|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Mar 12, 2019 12:19:45 GMT
All this arguing about which is more rare is just posturing by all involved parties. The difference to me is Harrison's play happened in the first half, and Arizona came back to take the lead in the second half. It was a great play in a back and forth game but it didn't decide anything. The Butler pick decided the game. Take off the fan glasses and you'll recognize this as fact. That's true, but is that the criteria? The more impressive play (even though to me it's more about missed tackles by the offense) is the Harrison play. I also could point a handful of Troy Polamalu interceptions that are much more impressive, objectively, but how much does the game situation factor in? Is it the overwhelming factor? If that counts more than anything else then the Butler is the one. If it's objectively the play itself then it's not. Fair point. To me, as a competition that has winners and losers, I'd give the edge to the play that decided the championship game-- especially if the player legitimately took initiative as opposed to one of those bonehead picks where the QB throws it right to the defender.
|
|
|
Post by masterofallgoons on Mar 12, 2019 12:39:27 GMT
That's true, but is that the criteria? The more impressive play (even though to me it's more about missed tackles by the offense) is the Harrison play. I also could point a handful of Troy Polamalu interceptions that are much more impressive, objectively, but how much does the game situation factor in? Is it the overwhelming factor? If that counts more than anything else then the Butler is the one. If it's objectively the play itself then it's not. Fair point. To me, as a competition that has winners and losers, I'd give the edge to the play that decided the championship game-- especially if the player legitimately took initiative as opposed to one of those bonehead picks where the QB throws it right to the defender. For sure. I guess it's just how you weigh the different criteria against the others. There are some absolutely amazing plays you could find that didn't really amount to much in a fairly inconsequential game and those are likely not very well remembered. But it's fairly easy to compare these two since their situations are at least pretty similar, even if one is the last play of the half and the other the last of the game. But some plays, I guess, are so impressive they stand out anyway. Like the iconic and much celebrated Beckham one handed catch was in the first half of an otherwise fairly bland game that the Giants lost.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Mar 12, 2019 19:06:00 GMT
By my count, only 13 times have a team had the opportunity to defend their title in the SB. You're saying 6/13 teams lost? That's almost half, that's not rare. It was 4 teams had lost before the Seahawks-Pats game. So yeah, it was rare And it was zero INTs that have been returned 100 yards for a TD in the Super Bowl BEFORE and AFTER that Super Bowl. So Harrison's 100-yard INT return for a TD is a 1-of-a-kind play in Super Bowl history. Doesn't get any rarer than 1-of-a-kind.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Mar 12, 2019 19:06:43 GMT
All this arguing about which is more rare is just posturing by all involved parties. The difference to me is Harrison's play happened in the first half, and Arizona came back to take the lead in the second half. It was a great play in a back and forth game but it didn't decide anything. The Butler pick decided the game. Take off the fan glasses and you'll recognize this as fact. Harrison's 100-yard INT return for a TD also decided the game. It was a swing of 14 points in a game decided by just 4 points.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Mar 12, 2019 19:08:47 GMT
All this arguing about which is more rare is just posturing by all involved parties. The difference to me is Harrison's play happened in the first half, and Arizona came back to take the lead in the second half. It was a great play in a back and forth game but it didn't decide anything. The Butler pick decided the game. Take off the fan glasses and you'll recognize this as fact. Harrison's 100-yard INT return for a TD also decided the game. It was a swing of 14 points in a game decided by just 4 points. Arizona took the lead in the second half, so that play couldn't have decided the game. Seattle never got the ball back after Butler's pick.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Mar 12, 2019 19:11:41 GMT
Harrison's 100-yard INT return for a TD also decided the game. It was a swing of 14 points in a game decided by just 4 points. Arizona took the lead in the second half, so that play couldn't have decided the game. Yes, that play did decide the game. Without Harrison's 100-yard INT return for a TD, take away 7 points from the Steelers and give the Cardinals 3 or 7 more points. Then the Cardinals win the Super Bowl by 6 to 10 points.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Mar 12, 2019 19:15:16 GMT
Arizona took the lead in the second half, so that play couldn't have decided the game. Yes, that play did decide the game. Without Harrison's 100-yard INT return for a TD, take away 7 points from the Steelers and give the Cardinals 3 or 7 more points. Then the Cardinals win the Super Bowl by 6 to 10 points. By that logic, every TD play by the Steelers also decided the game because without any of those TDs, they lose the game. They only won by 4.
|
|
|
Post by lordarvidthexiii on Mar 12, 2019 20:18:02 GMT
It was 4 teams had lost before the Seahawks-Pats game. So yeah, it was rare And it was zero INTs that have been returned 100 yards for a TD in the Super Bowl BEFORE and AFTER that Super Bowl. So Harrison's 100-yard INT return for a TD is a 1-of-a-kind play in Super Bowl history. Doesn't get any rarer than 1-of-a-kind. But it wasn't the score or stopped score that changed the game.
|
|
|
Post by damngumby on Mar 12, 2019 22:38:45 GMT
Yes, that play did decide the game. Without Harrison's 100-yard INT return for a TD, take away 7 points from the Steelers and give the Cardinals 3 or 7 more points. Then the Cardinals win the Super Bowl by 6 to 10 points. By that logic, every TD play by the Steelers also decided the game because without any of those TDs, they lose the game. They only won by 4. Christ, did Always Wrong get owned again? At this rate we're going to have to set up some sort of joint custody arrangement with the MCU board.
|
|