Talk:National Football League lore

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article was nominated for deletion on September 21, 2006. The result of the discussion was keep.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the National Football League lore article. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

This article is a former featured list candidate. Please view its sub-page to see why the nomination failed. Once the objections have been addressed you may resubmit the article for featured list status.

	This article is part of WikiProject National Football League, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the NFL on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.

Contents 1 Wrong Way Jim 2 Games without common nicknames 3 An "Other" Category 4 The Indoor Game 5 The Tackle II?? 6 Thanksgiving day OT coin flip debacle 7 Green Bay-Oakland 8 Feb. 2002 Super Bowl 9 October 6, 2003 10 February 2004 Superbowl 11 January 15, 2006 Steelers Colts game 12 Honorable Mentions 12.1 Can we fix it? 13 The Maddox Comeback 14 2000s 15 Nate Vasher 16 THE CARDINALS HAVE KNOCKED THE VIKINGS OUT OF THE PLAYOFFS 17 The comeback II? 18 Bears-Cards '06 19 The 100 Yard Interception 20 Do we need an addition rule 21 Correction of The Immaculate Reception 22 Adam Vinatieri rule?? 23 November 5, 2006 - Miami Dolphins at Chicago Bears 24 Past or present tense? 25 The Kick? 26 Flawed structure of the article? 27 Chad Johnson rule restoration 28 1998 NFC Championship 29 The Emerald City Miracle? 30 Immaculate Redemption 31 Games requiring nicknames 32 I think this article needs to be completely reorganized 33 removed copyright violation images

[edit] Wrong Way Jim

• October 25, 1964, Minnesota Vikings vs. San Francisco 49ers

  Vikings defensive end Jim Marshall picks up a fumble but accidentally runs 62 yards the wrong way, scoring a safety for the 49ers before he realizes his mistake. Fortunately for Marshall, the Vikings prevailed, 27-22.

---

Any other instance similar to that above? KyuuA4 17:23, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Games without common nicknames

OK, moved this entire section into discussion. That way, we can just go down the list and see which ones are worthy of the Lore. Mmmm Lore. KyuuA4 20:21, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Even though the following games and plays have no common nickname among dedicated NFL fans, they are still considered to be part of NFL lore.

• December 18, 1932, Portsmouth Spartans vs. Chicago Bears, 1932 NFL Playoff Game

  Due to severe blizzards and sub-zero wind chill, the first ever NFL playoff game was moved indoors to Chicago Stadium. Because of the size of the arena, several rules were adopted for the game, including an 80-yard long field. The Bears defeated the Spartans 9-0.

• December 8, 1940, Chicago Bears vs. Washington Redskins, NFL Championship Game

  Sparked by a comment made by Redskins owner George Preston Marshall, who had said three weeks earlier that the Bears were crybabies and quitters when the going got tough, Chicago crushes Washington, 73-0. This game currently stands as the most onesided victory in NFL history.

• December 16, 1945, Washington Redskins vs. Cleveland Rams, NFL Championship Game

  The Rams scored a safety when Redskins quarterback Sammy Baugh, throwing the ball from his own end zone, hit the goal posts (which were on the goal line between 1927 and 1973). The two points was the margin of victory as the Rams won 15-14. After the game, the rules were changed so that when a forward pass thrown from one's own end zone hits the goal posts, it is instead ruled incomplete.

• October 25, 1964, Minnesota Vikings vs. San Francisco 49ers

  Vikings defensive end Jim Marshall picks up a fumble but accidentally runs 62 yards the wrong way, scoring a safety for the 49ers before he realizes his mistake. Fortunately for Marshall, the Vikings prevailed, 27-22.

• November 27, 1966, New York Giants vs. Washington Redskins

  Ten NFL records were set or tied during the Redskins's 72-41 win, including the total number of combined points by both teams (113), the highest winning score in a regular-season game (72), and the total number of touchdowns (16). Redskins kicker Charlie Gogolak, who kicked the only field goal of the game with 7 seconds remaining, kicked nine extra points. His brother, Giants kicker Pete Gogolak made five. Although the Gogolak brothers each missed one extra point attempt, they tied the record for a combined total 14 PATs. Redskins receiver Charlie Taylor caught 6 passes for 124 yards and 2 touchdowns. Washington defensive back Brig Owens scored 2 touchdowns on a 62-yard interception return and a 62-yard fumble return. Because NFL stadiums did not have nets behind the goal posts at the time, a total of 14 footballs ended up in the stands, 13 on extra point kicks and 1 when Owens threw the ball into the crowd to celebrate his fumble return touchdown.^[1]

• November 8, 1970, Detroit Lions vs. New Orleans Saints

  Tom Dempsey, who was born without a right hand and no toes on his right foot, sets an NFL record for the longest field goal when he scores from 63 yards away as time expires in the game to help the Saints beat the Lions, 19-17. (This record stood unmatched until 1998, when Jason Elam of the Broncos tied the record vs. the Jaguars.)

• December 25, 1971, Miami Dolphins vs. Kansas City Chiefs, AFC Divisional Playoff Game

  The Dolphins and Chiefs play the longest game in NFL history. Just after 82 minutes, the Dolphins defeated the Chiefs 27-24 despite a playoff-record 350 total yards amassed by KC running back Ed Podolak. The longest previous game (in 1962) had involved the Chiefs under their previous team name, the Texans, and the Houston Oilers at 77 minutes and 54 seconds.

In my opinion, this is a game without a nickname that deserves to be part of the lore because it is the longest game in NFL history. It isn't just a long game, or one of the longest games, or the second longest game. It is the single longest game ever. --Kainaw ^(talk) 20:47, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Scroll up - to the Bears-Washington NFL Championship game - as the Bears beat Washington 73-0. Records alone do not necessarily constitute lore. At least, it shouldn't. If anything, I brought that record here: NFL records (team). KyuuA4 22:00, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

*January 14, 1973, Miami Dolphins vs. Washington Redskins, Super Bowl VII

• The Dolphins' 1972 perfect season could have been ruined during this play. Leading 14-0 late in the game, Miami kicker Garo Yepremian attempted a 42-yard field goal. The kick was blocked and instead of falling on the ball, Yepremian picked it up and made a feeble attempt to throw a pass. Unfortunately for the Dolphins, he ended up batting the ball into the air and into the hands of Redskins cornerback Mike Bass, who then ran it in for a touchdown to cut the lead by a touchdown. The Dolphins were able to hold off the Redskins in the last two minutes of play to earn a Super Bowl victory.

While this specific game isn't necessarily lore, the perfect season definately is. We should avoid repeating the often stated but completely false statement that the members of the 1972 Dolphins open a bottle of champagne each season once all teams have had at least one loss. There are 3-4 members that do it for the press coverage, but most of the team does not. --Kainaw ^(talk) 20:47, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Agree. The 1972 Dolphins are already mentioned for having the Perfect Season. KyuuA4 22:00, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

• January 21, 1979, Pittsburgh Steelers vs. Dallas Cowboys, Super Bowl XIII

  This high scoring game featured two of the league's elite teams of the 1970s. The game is best remembered for two moments: Late in the third quarter, Cowboys quarterback Roger Staubach threw to a wide open tight end Jackie Smith in the end zone, but Smith dropped the ball and Dallas had to settle for a field goal. Then a controversial pass interference penalty called on Cowboys cornerback Benny Barnes early in the fourth quarter paved the way for the Steelers to score 14 unanswered points to win 35-31. It was because of that interference penalty that the league now has the incidental contact rule.

• January 3, 1983, Dallas Cowboys vs. Minnesota Vikings

  Cowboys Running Back Tony Dorsett sets an NFL record for the longest run from scrimmage with a 99-yard touchdown. The Cowboys had only 10 men on the field during that play.

• December 2, 1985, Chicago Bears vs. Miami Dolphins

  The Bears entered the game undefeated with a 12-0 regular season record. On the other hand, the Dolphins wanted their 1972 team to remain the only NFL team to ever have a perfect season. Thus, in the most watched Monday Night Football game in history, Miami defeated Chicago 38-24, in what was the Bears' only loss during the season.

• September 21, 1986, Miami Dolphins vs. New York Jets

  In this shootout, which the Jets finally won 51-45 in overtime, both teams set an NFL record for the most net yards passing accumulated by both teams (884).

• January 22, 1989, Cincinnati Bengals vs. San Francisco 49ers, Super Bowl XXIII

  Quarterback Joe Montana leads the 49ers on a 92-yard drive to score the game winning touchdown with 34 seconds left to defeat the Bengals 20-16.

• January 31, 1993, Buffalo Bills vs. Dallas Cowboys, Super Bowl XXVII

  With the Cowboys holding an insurmountable 52-17 lead late in the fourth quarter, Dallas defensive lineman Leon Lett picked up a Bills fumble and appeared to be headed for a 64-yard touchdown. As Lett started to showboat just before crossing the goal line, Buffalo receiver Don Beebe raced in and knocked the ball into the end zone. The ball then rolled out of bounds for a touchback. Had Lett scored, the Cowboys would have broken the record for most points scored in a Super Bowl.

• November 25, 1993, Miami Dolphins vs. Dallas Cowboys, Thanksgiving Day

  Unlike Super Bowl XXVII, Dallas defensive lineman Leon Lett's blunder cost his team the game. On a rare snow-covered field in Texas Stadium, Dolphins kicker Pete Stoyanovich attempted a 41-yard game winning field goal with a few seconds left to play. But the ball was tipped and spun forward toward the Cowboys' end zone. Players from both teams stayed away from the ball, because a blocked field goal is usually ignored according to the rule book. But Lett tried to jump on the ball, and instead slid on the slick field, grazing the ball, and thus making it a live ball (i.e. a fumble). Jeff Dellenbach of the Dolphins recovered the ball at the 2-yard line, and Stoyanovich then kicked a 20-yard field goal as time expired, and Miami won 16-14.

• October 17, 1994, Kansas City Chiefs vs. Denver Broncos

  This Monday Night shootout was a duel between two future Hall of Fame quarterbacks, Joe Montana and John Elway. With 1:29 left to play in the game, Elway scored on a 4-yard touchdown run to put the Broncos ahead 28-24. But then Montana led the Chiefs on a 75-yard drive to score the game-winning touchdown with just 8 seconds to play. The final score was Chiefs 31, Broncos 28.

• January 4, 1997, Jacksonville Jaguars vs. Denver Broncos. AFC Divisional Game

  The second year Jaguars upset the 13-3 Broncos (who were the AFC's #1 seed), 30-27. The Broncos jumped to an early 12-0 lead in the first quarter, but the Jaguars would come back to take the lead at the half, 13-12. With Jacksonville leading 23-12 at the start of the fourth quarter, Terrell Davis scored a 2-yard touchdown run, and a successful two-point conversion. But Jaguars quarterback Mark Brunell threw a 16-yard touchdown pass to wide receiver Jimmy Smith with under 4 minutes left in the game, making the score 30-20. Even though the Broncos scored a touchdown with 1:50 remaining, not even Broncos quarterback John Elway (famous for his fourth quarter comebacks) could prevent the Jaguars from holding on and pulling off the upset.

• November 6, 2000, Green Bay Packers vs. Minnesota Vikings

  Antonio Freeman made what ESPN in 2005 labeled as the greatest play in the history of Monday Night Football. In overtime, in the rain, Brett Favre hit Freeman for a 43-yard touchdown that everyone thought was incomplete at first. Freeman and cornerback Cris Dishman had gotten tangled as each tried to come down with the ball, and in the process Freeman wound up facing the ground with the ball bouncing off his back. Freeman managed to turn over and catch the ball before it hit the ground, as Dishman continued away from the play thinking the play was dead. Since Freeman was not down by contact, he quickly and alertly got up and waltzed into the end zone for the winning score in overtime. The touchdown prompted ABC play-by-play announcer Al Michaels to famously say, "He did what?" Antonio Freeman later recieved an ESPY for the play.

• December 15, 2002, Minnesota Vikings vs. New Orleans Saints.

  Trailing 31-24, quarterback Daunte Culpepper hit wide receiver Randy Moss for a 13-yard touchdown with five seconds remaining. Instead of kicking an extra point to tie the game and force overtime, coach Mike Tice elected to try a two point conversion to win the game. Culpepper, after fumbling and recovering the snap, ran in for the score, and the Vikings became the first NFL team to win a game in that fashion since the two point conversion was adopted in 1994. A similar event happened in a 2005 game between the Washington Redskins and Tampa Bay Buccaneers. Fullback Mike Alstott scored on a game winning two-point conversion after an extra point attempt was blocked, but there was a penalty on the play.

• January 5, 2003, New York Giants vs. San Francisco 49ers, NFC Wild Card Game

  Down 38-14 in the third quarter, the 49ers scored 25 unanswered points to beat the Giants. However, New York did have a chance to win on the final play of the game with a field goal attempt. But a botched snap resulted into a feeble pass play that fell incomplete. The Giants were also called for having an illegal man downfield on the play, and the game ended. The following day, it was revealed that the penalized player had in fact checked in as an eligible receiver before the field goal attempt, and thus the 49ers should have been called for pass interference, which would have given the Giants another chance to attempt a field goal.

• October 6, 2003, Indianapolis Colts vs. Tampa Bay Buccaneers, Monday Night Football

  Down 35-14 with 3:43 remaining, a Tampa Bay kickoff was returned 90 yards, setting up an Indianapolis score. The Colts recovered the onside kick and scored to narrow the margin to seven. They forced a Tampa Bay punt and with under two minutes remaining Manning led an 87-yard scoring drive, and the Colts scored the game-tying touchdown with 35 seconds left. In overtime, kicker Mike Vanderjagt missed a 40-yard field goal, but Simeon Rice was called for a leaping penalty, a rarely seen infraction that penalizes a player for running and jumping to block a kick and landing on other players. Vanderjagt's subsequent kick was batted and hit the upright, but fell in good, winning the game for the Colts. Vanderjagt went on to become the first kicker in NFL history not to miss a kick attempt in a complete season, including the playoffs.

• December 22, 2003, Green Bay Packers vs. Oakland Raiders, Monday Night Football

  The day before, Irvin Favre, father of Green Bay quarterback Brett Favre, died suddenly of a heart attack. Favre elected to play and passed for four touchdowns in the first half, and 399 yards in a 41-7 defeat of the Raiders. Afterwards, Favre said, "I knew that my dad would have wanted me to play. I love him so much and I love this game. It's meant a great deal to me, to my dad, to my family, and I didn't expect this kind of performance. But I know he was watching tonight."^[2]

• January 11, 2004, Indianapolis Colts vs. Kansas City Chiefs, AFC Divisional Playoff Game

  While the Chiefs and Colts' high powered offenses were storming all over the field, punters Hunter Smith and Jason Baker took the day off and spent the entire game on the sidelines. Colts quarterback Peyton Manning threw for 304 yards and 3 touchdowns with no interceptions to lead his team to a 38-31 victory in the first puntless game in NFL postseason history. Indianapolis halfback Edgerrin James rushed for 125 yards and 2 scores. For the Chiefs, receiver Dante Hall caught a pass for a touchdown and returned a kickoff for another, while running back Priest Holmes contributred 208 combined rushing and receiving yards along with 2 touchdowns. Kansas City defensive coordinator Greg Robinson resigned one week after the game.

• November 28, 2004, Cincinnati Bengals vs. Cleveland Browns

  In a high scoring shootout between 2 Ohio teams, the Bengals defeated the Browns 58-48 in the second highest scoring game in NFL history and the highest scoring game since the 1970 AFL-NFL Merger. Although Browns quarterback Kelly Holcomb threw for 413 yards and 5 touchdowns and Cleveland's defense intercepted Bengals quarterback Carson Palmer 3 times, it wasn't enough to win. Bengals Running Back Rudi Johnson rushed for 202 yards and 2 touchdowns, while receiver Chad Johnson caught 7 passes for 117 yards and a score.^[3]

• January 15, 2006, Pittsburgh Steelers vs. Indianapolis Colts, AFC Divisional Playoff Game

  With the Steelers leading 21-18, the top-seeded Colts failed to convert on a fourth down, at their own 2-yard line, with 1:20 remaining in the game. The Steelers gave the ball to Jerome Bettis, who was hit by Colts linebacker Gary Brackett and fumbled the ball. Cornerback Nick Harper scooped up the ball and ran downfield, apparently headed for the go-ahead touchdown, but Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger managed to get one arm around Harper's ankle, slowing him enough for other Steelers to catch up and bring him down. The Colts still moved into field goal range, but Mike Vanderjagt, the most accurate kicker in NFL history,^{[citation needed]} missed a 46-yard field goal. Pittsburgh went on to win Super Bowl XL, whereas the Colts released Vanderjagt shortly after the end of the season.

[edit] An "Other" Category

How about other pieces of NFL Lore - such as the Steel Curtain or the Super Bowl Shuffle? Mentioning either one of those two, they are quickly associated to the 1970's Steelers and 1985 Bears. KyuuA4 03:36, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

That is what this article initially was meant to be: a list of common nicknames used in the NFL and what they mean. I initially made a short list of games/events with common nicknames that are used often, such as "The Catch". Then, everyone else looked at it and decided to list practically every game every played in the last 5 years. In my opinion, this is not "A Long List of Cool NFL Games". It is "Lore" - the common knowledge that has defined the NFL into what it is today. --Kainaw ^(talk) 09:08, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, I wasn't even referring to names. I was referring to nicknames to individual teams that has lasted over the years. If I say, the NFL reference Purple People Eaters, who do you think of? KyuuA4 19:58, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, games listed in the last 5 years do not qualify as Lore, unless they are still remembered for that long. Therefore, some listed under "Honorable Mention" are still rather questionable. sKyuuA4 19:58, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

So far, the only items listed are games - or events within games. Lore is a much broader term than that. KyuuA4 20:01, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Indoor Game

• December 18, 1932, Portsmouth Spartans vs. Chicago Bears, 1932 NFL Playoff Game

  Due to severe blizzards and sub-zero wind chill, the first ever NFL playoff game was moved indoors to Chicago Stadium. Because of the size of the arena, several rules were adopted for the game, including an 80-yard long field. The Bears defeated the Spartans 9-0.

Significant because: (A) first ever playoff game (B) extra-ordinary conditions forcing the game to be moved indoors (C) the relocation indoors forced immediate and temporary rule modifications such as the shorter field.

Are there any other instances of such? KyuuA4 16:58, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Tackle II??

Even though the following games and plays have no common nickname among dedicated NFL fans, they are still considered by many of them to be part of NFL lore.

The "Tackle II" belongs in the honorable mention section. It does not have a common name that is widely regarded. It is lore, but it does not have a common nickname. I've never heard any sports reporters or any football fan refer to it as the "Tackle II". Well, if I were to say to a NFL fan, "Remember the Tackle II? That was a crazy play!" they'd never understand what play I was talking about. Not that it wasn't a play that won't be remembered, I just think some guy tacked a II on the end in order to make the list. At least wait till a nickname forms (if one ever does) for the play. I don't even think a tackle is the best way to remember the play. It should be the Fumble II if anything else. Any oppositions to move it to honorable mentions? --Aviper2k7 06:23, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

-First, it seems kind of arbitrary to rate NFL lore moments based on whether they have a nickname or not. Even with that rule, "The Immaculate Redemption" (and Tackle II to a lesser extent) have been pretty widely used by sports reporters and fans. Also note there are less "deserving" events on the list right now, and even moments with "II" attached, like Catch II.

In fact, I think we can add Vanderjagt's miss to this lore, as it was pretty reminiscant of Norwood's miss. I think it even has a nickbame, the "he missed it" moment, due to four people (two on each side) saying "he missed it"

So I would object to removing the Immaculate redemption from the NFL Lore section. Also I could add the "he missed it" moment to the honorable mentions, barring strong opposition to it. Akshayaj 20:24, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Are you by chance a Steelers fan? KyuuA4 04:46, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Yea, it seems this one isn't as significant as the ones generally considered "lore". KyuuA4 04:45, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

*Clears throat in an overly obnoxious way*

I would like to direct you to this website http://www.profootballhof.com/store/item.jsp?ITEM_ID=2241 which is from the NFL Hall of Fame. We can clearly see a photo of Ben Roethlisberger making the famous grab. When one clicks and views the enlarged photo, one can clearly see that the title of the photo is "The Tackle"... if there is a better source than Canton, I woudl like to see it. This is all not to mention the fact that simply searching "Ben Roethlisberger 'The Tackle'" brings up several hits.

Supersoulty

[edit] Thanksgiving day OT coin flip debacle

I don't feel qualified, but I think somebody should add the game from the '90s (Detroit vs. Pittsburgh (?)) where there was a dispute over whether heads or tails had been called, and the ref ended up looking pretty dumb, so now they have more than one ref standing there for coin flips. Remember this? Xoloz 12:35, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

The result of the debacle was not the extra ref. The result was that it is called and verified before the flip - not called in the air. This is a debacle itself. The 'call it in the air' routine is used to ensure the flipper does not try to influence the flip once he knows what was called. By calling it before the flip, a ref can technically train his flipping hand to ensure his favorite team wins the toss. Kainaw 13:46, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

At overtime, the do have an extra ref standing by (two actually), on the other of the vistor's declarant. Not only that, but they make teams designate which one of the captains will make the call specifically, by stepping forward, in addition to calling before the flip. All three of these things were the result. I also really don't think the refs would bother influencing the toss -- if they are feeling biased (and who knows if and when they might be), penalties are a much easier and more routine way to make life hard for teams. Xoloz 02:54, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

(That game took place on November 26th 1998, and yes, it was Steelers vs. Lions

Xoloz is closer to being right as to what happened in that game. See History of the Pittsburgh Steelers under the 1998 season. Even with that, I don't think this merits honorable mention. Akshayaj 20:52, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Green Bay-Oakland

I added the MNF Green Bay-Oakland game from a couple years ago. If people feel it doesn't count as a part of "NFL Lore" then you can take it off. Also, I think the Emmitt Smith game should be added, when he played with a separated shoulder. I don't remember the game well enough to add it, and I don't currently have the time to go look it up, though I might sometime in the near future if no one else does

It could go to Green Bay's sports lore. KyuuA4 17:09, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Feb. 2002 Super Bowl

I dont want to be the one to add this without someone else agreeing, because i have a trememdous bias towards the pats, but i feel that their first super bowl win definitely deserves a part in the unnamed section of the lore. They were HEAVILY underfavored (100:1 odds before the season started), they played the season with a third string quarterback, and they strung together an amazing drive to kick a winning field goal agaisnst "the greatest show on turf" with 7 seconds remaining (seee that bias?). Furthermore, it was the beginning of what some (myself included, ill point out in the effort of fairness...though what im hearing about how theyre doing is both upsetting me) include the NFLs newest dynasty. Any thoughts?jfg284 13:57, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Apparently not. Oh well, I adapted a brief summary of the game (from the Super Bowl XXXIV article) and it doesn't seem any more or less biased than any other description on the page (leaving out some of the "whole season" aspects (like a 3rd string qb, the beginning of season odds, the "new dynasty"...though the page does kind of lend itself to POV, in my opinion...it's a collection of "lore," so there's a good chance that a lot of it will be written in an admiring tone). If it's still biased despite my efforts, go ahead and clean it up. Thanks.jfg284 ^{you were saying?} 19:27, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] October 6, 2003

In my opinion this was one of the greatest comebacks ever...while I didn't think it should go in the NFL Lore section, I added it to the honorable mention...21 points in less than four minutes against the best defense in the NFL

That's still not better than the Bills over the Oilers in their comeback. KyuuA4 20:13, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] February 2004 Superbowl

Should this game, with its amazing fourth quarter be considered part of NFL lore? It was one of the beswt games I ever saw played. Also Pats winning after 9/11 has something lorish about it.

As 2004 was 3 years after September 11, 2001, it seems like you're reffering more to the Feb 2002 Super Bowl. If that's true, that game is already in the lore section. If you really are reffering to the 2004 Super Bowl, it was an exciting game, yes, but I wouldn't argue lorish...and the September 11/Patriots connection, which I always thought was a bit of a stretch anyway, is too far apart to be of interest, in my opinion.--jfg284 ^{you were saying?} 09:24, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

   I wrote about this and now agree that this was a good game, but not in NFL lore.

I vote it does not belong on this page for reasons stated above.Andrew zot 02:06, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] January 15, 2006 Steelers Colts game

I am not in favor of putting the January 15, 2006, Indianapolis Colts vs. Pittsburgh Steelers AFC Divisional Playoff Game here at this time. It only has been a day old and has not been extensively written about like all of the other NFL lore games. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 20:45, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Since the Pittsburgh Steelers won the Superbowl, this game and "The Tackle," have become much more signifigant, and should be added in as a game of NFL Lore.

• I'm inclined to agree, since they went on to win the SB. However, I'm not sure which angle was more important...was it the fumble and the redemption, or the tackle that saved the TD that is most important. 'Some' have called it the "imaculate redemption" and some have called it yet another "the tackle." I think time will tell on what the game is more remembered for, if it is. 64.32.241.35 15:00, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm inclined to agree to wait and see how the game is remembered instead of rushing and putting in on a few weeks later. however, i can also see an argument for putting it on now, so i wouldn't be that opposed to keeping it. what do others think?--jfg284 ^{you were saying?} 21:21, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

True. The fact that the Steelers did win the Super Bowl that year increases the value in that one particular play. KyuuA4 17:10, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Honorable Mentions

Should this category exist? It seems to depart from NPOV and makes this look more like a fan site.

I agree entirely with the sentiments expressed supra and believe they can rightly be expanded and applied to the article writ large. Surely there is a level of NFL knowledge one must attain in order to be culturally literate and to be conversant in professional football, but I believe such an enumeration as this falls squarely into several categories enumerated in WP:NOT, to-wit, "Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information", "Wikipedia is not a repository of [lists]", and "Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought... or research". Were this list taken, for example, from the recent Sports Illustrated comprehensive history of professional football or even from one of the many extant ESPN surveys on top plays in NFL regular season and playoff history, it would be appropriate for inclusion in Wikipedia, but, as it is, this section is insufficiently encyclopedic to merit continued inclusion. Joe 18:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, Wikipedia doesn't need to have an "honorable mentions" section; some of these, like the Dropkick, could go under world records. Normally, "notable" headers and articles are often POV-riddled. Deckiller 01:14, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Definitely- jesse_d_s- Jan 28th, 8:02 p.m. Central

• Almost everything under "Honorable Mention" seems more like "memorable moments" instead of "great games." Perhaps a new page/category that focuses on "memorable moments in the NFL" could house those. Doctorindy 15:03, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Wouldn't a simple renaming fix this? Why not just change it from "Honorable Mention" (which implies they are lore'ified games that just aren't on some list) to "Other Famous Plays" or "Other Close Games" or something NPOV like that? The 77th Academy Awards still has a split-off to the nominees, and I think one can pretty easily manage a list of close-to-lore games without POV. Staxringold 04:04, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

• The 1982 San Diego Chargers Miami Dolphins wild card game is well know enough to be part of the main article.

[edit] Can we fix it?

I really feel like the actual list is good enough to be a FL. Can someone work with me on fixing the honorable mentions section? Should they be deleted, split-off, or renamed and pruned? Staxringold 13:45, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

• The main problem with this article is that there is very little cited sources to verify that each and every single game listed is in fact part of the "collection of information that NFL fans retain and share". Zzyzx11 (Talk) 16:20, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Then maybe the lead just needs a rewrite? Things like the years in film pages are lists that simply make judgement calls as to what is notable enough to be mentioned (the example I linked to, eg, doesn't come close to listing every event in film in 2005). Would making it clear that this is a list of simply amazing games, either by conditions or comebacks or something, rather than a compilation of "beloved games" which is much harder to cite? Staxringold 16:26, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Maddox Comeback

I don't know about the rest of you, but I think that the 2002 AFC Wildcard Game between the Steelers and the Browns deserves some mention. The Steelers were down 24-7 in the 3rd quarter. Three Maddox touchdown passes (to Burress, Tuman and Ward) and a running touchdown from Chris Fuamatu-Ma'afala led the Steelers to a 36-33 win over the Browns. Scoring 29 points in the last 19 minutes of the game. It might not be the greatest playoff comeback in history, but it certainly ranks up there.

BTW ESPN.com dubbed this game "The Comeback"

[edit] 2000s

Question, is there a name for the 2000s decade, like the 70s, 80s, or 90s? -- myselfalso 06:18, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes you say it.It's called the 2000s

How 'bout the 00s? Or is that confusing with the 1900s? -- enjoymoreradio 14:49, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

In terms of "seventies" and "nineties" the term that is used is the "Naughts, "aughts" or the "oughts," sometimes with 'ies' added at the end. Sounds a bit better than thousands, but that's just POV.JohnnyRush10 05:30, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nate Vasher

Before I rudley intrude on the actual article, I think that Nathan Vasher's 108 yard Touch Down return deserves a blurb in this article under the "Honorable Mentions" section. Yes, The Chicago Bears were playing one of the worst teams in the league at the time, but an accomplishment is still an accomplishment. Vasher's play would go on to earn him the NFL's Special Teams player of the week award.

For those of you that do not remember this incident, here is an article [1], and video [2] relating to the play. --ShadowJester07 06:31, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

As much as I am also a Bears fan. That's not a big enough event. For Chicago, it's HUGE. But elsewhere, they don't care. KyuuA4 06:52, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Well then, let's do a blurb on each and every NFL record then. Seriously, it was a cool play, and I had to watch it three or four times when it happened, but I haven't seen it mentioned in about 8 months. Not a part of NFL lore, really

And then Devin Hester pulled another 108-yard play, and this time on National TV. KyuuA4 16:43, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] THE CARDINALS HAVE KNOCKED THE VIKINGS OUT OF THE PLAYOFFS

Josh McCown's tochdown pass as time expired in week 17 of the 2003 season, in Arizona, to knock the Vikings out of the playoffs deserves an honorable mention, perhaps for the commentary alone. Sorry I don't have a real link so this must do for reference: vikessuck.ytmnd.com Andrew zot 02:10, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

It's rather mundane. Moreover it seems more fanboyic than memorable. --ShadowJester07 02:22, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Haha, well I live in Cheeseland and I heard that play over and over again on the radio. A great moment, maybe a mention of it under the monday night football game where Brett Favre went nuts? Edit: I found the hilight on the cards website http://play.rbn.com/?url=nfl/nfl/open/2003/nflfilms/demand/s2003/nflcom/w17/vikings_cardinals_highlight_300k.rm&proto=rtsp --Aviper2k7 04:32, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Is anyone under this section a Packer fan? KyuuA4 07:06, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The comeback II?

The "comeback II"(Not for nothing, but I have never heard this game described with this name) in the article is described as one of the greatest comebacks in NFL history. It wasn't even the biggest comeback of the day. The 49ers came back against the Giants on the same day trailing 38-14 at one point(The steelers only trailed 24-7). The game is mentioned further down in the article, but it seems only fair that if a 24-7 comeback counts as a great moment in NFL lore, then a 38-14 comeback that took place on the SAME DAY should be counted as an even greater moment in NFL lore. Right?

I agree, a 17 point comeback in two quarters isn't that great of an achievement, expecially against the underdog Browns. If the Browns were the ones that came back, it'd be a different story. Sure it was a great comeback, but it doesn't deserve to be mentioned in NFL lore, as I myself and probably others barely remember it after only three years. The Steelers were 15-1 that year, and should've killed the Browns. The Steelers ended up losing the next game (against the Jets?) anyways. I'm taking it out.--aviper2k7 16:03, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

In response to this... first of all the Steelers were not heavily favored. You are confusing the 2002 season (10-5-1) with either the 2004 season (15-1) or the 2001 season (13-3). You should have been able to figure this out purely based on common sense, since no 15-1 team is EVER going to have to play a wildcard game. The Browns were 9-7 that year. Second, this game deserves mention because it was the Steelers vs the Browns which is one of the biggest rivalries in the history of the NFL, rivaled perhaps only by the Bears/Packers. True that the 49ers scored a similar feet that day, but it wasn't against a team with which they were legendary rivals, nor was it done in quite as dramaic a fashion (remember, it was all done in the last 17 minutes)... also, in the end, the deficit the Steelers defense had to overcome was acctually 26 points since the Browns went on to score 9 more points. Third... here is the article where ESPN.com refers to the game as "The Comeback" http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=230105023 and I have heard it refered to as such multiple other times, both in the aftermath of the game and on various DVD's and in books, such as The Complete History of the Pittsburgh Steelers. Most of these "common names" that we use have very little direct, non-circumstantial, or non-anecdotal evidence to back up their naming for instance "The Tackle II", even though many of us are aware of the references. Fourth, the Steelers acctually lost to the Titans that year, but that's not important, because there are other games on there in which the victor did not end up a champion.

Anyway, nice attempt at the challenge flag, luckly, someone else took the time to copy and paste the information I posted in this article in another article, and so I am letting the ruling on the field stand until someone more offical steps in.

BTW... if the "River City Relay" qualifies, then this certainly does. --~Supersoulty Previosuly Unsigned

Can anyone at least do me the courtesy of explaining why (since it has been removed again) this should not be included on this page? I gave an explanation that matched all the criteria that were asked for. Tell me, by chance are there any Browns fans on this site who object to this purely out of spite? --~Supersoulty

Well, there needs to be a consensus in order to add an event on here. One person can't just add it - if that was the case, everyone would add their own personal favorite votes. And for one thing, the ESPN "article", which isn't even an article I may add, never refers to the game as "The Combeback". It merely uses the word "comeback" as an ordinary noun and eventually an adjective. Another thing is the rivalry claim, ESPN ranked the Steelers v. Browns game to be #3, behind the Bears-Pack, and Cowboys-Skins - however those are all very subjective. I've seen Vike fans claim the rivalry b/w the Pack/Vikings is much greater than the Bears/Packers. Finally, one must really value the significance of the event, and many others added on here; The Riv. City Rely earned recognition on some NFL commercial thing. Can you find an article/ legit. reference that shows the significance of the article? --ShadowJester07 00:33, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree that there is not a full consensus on this issue, but most of these would lack a full consensus. Anyway, the "Article" is an official recap of the game, which I would say is even better as submisable evidence. As for my claim to it being labeled "The Comeback", just look at the first paragraph:

"The Cleveland Browns never have gotten over The Drive by John Elway. Now they've got to live with The Comeback by the quarterback who was once supposed to be the next Elway."

It says "The Comeback" with capitals on both words, and it is put in the same context as "The Drive" which is mentioned on the sight as a well established name.

Your Minnesota comment holds no wieght for the simple fact that both Pittsburgh AND Cleveland fans generally accept oneanothers teams as their greatest rivals, as do the Bears and Packers, Redskins and Cowboys, etc. What Vikings fans think matters less because it IS purely subjective, since only they seem to see it that way.

Come on guys, I have deflected or outright speared any comments you have made... it should stay. -- ~Supersoulty

Refer to my final statement. Additionally, Don't expect other Wikipedians to instantly respond to your statements. I'm almost convinced they also have lives outside of Wikipedia. --ShadowJester07 02:54, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I will try to find another one... not easy since it happened 4 years ago, but I will try to find one. I know for a fact that it is refered to as "The Comeback" (caps are inflected and thus understood) in the Official History of the Steelers DVD. Anyway, I think the fact that the article is a recap of the game gives it even more official wieght, since it was done by a staff writter and not someone who has a clear agenda... as I said, it is also put into the same context as "The Drive" which is an accepted part of NFL Lore on the page.

Yes, I do realize that I should not expect an automatic response, and on most days, you wouldn't get one from me, but I am a college student who has nothing to do back at home in my sleepy one horse town over Thanksgiving Break, so....

PS I woudl like to add that there is a considerable difference between the two comebacks of that year that goes beyond the rivalrly. The Giants scored almost all their points in the first half and sat on their lead the rest of the game, falling to the common error of playing a prevent defense against a capable and hungry team. The Browns, on the other hand, scored only one fewer point in the second half than they did in the first.

PPS If the issue is honestly just with the naming though, I will put it in the memberable moments section, unless there is any significant objection. Or, I could just change the name to "The Maddox Comeback" or "Comeback Player of the Year" as those might be more easily recongnizable and are, in fact, used repeatedly to describe this game

-- ~Supersoulty

[edit] Bears-Cards '06

I think this game should be put in the article because of the fact that it was memorable on multiple layers.

1. A dominant Bears team comes into ARizona against a terrible team in the Cards. 2. Leinart's second start. 3. 6 turnovers and still a W for Chicago. 4. 20 points to win in 4th quarter... by defense and ST alone. 5. Denny Greens infamous blow up at the post game press conference. 6. Neil Rackers, an incredible future Hall-of-fame kicker, misses a 41 yarder.

If I'm missing anything, please add it.--Mjvan12 01:13, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

What you are missing is that this is the not the first time a team has lost a huge advantage (apparently, you haven't watched many Chokes - er, I mean Chiefs games). It is not the first time the defense has won the game for a poor offense. It is not the first time a coach has exploded after the game. It isn't the first time a kicker missed a kick that he should have made in a very important game. In my opinion, we should wait at least until next season to see if this game continues to hold any significance. --Kainaw ^(talk) 01:18, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

I can't believe this is even being discussed! This was one of the sloppiest games I've ever seen. It shouldn't be included, because a year from now, not many will remember it. If everyone does (bears win a superbowl) then it could be put in. If the bears did this against a team like the Colts or Broncos, then maybe, but it was a regular season game against a 1-4 team. The bears didn't really do much to "come back", it was more of a total colapse by the Cards.--aviper2k7 01:22, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, the significance of the game is subjective. While I'm sure most Chicagoans will claim this to be the greatest comeback since the "The Play", other NFL fans may view it as a combination of luck and exploitation of another team implosion. But, the very fact that offense did very little to contribute to win may actually make it somewhat notable. The Bears Defense/Special teams made the plays when they needed to. The last time the Bears came back from a >14 deficit was back in '87. While this victory may be worthy of an entry in Chicago Bear Lore, I don't think it deserves a spot in the NFL article - if anything at all, it should get a mention in the memorable moments section.

Interesting note, The game was watched in 10.8 million homes, the third-highest total in cable television history. [3] It was also the first time in history a team came back from such a large deficit without scoring an offensive TD. --ShadowJester07 02:37, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

• My two cents: Why are we discussing something that only just ended a little more than 24 hours ago? This has obviously not been extensively written about over a long period of time in the media and the history books like the other NFL lore games. This was the same problem a couple days after the January 15, 2006 Steelers Colts game. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 04:10, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • It's been a month and the only thing anybody remembers from this game was Denny Green's postgame press conference meltdown. This game is certianly not any part of the mainstream "lore." (My two cents) Doctorindy 22:20, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
    • For whatever it's worth, this game is still frequently talked about among Bears fans, and is refered to as either the "Miracle in the Desert" game or the "Escape from the Desert" game. We'll see which one sticks and if wider use happens (outside Bears fans, etc). IMHO, it has a couple of things going for it that might make it stick (reiterating a couple points already made above: 1. it was a prime-time game with a national audience and 2. the defense and special teams single-handedly won the game in an incredibly short period of time, just in time to "escape from the desert". Denny Green's "crown their asses" outburst is also legendary in Bear's circles for its hilarity.

Plus, it is overshadowed by Grossman's poor performance in that game - and in the weeks afterwards. KyuuA4 20:18, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The 100 Yard Interception

On October 29, 2006, a new interception return, was one of the greatest interception returns ever. With the Steelers trailing 13-6 over Oakland in the fourth quarter, quarterback Ben Roethlisberger hit Hines Ward for a 19-yard gain and then Dan Kreider for 11-yards. Parker then broke free for a 39-yard yard gain to the Raiders 10-yard line. Najeh Davenport got them to the seven-yard line with a three-yard gain. On third-and-seven, Roethlisberger threw into a crowd at the goal line and it was intercepted by Chris Carr and returned 100 yards for a touchdown, giving the Raiders a 20-6 lead. Pittsburgh lost to Oakland 20-13.

That would be worth mentioning if it was the longest (or even unique). There are other 100+ yard interception returns. As far as I know, the longest is a 106 yard return by Ed Reed in 2004. Vencie Glenn and Louis Oliver have also exceeded 100 yard interception returns. --Kainaw ^(talk) 20:53, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

The game itself was rather insignificant. These interceptions happen every once in awhile. Refer to last year's playoffs when Bailey returned an interception for 100+ yards (tackled at the 1). David Carr threw an interception return for a touchdown for around 103 yards a few years ago. Like Kainaw said, this play isn't that unique. The Raiders and Steelers both are 2-5 (I think) and it wasn't that critical.--aviper2k7 22:04, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

And how about the 99-yard pass? Point is, no special name denotes this play; and happens more than rare. KyuuA4 16:53, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Do we need an addition rule

To get into the Hall of Fame, players have to be retired for a minimum of five years before even being considered. Should a similar rule apply here? No game (or event) can even be considered for addition to the article for five years. That should make it rather easy to say "no" to every flash-in-the-pan event that is forgotten a couple years later. Really, I'm just tired of appologizing for creating this article in the first place. I didn't realize it would become such a monster. --Kainaw ^(talk) 20:58, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

The princple that this article violates ALL OVER THE PLACE is: NO ORIGINAL RESEARCH. If an item is refered to universally in reliable sources by a certain well established name (The Catch, The Imaculate Reception, The Greatest Game Ever Played) then it is NOT original research, and thus can stay. However, this article is NOT a random collection of memorable games (what makes a game memorable? Find a list in an outside source that lists the game as memorable, otherwise naming a game memorable is Orignal Research). Giving a memorable game a nickname yourself, or co-opting one from a blog or forum discussion with other fans, is also Original Research. This should be a place for established canonical lore that ALREADY EXISTS in the NFL canon, not a means to create lore for games that people found particularly memorable or important. The threshold should be: do people refer to the game/play/event/whatever in a semi-mythical way that makes it LORE. "The Catch" qualifies. "The Drive" does too. "The Tackle II" is VERY questionable, probably Orignial Research. Just about everything in Other Memorable Moments is definately not "LORE". --Jayron32 21:10, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

I would really like to push a year limit on events mentioned in the article. Once we remove the new stuff that will be probably forgotten in 2-3 years, we will have a lot less POV to weed out. An open-ended discussion on this will easily last years. So, I propose making Jan 1, 2007 the cutoff for this discussion. If you feel there should be a number of years that must pass before an event can be added, please respond with the number of years (and what you are basing your opinion of, if you like). If you feel there should be no limit, please respond that you don't want a limit. Then, on Jan 1, we can work on a compromise (as I'm sure there will be many differning opinions. I'll go first:

I feel we should have at least a 10 year limit. Anything newer than 10 years may be forgotten soon. Anything still being remembered after 10 years should qualify as lore. --Kainaw ^(talk) 20:39, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I think the limit should be shorter, maybe 5 years. If there's, say, an "instant classic" (which, for the record, I think that whole chain of events at the end of the Steelers-Colts game was, though I've never heard "The Tackle II" anywhere but here), it should be discussed, and possibly voted on, here. Kirjtc2 21:19, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't agree with a 5 years rule (or even a crazy 10 year rule), because some games become instant classics and are obvious to tell. The River City Relay would be out and the tuck game would be out, games that will stand forever. In the non-nickname section, the Favre Monday night game would be out, the controversial Giants vs 49ers game with the penalty would be out. These games are recent, but still very memorable game with oddities that will cause people to talk about them for a long time. If you don't think a play deserves to be in the page, make a new section in the talk page and we will all discuss it/vote.--aviper2k7 21:26, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Indeed, there will be always an exception. As the case of the River City relay, the circumstances were extremely ridiculous. KyuuA4 20:15, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Correction of The Immaculate Reception

The reason for the controversy here was not whether or not the ball BOUNCED. The debate was which player the pass deflected off of when Fuqua and Tatum collided. Quote from a sports reel commentary: "If Tatum did not touch the ball, the play would be ruled an incomplete pass." This also appears on the separate wikipedia entry, Immaculate Reception.

[edit] Adam Vinatieri rule??

Article says...

the Adam Vinatieri rule[citation needed] -- On successful field goals, five seconds will elapse on the game clock. Enacted in 2002 after the Patriots' kicker won Super Bowl XXXVI on the last play of the game. The clock ticked down from seven seconds to zero even though Vinatieri's kick appeared to sail between the uprights while time still remained.

This sounds odd because the rule at the time, and supposedly as it exists today, is that the ball is dead (stopping the clock) the exact moment it crosses the plane of the uprights and/or the plane of the back of the end zone. The SB 36 situation is notable that the clock 'should' have stopped with about 2-3 seconds remaining, but it is has for long been at the discretion of the official on the field timing the game. They were truely out of options as the celebratory confetti had already been fired off, and the sidelines had already been cleared of players and reporters who swarmed the middle of the field. If anything, since SB 36, they have made certian the officials take care to stop the clock when it should be. It didn't take long to test that, because in SB 38, a similar situation occured, and in that case, they stopped the clock with 4 seconds to go, and made sure it didn't haphazzardly run off. I think this "rule" listing needs some sort of reference, or it needs to go. Doctorindy 22:18, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

• UPDATE- After the Dal@NYG game 12/3/06, the rule came into play for the first noteworthy time in a while. The rule was subtle, but explained that the MAXIMUM amount of time that can be elapsed on a successfull field goal is five seconds. It does not seem to suggest that it is always exactly five seconds (suggesting it could be fewer if the kick was from close range). The Digest of Rules does not list the details of this rule, and a firm source of the exact wording of the rule is still needed. Doctorindy 15:51, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

• It happens quite a bit, it happened in the Denver-Seahawk game this weekend. I recall it happening at the end of a half also in another game. You just don't usually see the last second return a team tries to make, because it usually doesn't work.++aviper2k7++ 01:46, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] November 5, 2006 - Miami Dolphins at Chicago Bears

Think this would be a good little addition to the "Other memorable moments" section? We already have the notorious 1985 game of Bears vs. Dolphins there, where Dolphins handed them their only loss for that season, perserving the 1972 Dolphins achievement. And now, almost 11 years later, the Dolphins spoiled yet another perfect season for the Bears.

The only thing I can see wrong is the significance. I mean, the 1985 Bears were amazing and went on to win the Super Bowl, and that was their ONLY LOSS for the whole season, on a Monday Night game too. The 2006 Bears are good, sure, but were becoming unraveled 3 weeks before the Miami game, and have now lost a 2nd time to New England. They still lead the NFC, but anything could happen.

So yeah, still think it's worth mentioning in that section? I'd like to gather some opinions before I try adding it to the list.

-- Smoke Rulz 08:04, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

• This game only just ended a little more than a few weeks ago. This has obviously not been extensively written about over a long period of time in the media and the history books like the other NFL lore games. This was the same problem a couple days after the January 15, 2006 Steelers-Colts game and the October 16 Bears-Cardinals contest. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 08:13, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

It wasn't one of the highest viewed games ever, and the loss didn't spoil a Bears "perfect season". The Bears lost to New England, and will probably lose more games this year. The game was of little significance and doesn't deserve a mention.--aviper2k7 21:33, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Agreed, and I'm a Pats fan. If the game is notable for anything, it's for the nine turnovers including five by the winning team. And as noted we have no idea how the Bears or Pats are going to finish so it's ridiculous to use the Bears' record to argue for signficance. Last year's IND-SD game had more significance among "first losses". MIA-CHI 2006 is certainly not part of NFL lore, and we really need to avoid the Game of the Century of the Week phenomenon that comes when you lack historical distance. - PhilipR 05:17, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I had a feeling you guys would agree that "significance" would blow this one out of the water. I guess it would have to wait a year or two or so and see if people are talking about it, and I highly doubt that'll happen. The biggest topic after season's end will probably be Rex Grossman's shakiness. :P -- Smoke Rulz 08:53, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, nothing special about this second Miami victory over an undefeated Bears team. "Significance" should have some basis over how RARE such an event occurs. Undefeateds beaten by a team in the regular season happen every year. KyuuA4 16:47, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Past or present tense?

The tense in the entries jumps between past and present, sometimes within the same entry:

With its nationally-televised game running late, NBC begins to show the movie Heidi just moments after the Jets' Jim Turner kicked what appears to be the game-winning field goal with 1:05 remaining. While millions of irate fans, missing the finale, jammed NBC's phone lines, the Raiders scored 2 touchdowns in eight seconds during the final minute to win 43-32. After the game, NBC received so many phone calls and letters from angry football fans about missing the end of the game that the network felt compelled to issue a public apology.

Incidentally I left kicked unbolded because it could be argued that from the perspective of the point in time where NBC begins showing the movie, the FG was already kicked, although I think it also flows better if consistent. At any rate, I would just go fix them myself but I'd rather first reach consensus over which tense we want this article to be. Cheers, PhilipR 05:11, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Kick?

I don't think that's an appropriate nickname for Super Bowl XXXVI in this article. Pats fans call it that to some extent, but even then it requires some context, since Vinatieri also won Super Bowl XXXVIII with a kick. More to the point, when removed from my immediate context of the New England sports media, I can't imagine that anyone would associate that name distinctly with this game. It could be any of dozens of NFL or hundreds of college or thousands of high school football games decided by a last-second FG. I'm willing to be convinced that the nickname is appropriate if someone can cite sources to that effect, though. Cf The Tuck where every NFL fan immediately knows what game is meant. - PhilipR 05:24, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

• All I've heard it referred to was "The Kick." There could probably be a better name for it, but common lore called it "The Kick" so that's how it is. Sure, a ton of games have ended with last-second field goals, and Vinateri's kicks were the deciding factor in their next two Super Bowl wins, but this game was special in many ways. Such as the fact that the Patriots were such huge underdogs, and they entered the game collectively as a team, which changed how the Super Bowl intros have been since then. It made us believe they could do it. And they did, as the article explains: Madden's declartion, barely any time, no timeouts, first time a Super Bowl was won on the absolute final play... The play has gone down in history and has been talked about a lot, even honored by ESPN Classic's "Whos #1" show on a countdown of winning plays. It was the ONLY field goal kick on that list, if I remember right. So I'm sorry to disagree with you, but this play will always be "The Kick" to me. -- Smoke Rulz 08:51, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

To clarify, I'm not disputing the game's place in NFL lore. If nothing else, it kicked off the preeminent dynasty so far of the 21st century. I just don't think it has to have a nickname (Super Bowl XXXVI seems a perfectly valid way to refer to 36th Super Bowl), and indeed that no nickname is preferable to an overly general one. Regards, PhilipR 15:04, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Well I suppose the lore is more about that final drive that ended with the kick, rather than the entire game, so it's referred to as "The Kick" because of how the drive ended and how the game was won. I know it's terribly generic, but so are several other lore names. And like I said, I've never heard any other name for it other than "The Kick," so that name has stuck in my mind. Especially since I'm a Pats fan. :) -- Smoke Rulz 23:09, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

In fairness I would have thought Instant Replay Game was hopelessly generic, but I learned that Bears and Packers fans both know it as that, and that the Bears even call in that in their Media Guide. I'm open to being convinced about The Kick too, but you'd need to show me some non-Pats sources since this isn't New England Patriots lore. See also my comments below; it sounds like we're using presence-of-nickname as an organizing principle for NFL lore, and I think that's a suboptimal approach. Cheers and Go Pats! - PhilipR 04:22, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Well if we were doing that, I'm sure some random shmuck could think up names for any and all of the lore in the unnamed section of the article. The ones with names have been referred to that all over, and I don't feel like searching for any source. The article is good as is. And it appears no one is even paying attention to your post below. :P Just leave the thing how it is. -- Smoke Rulz 20:25, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't feel like searching for any source - WP:V, WP:CITE. In other words you're saying you don't feel like making your articles conform to Wikipedia standards. Under that policy and guideline, anyone has the right to remove "The Kick" and the burden is on you to back it up. Of course anyone can make up names for things, which is why organizing the page that way is dubious. And people don't pay attention to my suggestions because I'm long-winded, not because the ideas are bad. :-P - PhilipR 22:39, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Flawed structure of the article?

The more I get to know this article, the less I like some of its structural premises. Here are two gripes that I can put words to:

• DRY violation - The don't repeat yourself principle states that where possible a piece of information should be stored once and only once, then referred to at the original source. Granted that DRY is violated all the time on a multi-million article wiki; it's still a good principle that we shouldn't encourage users to violate. But this article does just that -- instead of encouraging the reader to click to Heidi Game or Music City Miracle, this article attempts to summarize those other articles. "The Tuck" is a particularly bad offender. This repetition is just pointless. IMO the entry for Super Bowl III is near-optimal: summarize why the nickname applies in a sentence and move on.

• The nickname thing - I don't dispute that certain games have nicknames or that those nicknames are part of NFL lore. I do take issue with a format that implies that the most memorable events should all have nicknames, and that games without nicknames are, in the words of a commenter above, in the "honorable mention section". If that's the case, make this into List of NFL games with nicknames and be done with it. But the upshot is, every game gets forced into some sort of overgeneric nickname, hence my comment on "The Kick" above. (At the time I hadn't noticed the structure of the article.) Apparently if the game doesn't have a nickname, we'd better give it one, or it might get relegated to second-string. But Super Bowl XXXVI was a classic game regardless of whether we contrive to give it a nickname or not.

Subordinate issues to the two above:

• POV - Because the Tuck Game is highly contentious, and because this article seeks to cover the disputed events, that paragraph descends into that Wikipedia he said/she said territory that we all know and love. If the goals of this article were more modest, the temptation to POV within a short summary in this article would be less. There would still be the same temptations in The Tuck, but that's a whole article dedicated to a single football game hence has more room to consider all angles.
• Poor documentation - If you're going to argue that the nickname is in fact part of NFL lore, you must be able to defend that assertion if challenged by citing sources. Because we have to force a nickname upon every great game in NFL history, my guess is it would be hard to show some of those nicknames attaining much permanence. I don't want to be a pain and put {{fact}} after each one, but it actually wouldn't be out of place.

IMO a list of great games in NFL history, with nicknames cited where appropriate, and the whole thing better documented, would be a fine structure for the "games" section/article. Also I'm not sure that "lore" is restricted to great games, but I'm not sure what other material would be appropriate here. Anyway, just some thoughts. Cheers, PhilipR 06:55, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Chad Johnson rule restoration

I restored this reversion because I inferred from the comment that the reversion was based on a false premise: that it's wrong to add content to WP and mark it with ^{[citation needed]}. In fact I think this is far better than adding a disputed assertion and not marking it, because you're encouraging future editors to join you in documenting your sources.

Now, that said I think the rules section is getting a little bit bloated and should probably be refactored to List of NFL rules associated with individual players or something. It seems to me that this article is essentially two lists, nicknamed games and nicknamed rules, with a third "honorable mention" (not my term) for some other games, see my rant above. NFL lore is interesting, verifiable, and encyclopedic, but I'm not sure that just adding every published reference to a rule named for a player is really doing justice to NFL lore.

You can probably find several sources using the term Chad Johnson rule, but I'm not convinced that makes the CJR an essential part of NFL lore to be treasured by future generations. If anyone else feels strongly on either the restoration or my thoughts about lore in general, I'd love to discuss them to reach consensus. I'm not trying to be overbearing, just suggesting that we think about what this article is really about. Cheers, PhilipR 18:50, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Some fans call it the Chad Johnson rule, google turns up only 41 results with "Chad Johnson rule", I don't think fans extensively refer to it as the Chad Johnson rule, and I know the NFL doesn't call it that.++aviper2k7++ 19:48, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm going to avoid restoring it again to stay out of a revert war and being you're technically correct about unsourced material, but the first reason you cited for reversion is irrelevant. Your comment was, "the NFL don't call it the chad johnson rule, some fans refer to it as the chad johnson rule. Please don't add unsourced statements in the first place)". The official NFL name is irrelevant in an article on lore (Wiktionary: "all the facts and traditions about a particular subject that have been accumulated over time through education or experience").

As for your other reversion reason, you're correct that per WP:V "The obligation to provide a reliable source lies with the editors wishing to include the material, not on those seeking to remove it." Personally I tend to favor leaving dubious material in with {{fact}} for a while to give the editor a chance to source it. If I cared about the CJR I would pick one of the sources from the Google article and restore the deleted content, citing it. If we delete all the unsourced nicknames from this article, it will be a much shorter article, though that wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing.

For convenience, the reverted content was:

the Chad Johnson rule ^{[citation needed]} -- Touchdown celebrations involving props and/or falling to the ground result in a penalty. Enacted in 2006 thanks to Chad Johnson's numerous memerable touchdown celebrations in 2005.

Cheers, PhilipR 20:30, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

By the NFL I meant TV, reporters, ext. If you find a legit source (ESPN or something) then add it back in. I personally wouldn't think of it as the Chad Johnson rule because he still does taunting celebrations and many receivers did taunting celebrations++aviper2k7++ 20:56, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Ah, OK, I substantially agree with you then. - PhilipR 21:01, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 1998 NFC Championship

This game should be added to the Other Memorable Moments list. It was the first NFC Championship OT ever, the Minnesota Vikings were upset by the Atlanta Falcons in an overall very memorable game with the end score, 30-27.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.195.27.127 (talk • contribs).

While the game was exciting and important (I saw it on ESPN2 the other night and was quite pleased with the result) I don't think it classifies as "lore". There's been a lot of important and great games that aren't listed here, simply because they do not have the classification of being lore. Thanks for the comments.++aviper2k7++ 06:44, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

I suppose you're right, the keyword here in this article being 'lore'. Thanks for the consideration, I am still a pretty mad Vikes fan and the 98 season was a lot more important to us and Atlanta than any other team.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.195.27.127 (talk • contribs).

Could've sworn you'd be a Falcons fan with that addition!++aviper2k7++ 06:52, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm a Vikes fan at heart but I give credit when credit is due, and the dirty birds have given me millions of "what if" thoughts over the game.

[edit] The Emerald City Miracle?

Is there any consensus on a name for the January 6th Cowboys/Seahawks game? I've heard "The Emerald City Miracle", "Romo's Folly" and i've made up "The Muff". And does it even belong in NFL Lore? NikJam 00:28, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

This should not even be considered to be put in for quite awhile, especially not the very next day. It should not be on this page with an arbitrary name.DaBears34 04:11, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, we should probably wait a month before considering adding the event. -- ShadowJester07 ►Talk 04:15, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm not even sure why it's called a miracle. The Seahawks would've scored anyways. And there's virtually no Google results on "Emerald City Miracle". I wonder why there aren't any results on the term??++aviper2k7++ 04:18, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't think this should be included. A botched field goal attempt? Wow, that's notable. Sure, it was a Wild Card game, but it still wasn't notable enough, in my opinion. Now, if that crazy safety a couple minutes earlier had actually been a touchdown, then maybe that could warrant inclusion. - Zone46 04:29, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

It should be considered, but probably not until the very last snap of the season. Who knows, this could inspire the Seahawks to make a run... i guess we'll just have to wait and see. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.150.43.212 (talk) 04:23, 9 January 2007 (UTC).

I think it could be included, considering who the holder was. If it was some anonymous punter or backup quarterback, then I think wouldn't be notable. But it was the starting quarterback, a player who normally doesn't hold for kicks (even though Romo had done it all season), and especially given Romo's meteoric rise to stardom during the season, I think it has to be considered. Besides, there's a reason why the Cincinnati-Denver game two weeks before this one isn't being discussed here. I do agree that we should wait awhile before actually including it, if we do.--Highway99 07:30, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

I feel it should be considered in 5-10 years if anyone then still knows or cares who Romo was. Right now, it isn't "lore". It is current news. This isn't an article about hot topics of the day. --Kainaw ^(talk) 10:09, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

• • It might be a little tough to believe, but I'd say that game's already been forgotten in the mainstream. Seattle didn't go any further, and two weeks ago seems like ancient history now that the Super Bowl teams are set. It'll go down as just another botched field goal. Doctorindy 16:30, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Immaculate Redemption

The phrase "Immaculate Redemption" in reference to Rothlisberger's tackle was coined by Chris Berman. He repeated it over and over for at least a week until he realized that it wasn't catching on. Everyone else called it "The Tackle". I don't know of an online resource written by Berman in which he wrote the phrase, but he sure said it a lot on TV. Anyone remember exactly which program to cite to remove the fact tag? Or, should we just dump the phrase. Or, better yet, delete the entry. Does anyone here honestly believe that 10 years from now announcers will see a quarterback tackle some guy after a fumble and say, "That reminds me of Big Ben and 'The Tackle'." Of course not. The game will be forgotten. The only thing remembered will be that they were a wild card team that had to go through the whole playoffs on the road and, somehow, they did it. --Kainaw ^(talk) 05:25, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree, there is no nickname for the game. As with Romo's fumble there's been many different announcers saying numerous phrases, but none will stick. If you ask a fan what "The Tackle" was, they'd say the Super Bowl tackle that was one yard short. If you say "The Tackle II" they won't know what it is. There's a tremendous lack of sources on both the phrases (the ones that are just seem to borrow it from the Wikipedia entry), only a couple that are good compared to the other ones. The tag has been up there for ages, so I'm moving it.++aviper2k7++ 16:35, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Now hang on... I agree that if I were to walk up to someone in 10 years and ask them if they remember "The Tackle II" they woudl probably say "no". However, if I were to go up to someone and ask them if they remember when the heavily unfavored Steelers went to Indianapolis, held the Colts to just 18 points until the final minute when Jerome Bettis fumbled (the first time he had done so that year) at the 2 yard line and Nick Harper recovered the football, ran it back to the 40 yeard line, when Ben Roethlisberger, the only player left between Harper and the goal made a desperate grasp and him and brought him down, which then set up, not one, but two failed attempts by Payton Manning to go for the win, which then led to Mike Vanderjagt (the most accurate kicker in NFL history) going for, and missing the 42 yard field goal attempt to end the game after which the Steelers went on to win Super Bowl XL... they would probably say "yes". I don't think anyone who watched that game will ever forget it, which is more than I have to say for some of the other games listed on here.

Then again, if I were to ask even the biggest NFL fan if they remember "The Tackle (I)" they would probably say "huh" first, then understand once I said "when the Titans failed to score in the final play of Super Bowl XXXIV at the 1 yard line". To digress a bit... its all kinda how you see it, cause I see that game as the "The Reach" not "The Tackle".

Anyway, to answer those people who doubt the common name, I give you this website from the Hall of Fame Store http://www.profootballhof.com/store/item.jsp?ITEM_ID=2241 when the play is called "The Tackle". Ask any Steelers fan what "The Tackle" was and they would tell you that it was when Big Ben tackled Nick Harper... the Titans wouldn't even come up. Granted, that isn't all NFL fans, but most of this stuff is subjective anyway. The only people I have ever heard refer to the 1958 NFL Championship as “The Greatest Game Ever Player” are people who honestly think it was… and its been my experience that those people are dying off pretty fast. “The Fumble” means something different to Giants fans than it does to Cleveland fans and so on.

In response to concerns that the game is not called “The Tackle II” well, the game isn’t called “The Tackle (I)” either, its called Super Bowl XXXIV. “The Tuck” was an event… it happened during the 2001 AFC Divisional Playoff. “The Helicopter Occurred” during Super Bowl XXXII… a lot of these things are events in games that were themselves remarkable, but the event is what sticks out.

Evidence of Big Ben’s grab being called “The Tackle” has been provided. It was the event that people have chosen to be emblematic of what was a great game. I think it should go back.

(supersoulty 06:02, 24 January 2007 (UTC))

You just brought up something that I hadn't thought of - why are we referencing games? For example, "The Clutch" and "The Catch" are not games, they are events. One has become lore because it was considered by many a rather dirty way to win a game. The other has become lore because the picture of it was on the cover of Sports Illustrated.

As for the question of people remembering it in 10 years. I'm sure Steelers fans will. I am all for a page on Steelers Lore. Maybe every team needs their own lore section. However, I don't think many NFL fans will remember that tackle more than the hard road the Steelers took to win the Super Bowl. If, perhaps, Ben becomes a great quarterback like Brady or Montana, then something as mundane as a tackle may become lore just as something as mundane as a tuck and a pass became lore.

Of course, I'm the one that annoys everyone by constantly complaining that a long list of "cool games" is not "lore". --Kainaw ^(talk) 07:07, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Games requiring nicknames

Someone restored the header for the games section to refer to common nicknames. Per the above I think that's a bad way to organize this article, but it appears to be an informal consensus. Therefore, games that can't be shown to have a common nickname don't belong in that section. Moreover, someone removed the list of games without nicknames, so these games can't go there either. This is lamentable, because SB36 is probably as big in NFL lore as any game with a nickname, but that's the way it goes. Nicknames made up by an editor don't come close to meeting WP:CITE or WP:NOR. Regards, PhilipR 05:45, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

The list of non-nickname games is at the top of this talk page. The intent was to put them there so we could decide which ones should be put back in. My opinion is that anything in the last 5 years should not go in unless it is a unique case. I do not feel that "the third longest run" or "second fastest comeback" is lore. If it is the absolute longest run or absolute fastest comeback, that is a completely different story - but there's a catch to that too. This is "lore", not an informal recordbook. Most people appear to have no idea what "lore" means. So, here's an example: When someone is discussing football and they say "The Catch", they are not referring to one of many random catches. They are referring to a specific catch and they expect anyone who knows about football to know about the catch. When they say "I expect the champagne to be opened this Sunday", they expect you to know about the Dolphin's perfect season - even thought the whole champagne thing is urban legend. What belongs in this article isn't a list of games that fans think are cool. It is a list of memories tied to the vernacular that fans are expected to know. Why is it called a gridiron? Why is it called a pigskin? Why can the quarterback throw a forward pass? There's a lot of lore behind that rule. Even the entire history of the scrimmage line is filled with rich lore going all the way back to rugby. There's only one player in the NFL now wearing a facemask consisting of a single bar - why? Why do the Lions play on Thanksgiving? All in all, this article took a wrong turn way back when it was a tiny section in the main NFL article. I feel I'm the only one that wants it to steer back into being "lore" and not "a list of games that someone thinks is really cool". --Kainaw ^(talk) 06:43, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

You're not the only one. I think there should be a List of NFL games with nicknames or List of memorable NFL games (thought that's absurdly subjective) and an article more like you're envisioning with broader lore. Also agree about the last 5 years in general and I would sacrifice SB36 to that guideline for a couple of weeks. :) Sorry I missed the list of games, and thanks for the pointer. - Cheers, PhilipR 01:06, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I think this article needs to be completely reorganized

Alright... this is a good concept everyone, but a number of flaws have crept up in this article that I think need to be addressed in a more drastic manner. This is a page of NFL Lore, and yet it has become a page filled with everyone's favorite games... or more exactly, everyone's favorite events in a game. This is what we need to do.

1 Have a seperate section for EVENTS only. Those events need to have a common name accepted by most NFL Fans.

2 Then create a seperate section for entire games. This would be for games that were remarkable of themselves. I know this is somewhat subjective, but with a little tweaking I think we could get it nailed down. This section differs from the one above in that there is no one event of these games that really stands out, they were remarkable of themselves.

3 We can keep the rules named for people section, because it does contain some lore.

4 Then we would have a section for broader feats in NFL Lore. This would include the 1972 Perfect Season, the Steelers Playoff Run of the 2005 season, etc.

5 Lastly, we would have a kinda misc section. This would include the "Steel Curtain Defense" and the Super Bowl Shuffle. (supersoulty 20:06, 25 January 2007 (UTC))

[edit] removed copyright violation images

Removed images that were in article claiming to be fair use, but did not fit narrow fair-use limitations. Atom 10:24, 7 February 2007 (UTC)