Why Pittsburgh Should Have 7 Rings

[footbull3196]

Time for another one of my What if segments.  Lets get it started. Week 15 of the 2010 season, 4-9 Detroit at 8-5 Tampa Bay.  The Bucs hosted the Lions in a game where they were fighting for their playoff lives.  With the Lions up 17-14 midway through the 4th quarter, Kellen Winslow caught what appeared to be the go ahead touchdown.  But the refs incorrectly threw a flag on Winslow, citing offensive pass interference and negating the touchdown.  If you look at replay from that game, Winslow barely put his hands on the Lions defender and it was mostly for positioning reasons.  It was one of the most ticky tacky, unnecessary fouls you could imagine.  The Bucs would settle for a field goal that would tie the game and eventually lose in overtime by the count of 23-20, with the Lions winning their first road game in over 3 seasons behind Calvin Johnson's 10 catches for 152 yards including the critical grab on 3rd and 8 in overtime to move Detroit into field goal range.  This would prove critical at the end of the year when the Bucs barely missed out on the playoffs due to tiebreakers with the Giants and Packers.  But what would have happened if the refs had made the correct no-call?

Here's my take on it:

First off, if we account for the touchdown that the Bucs would have scored if Winslow hadn't been flagged, and then remember that Detroit would have needed a touchdown on their last drive instead of a field goal to tie the game and assume that since they were at the 25 yard line with less than 10 seconds to go in that game the Bucs defense would have kept them out of the end zone, then we can reasonably assume that the Bucs would have walked out of there that day with a 24-17 win.  For Detroit this wouldn't have changed much, as they still would have finished last in the NFC North at 5-11 instead of at 6-10.  But for the Bucs, this changed everything.  Instead of finishing 10-6 and out of the playoffs, they would have finished at 11-5 and earned the #6 seed in the NFC.  This would have knocked the Packers out of the playoffs, who was the team that won it all that season.  Instead of Philly hosting Green Bay in the wild card round, they would have faced Tampa which was a better matchup for the Eagles.  Philly would have then won the playoff matchup against Tampa, but because of seeding, this would have led to #3 Philly at #2 Chicago, while the #4 Seahawks would have faced the #1 Falcons instead

Even though Chicago beat Philly in Week 12 of that season, it was by 5 points at Soldier Field.  The rematch likely would have gone differently since Jay Cutler wouldn't have had the luxury of shredding the worst team ever to make the playoffs like he did when the Bears played Seattle in real life.  So we can project that Philly would have gotten their revenge and moved on to the NFC Championship Game.  Since Atlanta would no longer be facing a Packers team with the "us against the world" mentality in the divisional round that was lucky as hell to be in the playoffs in the first place, but would instead be gifted with a matchup against the 7-9 Seahawks, they would easily beat down on Seattle

This creates one of the most interesting championship games in NFL history: dogfighter against his old team. And how it would it have turned out? Given that Matt Ryan was nearly undefeated as a starter at home at the time, and the Falcons' balanced offensive attack, I have them winning it. Their pass rush led by John Abraham would have been the deciding factor in forcing Vick to get rid of the ball earlier than normal

And Super Bowl 45?  Steelers vs Falcons.  Even though the Steelers only won in real life by the count of 15-9 in overtime, that game was a defensive struggle because of the fact that Ben Roethlisberger was suspended at the time, who would be back for the rematch in the Super Bowl.  Hard to see the Falcons offense predicated on the ground game being successful in a situation that plays right into the Steelers' hands, as Pittsburgh had a historically good run defense that season.  And obviously I don't have to go on about how Big Ben is better than Dennis Dixon.  The 28-16 Steelers win in this alternate version of events would mean that Pittsburgh would have won their 7th overall title and their 2nd in 3 seasons, cementing themselves as unquestionably the best franchise in the Super Bowl era

And all of this because the refs blew a call weeks earlier in the Lions / Bucs game....

[Jimmy Austin]

Just thinking about this a few weeks ago. No doubt the refs screwed that game up. The NFL even admitted that Winslow OPI was the wrong call. 

If Tampa bad been the 6th seed. I think that Philly game could of gone either way. Tampa was really good on the road that year, but they would not have gotten past Atlanta though. 

[Nabbs4u]

What if Santonio doesn't "toe tap", would the Steelers only have 5? Wouldn't this scenario then give them 6? There's a whole Gambit of what if's numerous teams could claim every season. Just saying.

[CKSteeler]

Simpler path to 7 (at the time, #5) - Neil O'Donnell rejects the payoff in '95 and throws to guys wearing Steelers jerseys.

Did I ever tell anyone how much I hate Neil O'Donnell? I hope he dies in a fire.

[patriotsheatyan]

If the Steelers turned it over four times, plus a misssd field goal and turnover on downs against the Falcons like they did Green Bay they would lose to virtually anyone they play. 

Philly beating Chicago is huge reach. Urlacher was 5-0 in his career against Vick and the Bears blew the Eagles out that season. 

[TecmoSuperJoe]

 

 

[footbull3196]

1 hour ago, Nabbs4u said:

What if Santonio doesn't "toe tap", would the Steelers only have 5? Wouldn't this scenario then give them 6? There's a whole Gambit of what if's numerous teams could claim every season. Just saying.

I agree with your main premise, but some scenarios are more fathomable than others

1 hour ago, CKSteeler said:

Simpler path to 7 (at the time, #5) - Neil O'Donnell rejects the payoff in '95 and throws to guys wearing Steelers jerseys.

Did I ever tell anyone how much I hate Neil O'Donnell? I hope he dies in a fire.

Crazy part is that O'Donnell's last INT wasnt his fault at all.  Andre Hastings ran the wrong route and would have been open if he had run the right one.  Instead the ball went straight to Larry Brown who got lucky for the 2nd time in that super bowl

1 hour ago, patriotsheatyan said:

If the Steelers turned it over four times, plus a misssd field goal and turnover on downs against the Falcons like they did Green Bay they would lose to virtually anyone they play. 

Philly beating Chicago is huge reach. Urlacher was 5-0 in his career against Vick and the Bears blew the Eagles out that season. 

There's 3 main problems with your post

1. The Steelers may have turned the ball over 4 times and missed a field goal against Green Bay, but they still only lost by less than a touchdown.  They would have Big Ben back for the rematch against the falcons instead of Dennis Dixon.  Pretty sure they would have scored more than just field goals

2. Lol @ Chicago "blowing out philly" in the regular season when they won the game by the score of 31-26

3. Even if you were correct in your assessment that the bears would beat the eagles, please tell me how they would possibly get past the Falcons on the road

[patriotsheatyan]

1 hour ago, footbull3196 said:

I agree with your main premise, but some scenarios are more fathomable than others

Crazy part is that O'Donnell's last INT wasnt his fault at all.  Andre Hastings ran the wrong route and would have been open if he had run the right one.  Instead the ball went straight to Larry Brown who got lucky for the 2nd time in that super bowl

There's 3 main problems with your post

1. The Steelers may have turned the ball over 4 times and missed a field goal against Green Bay, but they still only lost by less than a touchdown.  They would have Big Ben back for the rematch against the falcons instead of Dennis Dixon.  Pretty sure they would have scored more than just field goals

2. Lol @ Chicago "blowing out philly" in the regular season when they won the game by the score of 31-26

3. Even if you were correct in your assessment that the bears would beat the eagles, please tell me how they would possibly get past the Falcons on the road

1: You’re post is flawed. You predicate it on things like “Pittsburgh beat Atlanta in the regular season, therefore they would beat them in the post season” and “I think Pittsburgh would score more than field goals against the Falcons with Ben” while using the exact opposite with Chicago and Philly. There is no logic to this and you randomly apply the idea that things will play out the same or similarly to the first game while simultaneously acknowledging that games can have very different outcomes with rematches. If the Steelers and Ben play anywhere near as poorly against the Falcons, Bears, Eagles, or whoever they play as they did against Green Bay then they probably lose.

2: It seems like you look at the final score of games without actually checking context. Green Bay completely dominates that game, never looked like they lost control, and led the entire way. Every time it looked like Pittsburgh was back in it Rodgers moves the ball down the field and scored while making it look easy. Chicago led for 50+ minutes against the Eagles and had a 31-13 lead in the 3rd quarter, and the Eagles scored twice in the last five minutes to make it 31-26. Vick had four fumbles in that game but Philly recovered all of them, showing just how lucky Philly was to even have a superficially close score.

[footbull3196]

1 hour ago, patriotsheatyan said:

1: You’re post is flawed. You predicate it on things like “Pittsburgh beat Atlanta in the regular season, therefore they would beat them in the post season” and “I think Pittsburgh would score more than field goals against the Falcons with Ben” while using the exact opposite with Chicago and Philly. There is no logic to this and you randomly apply the idea that things will play out the same or similarly to the first game while simultaneously acknowledging that games can have very different outcomes with rematches. If the Steelers and Ben play anywhere near as poorly against the Falcons, Bears, Eagles, or whoever they play as they did against Green Bay then they probably lose.

2: It seems like you look at the final score of games without actually checking context. Green Bay completely dominates that game, never looked like they lost control, and led the entire way. Every time it looked like Pittsburgh was back in it Rodgers moves the ball down the field and scored while making it look easy. Chicago led for 50+ minutes against the Eagles and had a 31-13 lead in the 3rd quarter, and the Eagles scored twice in the last five minutes to make it 31-26. Vick had four fumbles in that game but Philly recovered all of them, showing just how lucky Philly was to even have a superficially close score.

1. I never said the reason that Pittsburgh would beat Atlanta was because they beat them in the regular season and I acknowledged that they looked pretty terrible for most of that game.  But again, the reason for that was because they were missing their starting quarterback which would be a pretty key factor in a Super Bowl rematch.  I also said that a historically good run defense was the reason I believed that the matchup would be a disaster for the Falcons.  You're right about the turnovers, but the Steelers still made a pretty good game out of it and ultimately did have a chance to win it at the end but went 4 and out.  Also, the Packers defense was clearly better than the Falcons' defense that year no matter which way you spin it

2. No, I fully remember watching that Week 12 Eagles @ Bears game almost in its entirety.  I remember thinking how great Cutler looked for the majority of the game and how the Bears defense was a legitimate unit, especially when it came to forcing timely turnovers.  But it wasn't a blowout by any means, even if Vick didn't have that amazing pass on 4th down to Brent Celek that was placed perfectly between 4 defenders.  The Bears were the better team for 3 quarters, and I'll give you the fumbles stat that you brought up, but the Eagles dominated the 4th quarter in terms of yardage.  That doesn't necessarily make it a close game, but it sure as hell doesn't make it a blowout.  Also, the Steelers vs Packers SB was far from a blowout.  I could use your logic to say that every time that Green Bay looked like they were about to run away with it, the Steelers would answer and keep it within reach (except for the last drive of course).  The Packers definitely did not dominate that game, they just played very well offensively.  But let's not act like they didn't give the Steelers any chance

3. Like I said earlier, even if you were correct in your assessment of the Bears beating the Eagles in the playoffs, please explain how they would beat Atlanta on the road.  This is where your argument falls apart, because no matter what, the most likely outcome in this scenario is a Steelers vs Falcons Super Bowl.  If youre going to try to argue that the 2010 Bears were a more Super Bowl worthy team than the 2010 Falcons, then lol ok whatever you say.  If you're going to try to argue that the 2010 Bears were more Super Bowl worthy than the Falcons AND would beat the Steelers in the Super Bowl, then you're just delusional and your argument wouldn't even dignify a response at that point 

[3rivers]

the steelers have had talent for years only to underachieve every year.  The easiest way is to figure out why they are underachievers and fix that, but so far they haven't.  They even tried to sign a RB this year that turned down the best deal available for a RB last year.  He showed up slow and heavier last year. They proceed to repeat this expecting different results ("insanity"?) and the  RB still hasn't reported . Will they correct this?  If accepting the 5th year option for a player 3rd worst at his position is a way to do so , then yes!

[BaratheonFollower]

You should be able to beat anyone to win the superbowl. If anything this proves they deserved it even less, if they needed a better match up to win. This wasn't just a lucky play or bad penalty, you needed a completely different opponent to win. 

[3rivers]

8 hours ago, BaratheonFollower said:

You should be able to beat anyone to win the superbowl. If anything this proves they deserved it even less, if they needed a better match up to win. This wasn't just a lucky play or bad penalty, you needed a completely different opponent to win. 

If Brady never got hurt in 2008, do we win in 2008? I doubt it because brady and BB owned Lebeau, just the facts. 

[7DnBrnc53]

37 minutes ago, 3rivers said:

If Brady never got hurt in 2008, do we win in 2008? I doubt it because brady and BB owned Lebeau, just the facts. 

Does Brady make that much of a difference in their matchup in Foxboro that year? Pittsburgh's defense was on fire. The only loss they had that year that may have been different with a healthy Brady was @Indy. That puts NE at 12-4 and division champ, but they would have been the three-seed (Steelers were 12-4, and they win tie-breaker due to head to head win). After that, you would have had a three-way tie for the WC between Miami, Baltimore, and Indy (who is now 11-5 with the loss to NE).

Indy would have been the five-seed due to a better conference record (9-3 to 8-4 for Baltimore and Miami). For the six seed, I imagine that they settle that head to head since both teams had the same conference record. Baltimore beat the Dolphins that year, so they get the six-seed and go to NE, and Indy still goes to SD.

Even with Brady, the 2008 Pats weren't as good as the year before, and the Ravens are a bad matchup for them. So, I am picking the upset. Ravens win behind the efforts of a strong running game. The rest of the playoffs plays out as it did in reality.

[BayRaider]

Atlanta was not making the Super Bowl that year. Green Bay vs Philly was the real NFC Champiomship. Falcons/Bears were probably the weakest top two seeds ive ever seen til this day. I remember telling all Green Bay vs Philly winner is going to the SB 100%. 

I'm glad Green Bay won but Philly vs Pittsburgh would of also been a fantastic Super Bowl. 

[BleedTheClock]

15 hours ago, Nabbs4u said:

What if Santonio doesn't "toe tap", would the Steelers only have 5? Wouldn't this scenario then give them 6? There's a whole Gambit of what if's numerous teams could claim every season. Just saying.

Or the refs don't give Pittsburgh some calls against the Seahawks in the 2003ish Super Bowl?