vincec Posted February 2, 2009 Posted February 2, 2009 How long before they go with a double decker stage a la "match game"? I mean can we really live without hearing the football knowledge of Matt Millen? The visual of this is really funny... but who would play Gene Rayburn?
Simon Posted February 2, 2009 Posted February 2, 2009 Double decker match game? Why not just go for the Deal or No Deal stage. Whoever has the big money suitcase is allowed to talk How could you say no to Charles Nelson Reilly? I don't even know who you are any more........
Bmwolf21 Posted February 2, 2009 Posted February 2, 2009 It just did. Hurry up. Done. Thanks. Double decker match game? Why not just go for the Deal or No Deal stage. Whoever has the big money suitcase is allowed to talk I think we have a winner here. Although honestly I think I'd rather hear one of the DOND models talk about the game than Matt Millen.
Fewell733 Posted February 2, 2009 Posted February 2, 2009 That's gonna be controversial. This will be talked about...maybe for years. It would be a bigger controversy if it involved a fan base other than the Cardinals. I thought that last play was absolute trash - i think it was pretty clearly a forward pass and to not review it is was unconscionable given that its the friggin Superbowl. Plus the Cards would have gotten a 15 yard penalty tagged on for the unsportsmanlike penalty on the Steelers after the play - it would have given them a reasonable last shot at the end zone. instead the end felt cheap like they were just trying to just sweep it under the rug.
ofiba Posted February 2, 2009 Posted February 2, 2009 It would be a bigger controversy if it involved a fan base other than the Cardinals. I thought that last play was absolute trash - i think it was pretty clearly a forward pass and to not review it is was unconscionable given that its the friggin Superbowl. Plus the Cards would have gotten a 15 yard penalty tagged on for the unsportsmanlike penalty on the Steelers after the play - it would have given them a reasonable last shot at the end zone. instead the end felt cheap like they were just trying to just sweep it under the rug. Fitz just needed one shot to get his hands on the ball.
gmac17 Posted February 2, 2009 Posted February 2, 2009 It would be a bigger controversy if it involved a fan base other than the Cardinals. I thought that last play was absolute trash - i think it was pretty clearly a forward pass and to not review it is was unconscionable given that its the friggin Superbowl. Plus the Cards would have gotten a 15 yard penalty tagged on for the unsportsmanlike penalty on the Steelers after the play - it would have given them a reasonable last shot at the end zone. instead the end felt cheap like they were just trying to just sweep it under the rug. what is the exact rule? If you are sort of fumbling it but your arm is going forward is it a pass? Do you have to have a clean grip?
bbb Posted February 2, 2009 Posted February 2, 2009 I thought it was more of a pass than the one they reversed earlier......How could they not review it??? Like was said, I like Fitz' chances for a jump ball.
RShirley Posted February 2, 2009 Posted February 2, 2009 I guarantee 10th Ave will be the best song he performs. The rest will be his crappy hit singles. I wanted Born in the USA.......but he didn't give it to us.........that was disappointing but enjoyed the performance.
ofiba Posted February 2, 2009 Posted February 2, 2009 what is the exact rule? If you are sort of fumbling it but your arm is going forward is it a pass? Do you have to have a clean grip? Even though the ball was hit pretty hard, it looked like it still stuck in his hand until he threw it forward. It really should have been reviewed. I would have loved to see one more play from the 30 yard line.
The Dean Posted February 2, 2009 Posted February 2, 2009 Even though the ball was hit pretty hard, it looked like it still stuck in his hand until he threw it forward. It really should have been reviewed. I would have loved to see one more play from the 30 yard line. While, after the replay, I don't think it would have been reversed, it most certainly should have been reviewed. The announcers said it was reviewed, but that is the same nonsense the NHL used in the "no goal" game. The officials should never be in a rush at the end of the game, especially a big game like that (and one that they were VERY involved in). I totally disagree that this was a stolen victory, or that the refs won it for the Steelers...but, that last play should have been properly replayed, IMO.
Fewell733 Posted February 2, 2009 Posted February 2, 2009 I totally disagree that this was a stolen victory, or that the refs won it for the Steelers...but, that last play should have been properly replayed, IMO. not a stolen victory, but not as satisfying as it should have been because of typical officiating baloney.
keepthefaith Posted February 2, 2009 Posted February 2, 2009 Even though the ball was hit pretty hard, it looked like it still stuck in his hand until he threw it forward. It really should have been reviewed. I would have loved to see one more play from the 30 yard line. Agree. That was one heck of a football game, well played by both teams. Very close outcome, several close plays, changes in momentum, drama at the end and some great individual plays by both teams. Really enjoyed it and it shows you how far many teams and orgaizations (including the Bills) have to go. You have to feel great about the Cardinals and how they played throughout the playoffs. Warner will be a big loss if he retires. Matt Linehert needs to grow up fast.
BuffOrange Posted February 2, 2009 Posted February 2, 2009 Nice to see a good game. Officiating I thought was slightly tainted towards the Steelers, but that happens. At least it wasn't so insanely 1-sided that it looked like the game was rigged while watching it, ie the Seattle SB.
Recommended Posts