 6th ranked defense.
Fact: The Titans were the 7th ranked defense.

In all of those games, are offensive performances were terrible.

Fact: Against Tennessee.. We scored one touchdown. The Cardinals scored 3 against a far superior defense.

Fact: Against Minnesota, we scored one offensive touchdown right away and couldn't get anything going for the rest of the game. We stayed in the game based on defensive touchdowns and special teams. The Cardinals scored 3 touchdowns against a far superior defense.

Fact: Against Houston, we put up 3 touchdowns. They are one of the very worst defenses in the league, and we were supposed to be one of the dominant offensively. To contrast, The Cardinals scored 3 against a far superior defense.

Fact: Against Jacksonville, we scored 1 touchdown. They are a below average defense. To contrast, The Cardinals scored 3 against a far superior defense.

I'm not seeing the correlation in your argument. I don't think we would have put up anywhere near the offensive performance that the Cards did against the Steelers. We would have been blown out.

I don't blame the offense for the Cardinals because they put up 23 points against the #1 defense in the league... Not the 22nd or 17th.. (where we scored less).

IMO, That is a pretty successful offensive day against the #1 ranked defense, where putting up 16 and 20 points against the 22nd and 17th ranked defenses is a poor offensive day. Can't really complain about the 23 points, and you certainly cannot compare the Packers struggling offensively against by in large average defenses to the Cardinals playing the far and away premiere defense of the NFL.

Ya know, this was a pretty good post - pretty well argued. Maybe it was worth posting it and 'walking away'...

[Bossman641]

So Minne and Tenn both have "dominating ball control offenses" and when we played them we held them to relatively low point totals, so clearly our defense did it's job. Nice.

However, we scored one offensive touchdown in each of those games. Is that good, or is that bad, BM? If you were the coach of a team with a dynamic, difference making receiving corps, a 4th year vet 1st round pick at QB, and a running back who finished the previous year as well as anybody in the league, would you settle for this?

I surely would not. The offense underachieved any way you slice it.

As for who I blame.. I have noted numerous times how MM is not the answer as a HC. His play calling sucked this year compared to last. Likewise, the limitations of going from a savvy veteran quarterback who can read defenses to an average quarterback who struggled big time with reading defenses obviously contributed to the change in style of play calling.

You'll get no argument from me on the Minn game. The Packers had no business being in that game at all, defense and special teams were the only things keeping them in it. The offense played like shit, and the OL was completely overmatched. It still hurt to lose it, but that would have been absolutely stealing a game.

If I remember correctly, the offense struggled in the red zone in the Tenn game. I have no problem placing the majority of blame on them in that game either.

[Partial]

So Minne and Tenn both have "dominating ball control offenses" and when we played them we held them to relatively low point totals, so clearly our defense did it's job. Nice.

However, we scored one offensive touchdown in each of those games. Is that good, or is that bad, BM? If you were the coach of a team with a dynamic, difference making receiving corps, a 4th year vet 1st round pick at QB, and a running back who finished the previous year as well as anybody in the league, would you settle for this?

I surely would not. The offense underachieved any way you slice it.

As for who I blame.. I have noted numerous times how MM is not the answer as a HC. His play calling sucked this year compared to last. Likewise, the limitations of going from a savvy veteran quarterback who can read defenses to an average quarterback who struggled big time with reading defenses obviously contributed to the change in style of play calling.

You'll get no argument from me on the Minn game. The Packers had no business being in that game at all, defense and special teams were the only things keeping them in it. The offense played like shit, and the OL was completely overmatched. It still hurt to lose it, but that would have been absolutely stealing a game.

If I remember correctly, the offense struggled in the red zone in the Tenn game. I have no problem placing the majority of blame on them in that game either.

Smart man. For what its worth, the Packers have the talent to compete with either of those teams. In both instances though, they snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.

[gbgary]

One offensive touchdown in key games is completely unacceptable. It's pathetic to try and justify anything else. For having two top 12 receivers and pretty good back and TE groups, it's even sadder!




The offense underachieved any way you slice it.

As for who I blame.. I have noted numerous times how MM is not the answer as a HC. His play calling sucked this year compared to last. Likewise, the limitations of going from a savvy veteran quarterback who can read defenses to an average quarterback who struggled big time with reading defenses obviously contributed to the change in style of play calling.

i agree. i said, several times this year, that the offense over-taxed the defense by not staying on the field and doing their part. that as bad as the defense was the offense was worse. for me mm's play calling combined with rodgers' inexperience were the main reasons. rodgers played very well for a first year qb. i'm very excited about his future here but only time, experience and more talent around him will reap success. offensively i think another really good receiver and a tight end are a must along with a better o-line. i think the d can be mostly fixed in FA (i won't hold my breath though) but the draft needs to go to the offense. they've got to be able to pile up first downs.

[red]

well maybe holmes didn't have both feet down.

pft, has a pic up showing his feet and the right foot is clearly off the ground. the problem is, we don't know where in the catch that pic was taken

i thought for sure after watching the replays that he was in, now maybe i doubt that

http://www.profootballtalk.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/holmestoes.JPG

[vince]

That's a hell of a shot there. However, based on how his feet and legs were configured at the moment he caught the ball, it appears to me that picture is from well after he established control of the ball.
http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c343/twernke/Packers/HolmesSuperBowlCatch.jpg
He had already turned his body and was helf-way to the ground at that point. While there isn't anything that definitively shows it was a legal catch (except the referrees), he could very well have had both feet down with control of the ball prior to that shot.

[mraynrand]

Both feet were clearly down - as witnessed by the second umpire on the grassy knoll.

[Bossman641]

I agree with Vince, I think that picture is from pretty late in the catch process. When he caught the ball his body was turned more toward Roethlisberger. There's no doubt in my mind that was a catch.

[KYPack]

Holmes blew it.

He should have written "Pepsi" on the bottom of his left shoe and 'Cola' on the bottom of the other one.

He'd be a billionaire right now.

[Harlan Huckleby]

well maybe holmes didn't have both feet down.

pft, has a pic up showing his feet and the right foot is clearly off the ground. the problem is, we don't know where in the catch that pic was taken

i thought for sure after watching the replays that he was in, now maybe i doubt that

http://www.profootballtalk.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/holmestoes.JPG

I thought the right foot was off the turf just watching the replays on TV. Its really pretty obvious looking at that still photo.

I'm surprised the announced to even mention that as an issue. They just got caught-up in the drama, I guess, wanted to believe.

[red]

i think the pic that i posted from pft came well after the catch was made and he had both feet down

look at my picture and in the top left corner you'll see a black shoe

now look at the picture vince posted, thats the moment the catch was made, and as you can see the zona player wasn't close enough yet to have his left shoe in the other frame

[swede]

Check out this week's SI. There is a photograph taken from a point directly behind Holmes' back that shows both feet clearly down.

No controversy here other than such caused by the usual goofs that work to prove a point rather than work to find the truth.

[Bossman641]

Check out this week's SI. There is a photograph taken from a point directly behind Holmes' back that shows both feet clearly down.

No controversy here other than such caused by the usual goofs that work to prove a point rather than work to find the truth.

Yep there are a couple great photos in SI this week.

[vince]

Wow Swede, you got better eyes than I do. I can't tell for sure that his foot is down there... Although it would appear that he would have been able to tap his right foot from that position...
http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c343/twernke/00_3_new_opis-4091-mid.jpg