what a fking game.
steelers got a lot of breaks.
Jeff Reed is a serious loser. Nice form tackling in the open field on that Harvin touchdown! Good week for the Steel City's effeminate kicker!
That was just downright unacceptable. Stupid little girl push. I think the Steelers really need to work on tackling all around. There were several bad tackles, a lot of the guys seemed to be trying to go for the BIG hit instead of a solid tackle. When it works, it looks good on tv, but when it doesn't it costs them dearly.
Ryan Clark is nasty, though. He lays the wood. That one hit on Harvin was money...
what a fking game.
steelers got a lot of breaks.
Jeff Reed is a serious loser. Nice form tackling in the open field on that Harvin touchdown! Good week for the Steel City's effeminate kicker!
Jeff Reed is no Roy Gerela (probably a more accurate kicker, though)
(http://supahz.250x.com/footballr/gerela01.jpg)
Wow, what a handsome guy....Real lady killer right there....
Why do people say this everytime a good team loses? You don't think the Vikings got breaks too? The Vikes got beat, plain and simple. Breaks had no effect on the outcome of this game. Both team got "breaks".
are you just arguing to argue or did you actually watch the game?
Of course I watched the game. I'm not trying to argue. I'm wondering why you say what you said so much? It's an excuse, dude. The Vikes got beat, period.
i say that so much?
i said it last week when the saints got breaks, which they did and i mentioned in in this thread when the steelers got breaks also. Stop reaching.
When a center fumbles a snap and the defense recovers, thats called luck. Thats a break for the defense. That has nothing to do with the opponent being better.
Theres a reason they keep all these stats.
maybe you think they should dump all game stats and just write "they got beat" on the game summary ???
what a fking game.
steelers got a lot of breaks.
thats what i thought.
arguing just to argue.
You said:
Which clearly highlights the "breaks" the Steelers got as a factor in the win. What do "breaks" have to do with game stats? A "break" would consist of a "gimme" or an example of good fortune. Ex: You're speeding and a cop decides to give you a break and not ticket you. A gift, right? You never mentioned any game stats, so I don't really follow the point that you are trying to make with that.
The Steelers didn't need any "breaks" to strip sack farve and score. They were the better team today, plain and simple. Breaks had nothing to do with anything, imo.
i didnt see this edit.
so youre basing your argument off of one play?
how about that pass on the screen play thrown directly to chester taylors hands and literally bounced in to timmons lap? then taken for a pic six? Would you define that as a break or did the other team just "beat em"
this is without factoring in bad officiating. The steelers got a break with the offials in the second half also. If you watched the game like you said, you know what play im talking about.
To me, you seem to pick and choose when "bad officiating" results in wins. Why not mention some breaks that went the other way? Your initial post said nothing of a particular play.... What am I phychic? Again, I'm merely pointing out your tendency to cherry pick calls, officitating and situations to discredit football teams.
In football, lucky bounces and tips lead to game changing plays all the time. It's a part of the game. The Tyree catch in 07 is a good example of this. A freak play that helped the Giants win a sb. That said, the play of the Giants leading up until that point was the true reason they won. Had the Patriots taken care of business, it would never have come down to those two or three freak plays or bad calls that happen in every football game each week. Had the Vikings taken care of business, they would have won today... but they didn't - so they lost.
I'm not trying to be argumentative; this is a messageboard where people come to talk sports and voice their opinion. I voiced mine on your statement.... nothing more, nothing less. It's not personal, nor am I upset to the point where I need a beer.
That bulldozer job that AP did to Gay was insane. He literally trampled on him after destroying him. Wow.
what a fking game.
steelers got a lot of breaks.
Why do people say this everytime a good team loses? You don't think the Vikings got breaks too? The Vikes got beat, plain and simple. Breaks had no effect on the outcome of this game. Both team got "breaks".I don't say it every game, but come on, it was fucking obvious on this game. come to think of it, the last time I was saying this was with the steelers a few years back when it was again obvious as fuck.
what a fking game.
steelers got a lot of breaks.
Very entertaining game. Vikings are for real. And of course Pitts will be in the thick of things as always....although their lack of a consistent running game could come back to haunt them.
That bulldozer job that AP did to Gay was insane. He literally trampled on him after destroying him. Wow.
steelers buy a lot of refs.I'm glad one of the cocksuckers got flattened in the 4th, make him earn his payoff ::)
so did the vikings
mendenhall dropping the ball on the 4 yard line
the phantom interference call on miller when santonio caught a td pass
in the end the better team won
E
the running game is fine, mendenhall had 69 yards on 10 carries against the number 1 run defense the last 3 years
he wasn't given another carry after the fumble though
E
I'm not so sure. The majority of his yards came on a couple of carries on one drive. The one where he fumbled. Aren't they like 17th in the league in rushing? Very mediocre. But hey, they won the SB last year with an awful running game, so who knows.
attention: body88 was wrong :D The steelers bought the refs 8)
That was my point oriognally. Not sure why people ignore stuff like this.
attention: body88 was wrong :D The steelers bought the refs 8)
I don't make excuses either. :)