Did Seattle Deserve to Win?

[mgteich]

They mauled the Steelers for the first half and had 3 points (should have been 7 if not for the refs. But it should have been about 24-7 at the half if the Hawks played better and called a better game. There was no reason for the Steelers to be in the game by halftime. And as we all know by now, no one has come from behind in 12 years, and no one has ever come back from an 11 point deficit.
-----------------------------
The refs called many in favor of the Steelers, but so did the Hawk offense.

And does the Hawk defense really deserve to win. They gave up three huge plays.

 

[PATSNUTme]

Answer to your question is NO. Steelers didn't either.

 

[dhamz]

No way did they deserve to win. They played terrible. They dropped half a dozen passes, they missed FGs, couldn't manage the clock, Jackson didn't "dot the I" on what should have been a long TD, seemed stunned that Randle El can throw, it goes on and on. For all the criticism Reid and McNabb deserved for their bumbling 2 minute drill last year did anyone ever think you'd see Seattle do it twice in 1 game???

No one deserved to win this game. Someone said it was as well played a game as an August preseason game. That might be overstating it.

 

[BelichickFan]

They both sucked - it was much like our Denver game to me, you can't guarantee the other team would have won with good officiating, or say that either team deserved to win, all you can say is the refs had a significant (unintional IMO) impact on who won the game - and that should never happen.

 

[marty]

At half time I was thinking that both teams were just playing not to make mistakes. The Hawks seemed to have the control edge, but couldn't finish drives. It was a poor example of football being played on the national level.

 

[richpats]

Before Hasselbeck's INT, yes, afterwards, not a chance. The commentators said the Steelers' bench was down as Seattle was driving, that pick just brought them back to life. Seattle blew it on that play.

 

[marty]

In the first half, the Hawks D were "handling" the Steelers very well, and they seemed to have the answer for Troy and Porter on offense. Then they started to unravel in the second half.

 

[Bella*chick]

I don't think they played as if they deserved to win, however, I think they deserved a fair shot at the game. Practically every good thing they did was taken away and their momentum was killed more times than freakin' Rasputin.

 

[stcjones]

I think they would have......

They mauled the Steelers for the first half and had 3 points (should have been 7 if not for the refs. But it should have been about 24-7 at the half if the Hawks played better and called a better game. There was no reason for the Steelers to be in the game by halftime. And as we all know by now, no one has come from behind in 12 years, and no one has ever come back from an 11 point deficit.
-----------------------------
The refs called many in favor of the Steelers, but so did the Hawk offense.

And does the Hawk defense really deserve to win. They gave up three huge plays.

done enough to win........those two controversial plays (offensive interference on Jackson....and the "hold" that wasn't)....took the momentum away from Seattle. Prior to those two hideous calls the Hawks were in control of the game and taking it to them. Rottenburger SUCKED......and except for the 75 yard run by Willie....the hawks shut down the run......whole keys to this game ended up being momentum....

Hawks got f'ed by the refs.....Rottenburger NEVER scored....there were alot of bad spots against Hawks......missed penalties against Pitt.....everything and anything called AGAINST Seattle.........truly a disgusting game called by the officials..........Anyways, in answer to your question....YES...I think if Seattle had scored TD's on both of those possessions and maintained the momentum.........they would have won pretty handily.......one man's opinion

 

[p8ryts]

No Seattle is a sissy team like the Colts

Pittsburgh's offense really only made a few plays. Holmgren and Hasselbeck, it was like the little engine that couldn't. Jeremy Stevens, ohmygod, get rid of him. What a tank job.

 

[Michigan Dave]

No way. Hasselbeck and Holmgren's management of the clock was hilarious. Of course, Holmgren screwing up Super Bowl management shouldn't be news, seeing as how we are dealing with the guy who though up the brilliant strategy of "Let Terrell Davis Score!."

 

[CheerforTom]

Yeah... again, it was sort of like our Denver game. While Seattle (us) didn't deserve to win because of their overall amateurish play (turnovers for us), Pittsburg (Denver) definately didn't deserve to win, either. Both teams played like turd, Pittsburg just had better luck (or, as some on the board would say, better calls).

 

[PatsFanSince74]

I don't buy it that any team that lost an SB "deserved" to win it...the Rams' fans are still saying that about XXXVI and it was BS then and it's BS this morning.

 

[Fanfrom1960]

No way. Hasselbeck and Holmgren's management of the clock was hilarious. Of course, Holmgren screwing up Super Bowl management shouldn't be news, seeing as how we are dealing with the guy who though up the brilliant strategy of "Let Terrell Davis Score!."

You're talking about the Young to T.O. TD that won the 1998 playoff game for the 49ers against the Packers? How was that Holmgren's fault?

 

[Bella*chick]

You're talking about the Young to T.O. TD that won the 1998 playoff game for the 49ers against the Packers? How was that Holmgren's fault?

I thought he was talking about the play late in the Superbowl vs. Denver, when Terrell Davis just walked right into the endzone because Holmgren and co. figured he would score anyway and they didn't want to kill too much clock.

 

[CTPatsFan]

Nope. They played like crap. Way too many unforced, legit errors & penalties, dropped balls, etc. And WTF was up with the clock management at the end of the 1st half? Holmgren looked downright Herm-esque.

 

[Michigan Dave]

You're talking about the Young to T.O. TD that won the 1998 playoff game for the 49ers against the Packers? How was that Holmgren's fault?

No....when Holmgren decided to let Denver score and take the lead with somewhere around 2 minutes left in the game, thinking that he'd have more time for Favre to lead them to the winning TD. He instructed the D to let Terrell Davis score.

 

[Mooch]

By the way, according to an old John Clayton article, D-Jax's play at the end of the first half should have been a TD:

A player will be ruled in bounds if he touches the pylon at the goal line before going out of bounds. For example, a pass would be considered complete if one foot touches the pylon and the other foot is in bounds.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/columns/clayton_john/1354105.html

 

[DaBruinz]

They mauled the Steelers for the first half and had 3 points (should have been 7 if not for the refs. But it should have been about 24-7 at the half if the Hawks played better and called a better game. There was no reason for the Steelers to be in the game by halftime. And as we all know by now, no one has come from behind in 12 years, and no one has ever come back from an 11 point deficit.
-----------------------------
The refs called many in favor of the Steelers, but so did the Hawk offense.

And does the Hawk defense really deserve to win. They gave up three huge plays.

The Hawks didn't deserve to win with all the mistakes that they made. But my beef isn't about whether or not the Hawks deserved to win. They deserved a fair chance in terms of the referees throwing flags. That is something they didn't get.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Nope - Seattle didn't deserve to win. They didn't deserve to be screwed over by the Refs, but they didn't deserve to win either.

SB champions overcome those things. Frankly, given the way both teams played, they BOTH should have been denied the Lombardi trophy.