• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Officiating mistake in the SuperBowl?

Actually, I have no idea. But let's just go with yes.
 
Yeah, strange but true. The referee stated that even tho they moved the ball, since Seattle didn't make the line to gain they in essense lose the challenge.
smallbigtall said:
One thing that you all may have discussed Sunday night, but I'm too lazy to scan the thread -- when Carroll challenged the spot of Wilson's run/stretch out of bounds, the refs changed the spot -- why was Carroll still charged the TO? I didn't think it was contingent on getting a new set of downs.
Click to expand...
 
bobknightfan said:
Why would the Seahawks have recovered it? Denver had no trouble recovering the ball....and without the kickoff return to the 13-14 yardline, they would have just recovered it 6 or 7 yards further up the field, rather than in the endzone for a safety.
Click to expand...

1st and 10 at DEN 14(Shotgun) P.Manning Aborted. M.Ramirez FUMBLES at DEN 14, recovered by DEN-K.Moreno at DEN -8. K.Moreno tackled in End Zone, SAFETY (C.Avril). Penalty on DEN-P.Manning, Illegal Motion, declined.

Moreno would have recovered it 2 yards deep in the end zone had the ball been spotted on the 20. Still a safety.

I love that ESPN's play-by-play says Peyton Manning Aborted.
 
qcdeac said:
1st and 10 at DEN 14(Shotgun) P.Manning Aborted. M.Ramirez FUMBLES at DEN 14, recovered by DEN-K.Moreno at DEN -8. K.Moreno tackled in End Zone, SAFETY (C.Avril). Penalty on DEN-P.Manning, Illegal Motion, declined.

Moreno would have recovered it 2 yards deep in the end zone had the ball been spotted on the 20. Still a safety.

I love that ESPN's play-by-play says Peyton Manning Aborted.
Click to expand...

OOOOPS

Also, when you are a returner like Holliday, you have to take those chances. Doubt that Fox minded him trying to make a play.
 
Everybody is taught in that scenario to take the safety over the touchdown even if it means kicking it out the back of the endzone.
 
The safety and the field goal following were not the big problem Denver had. Denver's problem was that the offense never did anything. Denver was in a less deep hole (5-0) receiving the second kickoff than they would have been if they had punted on their first series and Seattle had scored a touchdown (7-0). If Denver had punted from around the 25 or 30 after 5 or 6 plays, and Seattle had driven 65 or so yards for a TD (40 yd net on punt, D25 to S35) would this have been a big deal? I don't think so. It was the rest of the game, when Seattle's defense just totally throttled Denver's offense that was the big issue. If Denver's offense had rolled up the field after getting the second kickoff, scored a TD, it would have been a statistical oddity, not "the play of the game."
 
I agree with Deaconblue. Being down 5-0 was nothing. Not sure how 2nd & 28 at their own 2 would have been much better for Denver. A pick-6 or a safety would have been likelier outcomes than Denver getting a 1st down there.
 
Seattle's DL beat Denver's OL. Like the Giants did to Tom Brady a couple years ago, they got a lot of pressure up the middle - and, of course Cliff Avril's well documented harassment on the edge. No QB does well when pressured up the middle - not even Brady or Manning.

The strange thing is that Denver was totally unprepared for Seattle's blended D scheme - man on the outside, zone in the middle. You'd think with two weeks to prepare, and shown nothing particularly new in the SB, that Denver would have a better plan of attack. Denver did not plan on Seattle's fans being loud outside of Seattle. This debacle is all on Fox and Denver's OL.

Seattle, otoh, knew that Denver's D would key on Lynch, and they mixed in a lot of other plays (esp using Percy Harvin) to keep Denver off balance.
 
bobknightfan said:
Exactly. Seattle just completely dominated the entire game. I've watched all 48 Super Bowls. (Watched the first one in the Davis Dorm Day Room when I was a junior at WF.) And this one may have been the most one-sided game of them all. And, actually, Seattle's offense wasn't even all that outstanding.....but, oh that defense!
Click to expand...

Ray Berry and Tony Eason beg to differ.
 
bobknightfan said:
Exactly. Seattle just completely dominated the entire game. I've watched all 48 Super Bowls. (Watched the first one in the Davis Dorm Day Room when I was a junior at WF.) And this one may have been the most one-sided game of them all. And, actually, Seattle's offense wasn't even all that outstanding.....but, oh that defense!
Click to expand...

Seattle knew what plays Denver was going to run. Richard Sherman says they cracked their signals.

'We knew what route concepts they liked on different downs, so we jumped all the routes. Then we figured out the hand signals for a few of the route audibles in the first half,' he said.



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...signal-code-Super-Bowl-able-predict-play.html
 
The Broncos really did have an awful gameplan. Coming out throwing all those short passes, way to play right into their hands
 
Go back to the game thread. People were saying Seattle would regret those FGs. Denver wasn't really out of it until 12 seconds into the 2nd half. The safety was barely a game changer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top