Popdose - Latest Comments in The Three Strike Rule: Super Bowl XLIII

Re: The Three Strike Rule: Super Bowl XLIII

Arend_Anton — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 22:45:10 -0000

I thought The Office was really good, actually. That might have been because I expected it to be a terrible episode since last year's hour long episodes were god-awful. I laughed all the way through.

Re: The Three Strike Rule: Super Bowl XLIII

Malchus — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 22:35:53 -0000

I don't think so. I thought the episode improved by the end of the hour and I didn't mind the Jack Black/Cloris Leachman bit. I felt that the way they used "bog stars" was much more organic compared to the way they did it on "Friends" all those years ago.

Re: The Three Strike Rule: Super Bowl XLIII

Eric S. — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 18:23:07 -0000

I was disappointed with "The Office" last night. They had a huge national audience and an hour to work with, but I doubt they hooked any new fans. The entire Jack Black/Cloris Leachman movie subplot was horrible. If you need to pad out an hour, at least feature more Jessica Alba (who was promoted heavily and then almost nonexistent in the actual show). There were some classic moments, but you really needed to know the characters to appreciate many of them. NBC dropped the ball on this one, and I hope it isn't us "Office" fans that end up paying the price.

Re: The Three Strike Rule: Super Bowl XLIII

Malchus — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 17:42:59 -0000

Wow, I'm a little disappointed to learn Hill and Hudson both lip synced their performances.

http://www.google.com/hoste...

Re: The Three Strike Rule: Super Bowl XLIII

mojo — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 15:12:08 -0000

if someone would have just tackled #92 before the half, the good guys would have won...I mean, three 1,000 yard receivers and not one could get into position to tackle him? Brutal

Re: The Three Strike Rule: Super Bowl XLIII

Zack — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 14:40:47 -0000

There were more penalties that I'd like to have seen, but they seemed to balance out evenly, so it wasn't that big of a deal. The only truly criminal action by the officials was their failure to review the game-ending "fumble" by Warner - his arm was moving forward, his hand was on the ball the entire time, and the thing SPIRALS when it leaves his hand. A shame to let the game end on a missed call (and don't think for a second that I believe the outcome would have changed, just that the Cardinals deserved a shot) without at least taking a closer look at it.

Re: The Three Strike Rule: Super Bowl XLIII

Malchus — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 13:46:18 -0000

I think Harrison made it across, definitely. But there were some suspect calls. The Cards got called for roughing the passer when the defender clearly couldn't stop himself. Then, later in the game, Warner got slammed after he threw a pass (basically the same play the Cards were penalized for) and there was no flag.

I feel your pain about Michaels' comments, but he's being paid to create drama.

Re: The Three Strike Rule: Super Bowl XLIII

Malchus — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 12:50:46 -0000

Tells you how memorable Petty's performance was. My bad.

Re: The Three Strike Rule: Super Bowl XLIII

Arend_Anton — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 11:28:16 -0000

Sorry, but the Boss sounded horrible! It sounded like he had laryngitis.

Re: The Three Strike Rule: Super Bowl XLIII

Jamie Lyon — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 10:13:30 -0000

As a die-hard Seahawks fan it was rather painful to hear Al Michaels' numerous references to Mike Holmgren and the officiating in the Steelers previous Superbowl appearance. The Steelers certainly did play a much better game last night and didn't need nearly so much help from the refs this time, although one is left to wonder if Harrison really crossed the goal line or if the refs felt, like John Madden, that much effort deserves a touchdown.

Re: The Three Strike Rule: Super Bowl XLIII

Chris Holmes — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 09:48:04 -0000

Tom Petty did the halftime show last year, not Prince.