In the recent topic about the 2005 Steelers, it was questioned a few times how many controversial advantages the 2001 and 2003 Patriots received, after it was brought up that the 2005 Steelers had perhaps a controversial advantage. Bostonfred said he'd only discuss it in a separate topic, so I decided that this would be interesting enough to indeed discuss.
Anyway, a very strong case can be made that the 2001 Patriots were outright handed the Lombardi trophy via an NFL conspiracy. Everybody nows about the infamous Tuck Rule....a ruling only equaled in how terrible it was by Polamalu's INT reversal against the Colts in 2005. Even if Brady did "tuck" the ball, and the ref decided to use this call for perhaps the first time in decades, it's obvious that Brady had possession of the ball. He did NOT want to drop it, and Woodson's hit forced it out. That's a fumble, it has to be.
And in the 2001 SuperBowl (Pats vs Rams) the Patriots also may have gotten unfair advantages through terrible officiating. If you look on the internet you'll find many examples of blatant Patriots personal fouls (including one of the worst face-mask pulling I've ever seen) that weren't called.
Also, while I don't nescessarily believe it goes this deep, many have said that the NFL wanted the Patriots to win it all after 9/11....and it does seem a tad suspicious that it worked out that way.
As for the 2003 Patriots, it's all about the AFCCG versus the Colts. This time the NFL even later admitted that they made several errors, and there should have been around 5 or so pass interferences called, but they weren't, likely because the game was at Foxboro. The Colts probably should have won that game...
Discuss.
Anyway, a very strong case can be made that the 2001 Patriots were outright handed the Lombardi trophy via an NFL conspiracy. Everybody nows about the infamous Tuck Rule....a ruling only equaled in how terrible it was by Polamalu's INT reversal against the Colts in 2005. Even if Brady did "tuck" the ball, and the ref decided to use this call for perhaps the first time in decades, it's obvious that Brady had possession of the ball. He did NOT want to drop it, and Woodson's hit forced it out. That's a fumble, it has to be.
And in the 2001 SuperBowl (Pats vs Rams) the Patriots also may have gotten unfair advantages through terrible officiating. If you look on the internet you'll find many examples of blatant Patriots personal fouls (including one of the worst face-mask pulling I've ever seen) that weren't called.
Also, while I don't nescessarily believe it goes this deep, many have said that the NFL wanted the Patriots to win it all after 9/11....and it does seem a tad suspicious that it worked out that way.
As for the 2003 Patriots, it's all about the AFCCG versus the Colts. This time the NFL even later admitted that they made several errors, and there should have been around 5 or so pass interferences called, but they weren't, likely because the game was at Foxboro. The Colts probably should have won that game...
Discuss.