The Daily Collegian - MTV's message is one-sided

[Listening to: She's Hot - T.O.K. - Reggae Gold 2003 Disc 1 (03:30)]

More Super Bowl Reflections

Questionable Officiating

Through the pats last two games, there have been several controversial calls in the pats favor. It is not the number of penalties called, it is the timing of the penalties that is most important. Against the Titans, there were numerous defensive holding and pass interference calls that were simply not called. ESPN made note of this throughout the following week. In Sunday's games, there were at least two calls that were that changed the face of a drive and led to pats scores.

1) 4th and 1, pats have the ball, they run the ball, hole opens and is violently closed by the Panthers. A horrible spot from the referee leads to a first down even after review of the play and agreement among the commentators that he never go to the first down line. The replay clearly shows this, the pats were going from right to left. In a reference to watching it on TV, the rb starts towards the top of the screen with the ball in his left hand (towards the bottom of the screen), cuts back to the bottom of the screen and is nailed. Clearly only his helmet and maybe a bit of his right shoulder crossed the first down marker and that's being generous. The left side of his body, including the ball, never cross the line....ever. The referees explanation after reviewing the play....the point of the ball crossed the first down marker which is impossible since the RB at not ime extended the ball out. If the left side of his body never cross the line, how does the ball? They went on to score a drive instead of turning the ball over on Downs.

2)Tom Brady apparently is immune from Intentional Grounding. In one instance early in the game, it didn't matter since the drive ended with a missed field goal although it could have meant a different field position for the Panthers. The second intentional grounding, the Panther come with an all out blitz and Brady is in the midst of the first sack of his post season. He is between the guards as he dropped straight back. He throws the ball into the offensive line. There was no runningback, no wide receiver, no one who could legally catch the ball. The ref's call? Illegal touching because it bounced of the legs of an offensive lineman, the back of the legs no less. The difference between the two calls is Illegal touching is a 5 yarder (maybe a 10 yarder) and repeat the down. Intentional grounding is loss of down and the ball is placed at the spot the qb threw it from. Huge difference between 2nd and 15th and 3rd and 21.

Now I'm back in New England and miserable. What I wouldn't give to talk to a pats fan that knew something about the game and was realistic enough to admit that the pats had a whole helluva lotta luck this season. ON the plane ride here, there were pats fans everywhere and even the friggin stewardesses who obviously knew nothing about football are talking about the super bowl. It will only get worse.....

In my opinion, there was no Super Bowl Champion for 2004....Next. Done.

Well, for the second time in three years the patriots (I refuse to capitalize that) have won the super bowl. The first time was a bonified fluke in my opinion. If that game in 2002 is played 10 times the Rams win 9 of those ten times. It just so happened that the one that was played was the one that counted. I will not say that this last super bowl was a fluke, but I will say them being there (yes even with consideration for their win streak) is a fluke (though I have to imagine the referees had to be getting some sort of kick back).

I find it hard to cheer, congratulate, or admire a champion that is unable to truly dominate a single game. Yes, I know this is the Super Bowl and it's the matchup of the two best (or hottest) teams in the league so a close should be expected. But even looking back through their season, they weren't in a particularly strong division yet they had only one blowout victory against a pitiful Bills (although the Bills did give it to them in the first game of the season). They also lost to my Washington Redskins as well as needed overtime to beat the Texans. They required horrible playcalling in week 16 (an approximation) to get by the Colts the first time and horrendous lack of officiating to get by them the second time. They beat an injury riddled Titans team in the playoffs although it seems the Titans are always injury riddled. They were just not impressive.

My theory on teams that win in the last period of a game is contrary to what the experts would have you believe. See the experts say coming through with clutch victiories shows heart......wrong! Coming through with clutch victories against good teams or superior teams shows heart. Needing that for everyone is just a

• Lack of concentration
• Lack of talent
• Lots and lots of luck
• A generally mediocre performance for most of the game

Working in Boston my views are not looked upon in the most positive fashion. Rather, I get the all too common and oft overused 'You're a hater.' My main reason for not cheering for the pats is because I have yet to encounter a New England fan that will listen to a sensible argument about the game. They are generally the most blind, one-sided fans I have ever met. And this goes for red sox fans as well. Oddly enough, the celtics aren't winning so no one seems to notice them too much. Kinda like the amount of attention the pats received at the beginning of the year. Actually now that I think about it, there were hardly ever any crowds at the Avenue to watch most of the early season of the pats. The crowds didn't start gathering until the winning streak was solidly under way. Strange how that could happen in such a sports loyal city....

Aaaah, but what do I know. I'm just an outsider who refuses to resign my current loyalties in order to jump on the pats bandwagon so I can fit in with my peers. Maybe it's the thug in me....