You’ve got a lot of heat on this one.

You are inferring a conclusion based on what I said. I’ve said nothing like that. I think we can all agree, as would Mike Pereira, that spotting the ball is an inexact science, at best.

It is worth noting that in the case of the Eagles, where we agree that McNabb made enough progress to be awarded a first down, he was not receiving the ball and did not have to establish possession. I believe the officials ruled incorrectly in his instance.

As I said with Faulk, he needed to establish possession of the ball first — and then his forward progress was marked from where he possessed the ball — not from where he first touched the ball. I thought it was clear Faulk didn’t make it. Dude shoulda punted — then we could talk about the Eagles.

You tryin’ to label me with the Lumpen Buggetariat?

If Faulk had caught the ball cleanly, it would have been a first down. He bobbled the ball and therefore, was not granted “forward progress” to where he first makes contact with the ball i.e., where he ATTEMPTED the catch. The ball was spotted where he possessed the ball. That was the distinction.

At least he had the balls then and now.

but pressure can do things to the decisive process!

after so many years maybe that was a telling moment for the coach…when the pressure finally told on him and resulted in a decison that did not take in all the options at the moment and resulted as we saw.

but the Pats seemed to have made the first down. I thouht the ball was marked where it was because that is where the first leg of the receiver came down.

the receiver caught the pass over the first down marker, but driven back by the safety, in the air, his legs came down behind that marker…seemingly, exactly where the ball was marked. no first down!

I guess there is some rule….written or unwritten about forward momentum.

if there is and it is where the receiver caught the ball, in the air, then it is a first down.

if it is where his feet come down then no first down on sunday night for the Pats

the media on the other hand is the opposite and likes opposite, ‘newsy’ people

I would leave caldwell his quiet space and let him do his competent thing up in there.

media adulation clearly is not something caldwell feeds-off, finds essential to do an effective job

Definitely his personality to make that call. Like I said, he did the same thing in the 2007 Super Bowl and they lost that game too.

All I’m saying is you know they’re not winning the SB because he made the call — not the other way around. No coach on any Super Bowl team has needed to go to that extreme to win a game — except maybe Dick Vermeil with the Rams during their first run.

Smoke and Mirrors — playing on memories…and don’t get me to talking about Brady’s inability to connect with Moss in playoff games.

It’s BB’s personality to make a call like that. That’s all I’m saying. It really shouldn’t have been a shock. As you say, it went to Faulk.

That was a crazy call for any other team but not one expected to perform in the clutch.

As far as the defense, I don’t think anyone should speak for them until they tell it. They might have relished the challenge. I fight to the end. Most football players…especially defenders are of that mindset.

Hence the message. Maybe BB was trying to bring something out of them. This wasn’t just a football call. That’s what should be obvious.

If they don’t win the Super Bowl, it’s not going to be because of this call.

I want coaches to do this. I want to see coaches go for two instead of the tie. Pressure is life and death. Pressure is not football no matter how much money is at stake. As far as the bookies…please. They’ll be aight.

The issue isn’t whether or not they made it. He called a play to a guy who has GREAT hands and is SO SO CLUTCH. Kevin Faulk is one of the best 3rd down backs I’ve ever seen. Brady had a great game. All of that is beside the point.

If they make it, it’s still a stupid ass call with great execution. Today, it’s a stupid ass call with mediocre execution. Faulk did catch the ball. Brady made the throw. It just wasn’t a clean catch or a first down. If Faulk doesn’t bobble the rock, the Patriots win the game.

If you play Russian Roulette and live to tell about it, you’re not going to asked to judge anything more meaningful than an American Idol episode. You’re not wise. You’re not a genius. You’re not much of anything other than a dude who could care less about the consequences. And that sucks for people who do — like your defense, and the bookies, and your bandwagon fans who all became fans in 2001. The decision speaks volumes to the quality of play of the 2009 New England Patriot defense. They suck. They’re not a post-season threat like they have been and they’re not better than the Colts, Bengals or Steelers. If they were, BB would have punted.

This is Desperation 101. I wonder if he’s going to retire soon. Unless they get another Terrell Davis/Corey Dillon type Power Savior (hello Larry Johnson), they can pack it up.

By way of comparison, the Steelers beat the Colts in the 2005 playoffs in almost exactly the same situation. They forced Manning to work the length of the field and he moved the ball. The Colts got into scoring position, but couldn’t punch it in. Manning tried twice to beat rookie Bryant McFadden over the top to Reggie Wayne. B-Mac wasn’t havin’ it and the Colts kept their asses at home that year.

If NE was at their 38 — maybe. At their own 45 — fine. At midfield — cool. At their own 28, that was straight up crazy.

Penny for his thoughts last night: Richard Seymour!

A Pats team in the playoffs is just as much of a threat as any team in the history of the league. Yes, defensively this is a different era for the franchise, but if the playoffs began today I’m rocking with them and the Steelers as the standard. Everyone else is suspect in THIS league.