The Steelers gave that one away.

[Austin 3-16]

As i went to sleep at 5am South African time i couldnt help feel the Steelers will be livid with the way they seemingly handed "Vince" to the Packers. Twenty one points of 3 turnovers,a pick 6 and two short fields for the most efficient passer in the league. Rogders had no running game and as the game went on it told. Mendenhall's turnover was the proverbial "turning point". Im not saying conclusivly that the Steelers would have won without those turnovers,but you tell me where the Packers would have found all those points without their number one receiver and no running game.

[T-RO]

As i went to sleep at 5am South African time i couldnt help feel the Steelers will be livid with the way they seemingly handed "Vince" to the Packers. Twenty one points of 3 turnovers,a pick 6 and two short fields for the most efficient passer in the league. Rogders had no running game and as the game went on it told. Mendenhall's turnover was the proverbial "turning point". Im not saying conclusivly that the Steelers would have won without those turnovers,but you tell me where the Packers would have found all those points without their number one receiver and no running game.

Once you start playing coulda-woulda-shoulda...where do you stop?

The five-six Packer drops were every bit as big as the 3 turnovers. The Packers were also very unlucky with injuries.

The best team won. They were favored to win. They outplayed the Steelers. They led for all 60 minutes. I don't know what you are whining about.

[Austin 3-16]

Once you start playing coulda-woulda-shoulda...where do you stop?

The five-six Packer drops were every bit as big as the 3 turnovers. The Packers were also very unlucky with injuries.

The best team won. They were favored to win. They outplayed the Steelers. They led for all 60 minutes. I don't know what you are whining about.

Im not whining,screw the Steelers. Im just stating the fact that the Packers scored 21 points off 3 turnovers. This is what actually happened, not a what if. Who knows what would have happened with those dropped balls but we know what happened with the turnovers.

[newlander]

Im not whining,screw the Steelers. Im just stating the fact that the Packers scored 21 points off 3 turnovers. This is what actually happened, not a what if. Who knows what would have happened with those dropped balls but we know what happened with the turnovers.

.....you could say the multitude of turnovers that Dallas forced Buffalo into in their super bowls was a result of Buffalo 'handing' the game to the Cowboys. :cool: All depends on your perspective. Looked like Green Bay was younger, hungrier, faster and BETTER. Therefore, they led from wire to wire and won.:)

[dbair1967]

As i went to sleep at 5am South African time i couldnt help feel the Steelers will be livid with the way they seemingly handed "Vince" to the Packers. Twenty one points of 3 turnovers,a pick 6 and two short fields for the most efficient passer in the league. Rogders had no running game and as the game went on it told. Mendenhall's turnover was the proverbial "turning point". Im not saying conclusivly that the Steelers would have won without those turnovers,but you tell me where the Packers would have found all those points without their number one receiver and no running game.

They got outplayed. And outplayed significantly. If not for all the dropped balls by the Packer WR's, it wouldnt have been close.

[Woods]

Im not whining,screw the Steelers. Im just stating the fact that the Packers scored 21 points off 3 turnovers. This is what actually happened, not a what if. Who knows what would have happened with those dropped balls but we know what happened with the turnovers.

I was sitting here in London watching the game as well (and made it into work at 8 a.m.).

I agree 100% with you. The turnovers did the Steelers in, esp the last fumble in the 2nd half. The Steelers had all the momentum up to that point (since the end of the 1st Half).

Interestingly, the Steelers vaunted defense didn't force even one turnover.

That said, I think the Steelers also were fortunate to win versus the Ravens (so it sort of evens out). R Rice typically doesn't fumble, and the Ravens just choked in that game.

[sago1]

I was going to say the same thing re our beating the Bills in first of our 3 SB wins in the 90s, but you got there before me.

Turnovers happens in most games. Take your pick whether the better team won because they caused the turnovers or the loser lost the game because they screwed up. Doesn't matter and is frankly a bad explanation for losing. Good teams don't screw up and make turnovers; live with it.

[Woods]

I really hope we can get back and win another Super Bowl soon - we can tie the Steelers for most SB wins. I'm so glad they lost.

I hope Flo takes his money and retires, along with a couple of their older defensive vets.

[burmafrd]

It balanced out- the GB drops vs the Steeler Turnovers.

[Austin 3-16]

You just cant give Rodgers two short fields,he will and he did burn 'em.

[REDVOLUTION]

As i went to sleep at 5am South African time i couldnt help feel the Steelers will be livid with the way they seemingly handed "Vince" to the Packers. Twenty one points of 3 turnovers,a pick 6 and two short fields for the most efficient passer in the league. Rogders had no running game and as the game went on it told. Mendenhall's turnover was the proverbial "turning point". Im not saying conclusivly that the Steelers would have won without those turnovers,but you tell me where the Packers would have found all those points without their number one receiver and no running game.

Without turnovers. The Stealers win.

Then I read this... (below)

It balanced out- the GB drops vs the Steeler Turnovers.

True.


In the end the should have lost vs Cards and should have never got all the calls vs Seahawks.

so.... Karma...

[burmafrd]

No they need to lse at least 2 more for Karma to be satisfied.

[jimmy40]

As i went to sleep at 5am South African time i couldnt help feel the Steelers will be livid with the way they seemingly handed "Vince" to the Packers. Twenty one points of 3 turnovers,a pick 6 and two short fields for the most efficient passer in the league. Rogders had no running game and as the game went on it told. Mendenhall's turnover was the proverbial "turning point". Im not saying conclusivly that the Steelers would have won without those turnovers,but you tell me where the Packers would have found all those points without their number one receiver and no running game.How can you say they gave it away when Green Bay forced those turnovers? This wasn't a Neil O'Donell give away.

[kingwhicker]

I disagree with the OP, that game's not even close if Jordy Nelson makes some easy catches.

[Idgit]

That game was one of the sloppiest Superbowls I can remember. It should have been a Packer blowout.

[WV Cowboy]

I think the Packers were the better team last night, and they took it from the squeelers.

But even if the squeelers gave it away, that's even funnier!

It would have been even funnier if they would have lost on a bad call!!

[burmafrd]

That is what I was hoping for- a truly horrendous call that went against the Squeelers.