Superbowl

... and poor Gisele [insert whiny, screechy voice here] "My husband can't ... throw the ball and catch the ball at the same time!"

Of course he could have thrown the ball leading his receivers. And he could have actually gotten outside the tackles before throwing the ball away as well. Three or four dropped passed and three or four off target throws is easily the difference in a close game.

I doubt she even knows the rules to the game. Gisele's version of the rules:

"My manly, hunky man stands tall while the villanous dee-fence tries to kill him. He fires with his god-like rocket launcher of an arm to willing recipients who will, as proper, obediently sacrifice their inferior bodies to ensure my beloved's hard work is not wasted. My valiant prince secures the end zone through his brilliance and prowess, and the fans properly cheer his greatness. Then the other guys do something or another and then bow down to another surge of greatness from my stalworth warrior. This goes on for a day or so and then I get my man back in my castle."

 

Rich Eisen said the same thing. He even said it could be considered sound strategy. Granted, you can't end the game on a defensive penalty, so you would have to play at least one play with 11 guys, but seeing as how the penalty is simply "too many men on the field" - not "5 yards per guy you're over", just throw out 15 guys if you feel like it - it's only 5 yards either way and you don't get the time back on the clock.

A bit picky, but if I were to criticize any officiating call in the game, it was the intentional grounding in the end zone. No, there wasn't a player near the ball, but you could say he thought the receiver was going to run a post route instead of an in route. I've never seen intentional grounding called when the ball goes 50 yards down field.

 

It's taken me 28 years to figure out that a superbowl is about the American version of football and has nothing to do with bowling!

 

I had the same argument with my father-in-law. That rule has always rubbed me the wrong way. It's a completely lopsided rule and not officiated consistently. The game is such a bang-bang type of game now, with the atheletes in such uber-shape that any poorly run route or mis-commuication of a hot-read can result in a flag. It's a stupid rule that doesn't fit today's game. Should be removed.

As for the game, I just wanted to see a well played, close game. I think we got that.

 

I had a super bowl of cereal this morning. Golden Grahams, mmmmm!

 

I was hoping that the team who finished the game with the most points would win. I wasn't disappointed.

 

I still have a smile on my face.

I watched with a delay in the morning while brunching. The demise of the oh so pretty and perfect pesky Patriots is a fact. It is the only NFL team that I dislike.

(ps a healty Rotlisberger....)

 

I'm still in healing mode and therefore unwilling to discuss the game.

However, I will comment on the Gisele issue. It is complete ********. Everyone is trying to paint her as if she is public enemy number one in New England. That couldn't be further from the truth. What she said was exactly what everyone in New England was also thinking. Brady didn't have a spectactular game, but he didn't suck eggs either. There were passes that should have been caught and weren't and they cost the game. Should she have said it the way she did? Probably not, but in an emotionally charged moment when someone is trying to heckle her, the ******* is lucky she didn't arrange to have him killed instead. To me (a diehard Pats fan) this is just Pats haters piling on and trying to cause trouble.

Now I go back into my cave and wait for the draft in April

 

Do people up in Boston really refer to Giselle as Yoko?

 

Only agitators