PDA

View Full Version : Seattle Fans, enjoy the win knowing you are Marked Men for the rest of the season.


v2micca
09-25-2012, 08:33 AM
I remember this same song when it played for the Broncos in week 2 of the '08 season against the Chargers. Bad call gave us the win. At the time, we took it, happily. But Kharma is a b**** and kharma never forgets. I fealt like we didn't get a single close call go our way for the rest of that season, including a massively bogus offensive pass interference against the Dolphins the nullified a touchdown and swung that game. Other fanbases with no skin in the game in our match ups actively started rooting against us over that blown call. We became the de facto bad guys of the AFC west that year. This is your future Seattle. The rest of the season most fan bases will root against you. Any sympathy you still retained for getting jobbed in Superbowl XL? All gone. And I mean all gone. So, enjoy the win. You will pay for it.

Phantom
09-25-2012, 09:49 AM
Funny ... most average fans were pulling for Seahawks I would assume. Not overhyped/underdog, etc... compared to Packers. Would have double sucked if the tables were turned.

menonite
09-25-2012, 09:52 AM
No offense to our Indian friends but karma doesn't exist. It rains on the just and unjust alike. The refs get the blame for this one. Not the Seahawks.

DBroncos4life
09-25-2012, 09:53 AM
Funny ... most average fans were pulling for Seahawks I would assume. Not overhyped/underdog, etc... compared to Packers. Would have double sucked if the tables were turned.

Really I'm sick of the Russell Wilson hype they are trying to force on us. He doesn't look good at all and is being carried by a very good D and rich owner (refs)

Tombstone RJ
09-25-2012, 10:02 AM
what is Seatlle supposed to do, give the win to GB? What I don't understand is the play was reviewed in the booth and the booth officials upheld the TD. I don't understand this. The field officials make at the very least a "questionable call" and at most the "wrong call" yet the replay officials don't change it.

IMHO, this is more on the replay officials than the field officials. The field officials are going to make mistakes. When the regular booth officials have the opportunity to override a "mistake" but don't, well, you can't blame the field refs.

ColoradoDarin
09-25-2012, 10:12 AM
We got every call against us for what seemed like 3 seasons after that.

Gort
09-25-2012, 10:18 AM
what a bunch of bitchy little girls! gimme a break.

these refs are no different than the previous refs.

did you forget SB XL?

those were supposed to be the best of the best "regular" refs and they botched that whole SB and essentially gave the game to the Pissburghers.

i doubt anybody in Seattle thinks they are playing with house money. if anything, i suspect they feel they are STILL owed for that cluster**** of a SB that they "lost".

http://www.aolnews.com/2010/08/06/nfl-referee-admits-mistakes-in-seahawks-steelers-06-super-bowl/

Beantown Bronco
09-25-2012, 10:34 AM
what is Seatlle supposed to do, give the win to GB? What I don't understand is the play was reviewed in the booth and the booth officials upheld the TD. I don't understand this. The field officials make at the very least a "questionable call" and at most the "wrong call" yet the replay officials don't change it.

IMHO, this is more on the replay officials than the field officials. The field officials are going to make mistakes. When the regular booth officials have the opportunity to override a "mistake" but don't, well, you can't blame the field refs.

As was mentioned in the other thread, the replay officials don't review anything. They buzz down to the on field official to review it. They can't override any mistakes by the on field guys.

Tombstone RJ
09-25-2012, 10:36 AM
what a bunch of b****y little girls! gimme a break.

these refs are no different than the previous refs.

did you forget SB XL?

those were supposed to be the best of the best "regular" refs and they botched that whole SB and essentially gave the game to the Pissburghers.

i doubt anybody in Seattle thinks they are playing with house money. if anything, i suspect they feel they are STILL owed for that cluster**** of a SB that they "lost".

http://www.aolnews.com/2010/08/06/nfl-referee-admits-mistakes-in-seahawks-steelers-06-super-bowl/

yep, this is an example of the most important game of the year being poorly officiated and costing one team on opportunity for a championship. The ref even admits his mistakes.

Tombstone RJ
09-25-2012, 10:38 AM
As was mentioned in the other thread, the replay officials don't review anything. They buzz down to the on field official to review it. They can't override any mistakes by the on field guys.

Why do they even need to do that? Aren't all TD an automatic review? So really, there's no point to having "replay officials" on a TD anyway.

DBroncos4life
09-25-2012, 10:41 AM
what a bunch of b****y little girls! gimme a break.

these refs are no different than the previous refs.

did you forget SB XL?

those were supposed to be the best of the best "regular" refs and they botched that whole SB and essentially gave the game to the Pissburghers.

i doubt anybody in Seattle thinks they are playing with house money. if anything, i suspect they feel they are STILL owed for that cluster**** of a SB that they "lost".

http://www.aolnews.com/2010/08/06/nfl-referee-admits-mistakes-in-seahawks-steelers-06-super-bowl/dumbass

Gort
09-25-2012, 10:42 AM
dumbass

fluffer

DBroncos4life
09-25-2012, 10:45 AM
fluffer

Yeah some of these "replacement refs" got fired from a league of half naked chicks playing football and I'm a wrong. You are siding with the retards so you are a ****ing dumbass.

Gort
09-25-2012, 10:50 AM
Yeah some of these "replacement refs" got fired from a league of half naked chicks playing football and I'm a wrong. You are siding with the retards so you are a ****ing dumbass.

no, i'm siding with the side that says the old refs are just as bad as the new refs. i don't give a **** where these new refs came from or where the old refs came from. what's amusing to me is all you little women bitching and moaning about the new refs as if the old refs never, ever, ever made critical mistakes. they made them all the time. ALL. THE. TIME. the problem is not the refs... it's the stupid 2012 NFL rulebook with so many ridiculous rules in it. all this bitching about a play to end the GB/SEA game would have been laughed at 20-25 years ago, you know, before there was replay. if i was so inclined, i could find 100+ examples of games lost because of one blown call with the old refs... but somehow or another you think those were all ok. however these new blown calls now are injustices. gimme a break. grow a pair or start wearing a skirt.

meet the new refs, same as the old refs.

DBroncos4life
09-25-2012, 10:55 AM
no, i'm siding with the side that says the old refs are just as bad as the new refs. i don't give a **** where these new refs came from or where the old refs came from. what's amusing to me is all you little women b****ing and moaning about the new refs as if the old refs never, ever, ever made critical mistakes. they made them all the time. ALL. THE. TIME. the problem is not the refs... it's the stupid 2012 NFL rulebook with so many ridiculous rules in it. all this b****ing about a play to end the GB/SEA game would have been laughed at 20-25 years ago, you know, before there was replay. if i was so inclined, i could find 100+ examples of games lost because of one blown call with the old refs... but somehow or another you think those were all ok. however these new blown calls now are injustices. gimme a break. grow a pair or start wearing a skirt.

meet the new refs, same as the old refs.

Ha ha ha this stance is dumb too! Well they all have made errors so no big deal...durrrrrrr

Beantown Bronco
09-25-2012, 10:58 AM
if i was so inclined, i could find 100+ examples of games lost because of one blown call with the old refs... but somehow or another you think those were all ok. however these new blown calls now are injustices. gimme a break. grow a pair or start wearing a skirt.

meet the new refs, same as the old refs.

Even if you could, which you couldn't, 100 games turned on bad calls is nothing in the entire history of the NFL. There are over 500 NFL games played each year. 100 games in the history of the NFL is a fraction of 1 percent.

These replacement refs have only worked 48 games so far and they've directly swung at least 5 if not 10 or more games with egregiously bad calls. That's over 10% of games played. Using conservative estimates.

HUGE difference.

DBroncos4life
09-25-2012, 11:01 AM
Even if you could, which you couldn't, 100 games turned on bad calls is nothing in the entire history of the NFL. There are over 500 NFL games played each year. 100 games in the history of the NFL is a fraction of 1 percent.

These replacement refs have only worked 48 games so far and they've directly swung at least 5 if not 10 or more games with egregiously bad calls. That's over 10% of games played. Using conservative estimates.

HUGE difference.

^this you would think they would get this but dumb is dumb.

Gort
09-25-2012, 11:08 AM
Even if you could, which you couldn't, 100 games turned on bad calls is nothing in the entire history of the NFL. There are over 500 NFL games played each year. 100 games in the history of the NFL is a fraction of 1 percent.

These replacement refs have only worked 48 games so far and they've directly swung at least 5 if not 10 or more games with egregiously bad calls. That's over 10% of games played. Using conservative estimates.

HUGE difference.

i think you are not understanding the real magnitude of the problem. refs have always had the ability to affect the outcome of the game. 1 holding call on a late drive (or 1 non-call) can often determine which of the 2 teams wins. that happens all the time. year in and year out. there have been many hundreds of games decided in just this way i'm sure. it's not glamorous like a last second hail mary, but the end result is the same.

anybody who thinks these new refs are worse than the old refs is fooling themselves. they are both equally bad in the same ways. because they don't call every violation or they call violations that shouldn't be violations. it's the rule book that's the problem.

what's silly is all these people being ginned up into a mob mentality over the first 3 weeks of this season by a bunch of sportswriters with their own agendas.

here's the simple law of the NFL. if you don't want the game to be decided by the refs, then win it decisively on the field, long before the 4th quarter. if you leave up to the refs, you might as well be rolling dice.

kappys
09-25-2012, 11:14 AM
i think you are not understanding the real magnitude of the problem. refs have always had the ability to affect the outcome of the game. 1 holding call on a late drive (or 1 non-call) can often determine which of the 2 teams wins. that happens all the time. year in and year out. there have been many hundreds of games decided in just this way i'm sure. it's not glamorous like a last second hail mary, but the end result is the same.

anybody who thinks these new refs are worse than the old refs is fooling themselves. they are both equally bad in the same ways. because they don't call every violation or they call violations that shouldn't be violations. it's the rule book that's the problem.

what's silly is all these people being ginned up into a mob mentality over the first 3 weeks of this season by a bunch of sportswriters with their own agendas.

here's the simple law of the NFL. if you don't want the game to be decided by the refs, then win it decisively on the field, long before the 4th quarter. if you leave up to the refs, you might as well be rolling dice.

Good point but I think one of the major problems is the slow pace of the game with the replacements - they are slow to spot the ball, slow to call penalties when they do throw a flag and slow to announce them. every game seems to run too long.

Beantown Bronco
09-25-2012, 11:16 AM
anybody who thinks these new refs are worse than the old refs is fooling themselves.

You really are insane.

By definition, your statement can't be true. It's like saying our 3rd string guys are just as good as our starters because they're all flawed human beings that make mistakes.

These guys are not even true backups. These are division 2 college guys at best. Some don't even have resumes at that level. They don't even know all the rules they're charged with enforcing.

There's a reason they're only making about 10% of the salary of the regular refs. If they were just as good, they'd be getting paid a whole hell of a lot better.

ZachKC
09-25-2012, 11:23 AM
Its hard to blame the Seahawks at all. This is a silly thread.

Gort
09-25-2012, 11:23 AM
You really are insane.

By definition, your statement can't be true. It's like saying our 3rd string guys are just as good as our starters because they're all flawed human beings that make mistakes.

These guys are not even true backups. These are division 2 college guys at best. Some don't even have resumes at that level. They don't even know all the rules they're charged with enforcing.

There's a reason they're only making about 10% of the salary of the regular refs. If they were just as good, they'd be getting paid a whole hell of a lot better.

they are less experienced, and that makes them slower.

they are under a tremendous amount of scrutiny, and that makes them slower.

they are afraid of missing calls, so that makes them susceptible to coaches/players on the sideline.

all of that will disappear with time.

they have the same eyesight as the other refs. they know the rulebook. they have lots of league help during the game. so yes, they are the same as the old refs. both groups made/make mistakes by the bucket. to me that means the rulebook is the problem.

it's really popular to make these new refs scapegoats, but how many times have we all pulled out our hair when the old refs botched calls in Broncos games in the past few years? it happened alot.

that's my point. the new refs are not any different than the old refs. slower maybe, but considering the fact that you can throw a flag on just about any play anyway because of the current NFL rules, the refs have ALWAYS had too much effect on the game.

i kind of like the fact that these new refs aren't calling as many ticky-tack PI penalties. the league has swung too far in favor of the QB/passing game. let's let the DBs make some plays out there without worrying about drawing a flag every time.

Beantown Bronco
09-25-2012, 11:28 AM
they are less experienced, and that makes them slower.

they are under a tremendous amount of scrutiny, and that makes them slower.

they are afraid of missing calls, so that makes them susceptible to coaches/players on the sideline.

all of that will disappear with time.

All evidence to the contrary. Week one was universally regarded as the best officiated, then week two, then week three. It's getting WORSE as time goes by.

they know the rulebook.

Obviously. It's not like they're out there flagging coaches that challenge too many men on the field plays or anything; or marking off the wrong distances on penalties; or bringing punts that are downed by the punting team at the one yard line out to the 20 as if it was a touchback.

they have lots of league help during the game. so yes, they are the same as the old refs.

Not enough league help. And who exactly are these "helpers"? What are their qualifications? This is a question that nobody can or will answer. We do know that they cannot be true NFL refs because they are being locked out.

kappys
09-25-2012, 11:35 AM
All evidence to the contrary. Week one was universally regarded as the best officiated, then week two, then week three. It's getting WORSE as time goes by.



Obviously. It's not like they're out there flagging coaches that challenge too many men on the field plays or anything; or marking off the wrong distances on penalties; or bringing punts that are downed by the punting team at the one yard line out to the 20 as if it was a touchback.



Not enough league help. And who exactly are these "helpers"? What are their qualifications? This is a question that nobody can or will answer. We do know that they cannot be true NFL refs because they are being locked out.

As we go further the players will engage in more and more penalties as long as they think they can get away with it. The real tragedy wasn't the stupid split possession call it was the blatant shove that Tate used to get open

broncocalijohn
09-25-2012, 11:35 AM
Its hard to blame the Seahawks at all. This is a silly thread.

I won't blame them but when guys like Tate should shut his mouth, he actually lies on tv and says he had the ball the whole time. Full of ****. Seems Carroll told the players not to mention it when they tweet which was smart. Tate puts a bad taste in everyone's mouth by calling us blind and dumb. We know what we saw. Now I need to judge the fans. I hope there is a poll by that ESPN show (or other outfit) that breaks down the votes based on state. I guarantee you that every state should say it was a bad call. If Washington state has this as a "good call" by the refs, I hope they lose every single game on their schedule...even if they play the Rams.

broncocalijohn
09-25-2012, 11:44 AM
http://blog.seattlepi.com/football/2012/09/24/poll-should-the-seahawks-or-packers-have-won-that-game/

Here is a poll but so much traffic that it won't show up the results.

DBroncos4life
09-25-2012, 11:45 AM
They know the rules so well they throw hats on the field to stop WRs from getting open or walking off 22 yards for a 15 yard penalty. Gort knows as much about football as the replacement refs.

Gort
09-25-2012, 12:02 PM
They know the rules so well they throw hats on the field to stop WRs from getting open or walking off 22 yards for a 15 yard penalty. Gort knows as much about football as the replacement refs.

yes, you are right. the old refs NEVER made mistakes. NEVER, EVER, EVER. they were perfect. if only the NFL would hire them back, it would be nothing but rainbows and unicorns from here on out.

/sarc

Gort
09-25-2012, 12:07 PM
All evidence to the contrary. Week one was universally regarded as the best officiated, then week two, then week three. It's getting WORSE as time goes by.



Obviously. It's not like they're out there flagging coaches that challenge too many men on the field plays or anything; or marking off the wrong distances on penalties; or bringing punts that are downed by the punting team at the one yard line out to the 20 as if it was a touchback.



Not enough league help. And who exactly are these "helpers"? What are their qualifications? This is a question that nobody can or will answer. We do know that they cannot be true NFL refs because they are being locked out.


they know the rulebook the same way that a 16 year old kid knows the DMV manual right before he takes his driving test.

the problem is experience. you need that to get comfortable. same as a 16 year old kid being told to parallel park for his test. same with these new refs. they are making mistakes. i'm not arguing that they aren't. i'm saying the old refs made just as many mistakes too. maybe not the dumb mistakes that are easy to mock like you are doing now, but i've seen lots of clock mistakes and spot mistakes over the years with the old refs. they are no better than the new refs.

DBroncos4life
09-25-2012, 12:15 PM
yes, you are right. the old refs NEVER made mistakes. NEVER, EVER, EVER. they were perfect. if only the NFL would hire them back, it would be nothing but rainbows and unicorns from here on out.

/sarc

You are so ****ing dumb its beyond discussing. The replacement refs are ****ing up a record pace and your dumb ****ing ass keeps saying well the old refs messed up too.

bronco militia
09-25-2012, 12:39 PM
****ty refs are ****ty!

Gort
09-25-2012, 12:59 PM
You are so ****ing dumb its beyond discussing. The replacement refs are ****ing up a record pace and your dumb ****ing ass keeps saying well the old refs messed up too.

we agree on one thing... there is no point in me discussing anything with you.

have fun with your impending aneurysm.

:welcome:

Boobs McGee
09-25-2012, 01:10 PM
they know the rulebook the same way that a 16 year old kid knows the DMV manual right before he takes his driving test.

the problem is experience. you need that to get comfortable. same as a 16 year old kid being told to parallel park for his test. same with these new refs. they are making mistakes. i'm not arguing that they aren't. i'm saying the old refs made just as many mistakes too. maybe not the dumb mistakes that are easy to mock like you are doing now, but i've seen lots of clock mistakes and spot mistakes over the years with the old refs. they are no better than the new refs.

Which is not very well at all, and the majority of 16 year olds are NOT going to keep studying it after they pass. New drivers ****ing suck, and continue on in that regard for a few years...learning poor habits and becoming even worse drivers because they don't STUDY the manual. Horrible analogy. Unless you were trying to make the point that the replacement refs know just barely enough to squeak by, but when any kind of important question comes up they'll fail miserably (which they're doing, every game). BUT, you weren't.

Let me give you the proper use of your analogy.

Yes, your replacement refs are the 16 year old drivers. They suck, they don't know the rules, and they're going to be terrors on the road for a few years. The REAL refs, are the Drivers Ed teachers. They study the rulebook daily, have been driving for YEARS, instruct others, make the road a safer place, and make occasionally make mistakes.

Boobs McGee
09-25-2012, 01:12 PM
In addition, you DO NOT let your 16 year old kid teach others how to drive, because they'll get someone killed. You MAKE them study, and under constant supervision, teach them how to properly drive. Then, 15 years from now, you let them apply for a job teaching driver's ed, once they have the proper education.

Gort
09-25-2012, 01:39 PM
Which is not very well at all, and the majority of 16 year olds are NOT going to keep studying it after they pass. New drivers ****ing suck, and continue on in that regard for a few years...learning poor habits and becoming even worse drivers because they don't STUDY the manual. Horrible analogy. Unless you were trying to make the point that the replacement refs know just barely enough to squeak by, but when any kind of important question comes up they'll fail miserably (which they're doing, every game). BUT, you weren't.

Let me give you the proper use of your analogy.

Yes, your replacement refs are the 16 year old drivers. They suck, they don't know the rules, and they're going to be terrors on the road for a few years. The REAL refs, are the Drivers Ed teachers. They study the rulebook daily, have been driving for YEARS, instruct others, make the road a safer place, and make occasionally make mistakes.

i knew the book well when i was 16 and ready to take the test. what i didn't have was lots of experience. of course, i'm naturally brilliant, so maybe the analogy wouldn't work for you (bazinga!).

that was my point. in nearly 30 years of driving since i took that test... no accidents, no points, only 2 bogus tickets (speed). i took my book knowledge and with experience, i became a phenomenal driver. seriously. people sometimes stop their own cars as i go by and marvel at how good i am.

your assertion that the old refs rarely makes mistakes cause me to laugh. out loud even. i scoff at that assertion. in fact, i scoff at thee!!

Gort
09-25-2012, 01:41 PM
In addition, you DO NOT let your 16 year old kid teach others how to drive, because they'll get someone killed. You MAKE them study, and under constant supervision, teach them how to properly drive. Then, 15 years from now, you let them apply for a job teaching driver's ed, once they have the proper education.

if i had a 31-year old kid who only aspired to teach driver's ed, i'd kick him in the nuts on the general principle of the thing.

DBroncos4life
09-25-2012, 01:44 PM
They know the book so well they gave San Fran challenges with no time outs.

Anikai
09-25-2012, 01:45 PM
http://blog.seattlepi.com/football/2012/09/24/poll-should-the-seahawks-or-packers-have-won-that-game/

Here is a poll but so much traffic that it won't show up the results.

71% say GB should of won.

menonite
09-25-2012, 01:49 PM
71% say GB should of won.

Another 10% voted "No, but what can you do? The replacement refs did the best the could with the replay available."

Only 7% of voters in a Seattle based newspaper poll voted that the Seahawks should have won.

broncosteven
09-25-2012, 01:51 PM
Anyone else glad that we aren't at the center of this **** storm for once?

broncocalijohn
09-25-2012, 02:04 PM
Another 10% voted "No, but what can you do? The replacement refs did the best the could with the replay available."

Only 7% of voters in a Seattle based newspaper poll voted that the Seahawks should have won.

Then I could rest easy to root them on when they play the Rams. NFC WEST isn't a cake walk this season. I am now wondering if AFC WEST is that cake walk.

Cito Pelon
09-25-2012, 02:14 PM
Another 10% voted "No, but what can you do? The replacement refs did the best the could with the replay available."

Only 7% of voters in a Seattle based newspaper poll voted that the Seahawks should have won.

Hooray for them, they understand as well as anybody about getting jacked over.

What got me about the play was there was no ref anywhere near the play! Hell, Seattle was all the way down to the 24 I believe, so why wasn't the side judge or the back judge SOMEWHERE close to the darn play?

Crushaholic
09-25-2012, 02:16 PM
The Packers are lucky that this is early in the season. They should be good enough to overcome this one loss. The consequences will be magnified by 100 times, if this was Game 16 and a tiebreaker situation...

Tombstone RJ
09-25-2012, 02:19 PM
the silver lining in this is that the call went against GB. I have to admit I'd be more annoyed if the situation was reversed and the cheesedick packers got the call.

FearLanier
09-25-2012, 02:21 PM
The thing I hated most was watching that stupid smirky smile on Pete Carroll's face after they won.

Nobody liked him because of what he did to USC and how he left. Now? He's probably one of the most hated coaches in the league.

Tombstone RJ
09-25-2012, 02:22 PM
The thing I hated most was watching that stupid smirky smile on Pete Carroll's face after they won.

Nobody liked him because of what he did to USC and how he left. Now? He's probably one of the most hated coaches in the league.

I certainly have no love for Carroll, I think he's annoying.

Miss I.
09-25-2012, 02:34 PM
I just finished the game. Wow, what a mess. It was quite a fascinating, exciting game up until that painfully awful final call. The first half seemed to be about sacking Aaron Rodgers, i think he was sacked 8x in the first half. At any rate not sure why anyone would hold Seattle responsible for a **** call by the refs. Granted, Tate is an idiot and should be quiet, but the refs are the ones who clustered it.

ol#7
09-25-2012, 03:55 PM
I just finished the game. Wow, what a mess. It was quite a fascinating, exciting game up until that painfully awful final call. The first half seemed to be about sacking Aaron Rodgers, i think he was sacked 8x in the first half. At any rate not sure why anyone would hold Seattle responsible for a **** call by the refs. Granted, Tate is an idiot and should be quiet, but the refs are the ones who clustered it.

What do you expect Tate to say? This is like when Matt Holliday 'maybe' touched the base against SD in 2007. Matt did you touch that doughnut?

I actually like Tate's response, especially to the PI pushoff. It's what I would wnat one of our guys to say if put in the same spot.

Miss I.
09-25-2012, 09:43 PM
What do you expect Tate to say? This is like when Matt Holliday 'maybe' touched the base against SD in 2007. Matt did you touch that doughnut?

I actually like Tate's response, especially to the PI pushoff. It's what I would wnat one of our guys to say if put in the same spot.

I suppose so and it was highly emotional and people say what they say in those moments, but people do have a choice. He could have just shut up and told them he'd speak at the presser.

Anyway, here's a picture a friend gave me, on my avatar now too, that I thought was funny (and he doesn't even like football).

https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/185297_10151027310721862_1297737714_n.jpg

eddie mac
09-26-2012, 03:24 AM
Its hard to blame the Seahawks at all. This is a silly thread.

Exactly, albeit if it was the Chiefs then that's a different story.Ha!

broncocalijohn
09-26-2012, 09:20 AM
The Packers are lucky that this is early in the season. They should be good enough to overcome this one loss. The consequences will be magnified by 100 times, if this was Game 16 and a tiebreaker situation...

How about taking the division? How about home field advantage for the playoffs? That one game can make a huge difference.

Aftermath
09-27-2012, 10:57 PM
Stupid thread. Funny how worked up that DBroncos guy is getting. Its embarrassing actually. But thanks for PITT/SEA Superbowl mention. That was the worst officiating I've ever seen, I forgot about that.

Blueflame
09-27-2012, 11:42 PM
How about taking the division? How about home field advantage for the playoffs? That one game can make a huge difference.

The subject of the bad call will definitely be revisited if Green Bay misses the playoffs by a single game. Or if the Seahawks make the playoffs but would have been watching on tv without that one "victory". It's bad enough that a single call determined the outcome of a regular-season game, but when you factor in possible postseason effects as well, it carries even more impact... it could wind up being a "gift that keeps on giving" (giving controversy, that is).

menonite
09-27-2012, 11:45 PM
When you consider draft position it could have an impact on or both of the franchises for years. One draft spot can make a world of difference.

Blueflame
09-27-2012, 11:53 PM
When you consider draft position it could have an impact on or both of the franchises for years. One draft spot can make a world of difference.

Best-case scenario for such a bad call to be made would have been an AFC team vs an NFC one... it's unfortunate that it happened in a game between 2 teams from the same conference. Can you imagine the "chip" the Packers would have on their collective shoulders if they happen to meet the Seahawks in the playoffs? "A bit chippy" won't begin to describe the emotional atmosphere...