jma11473 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You\'re right, they don\'t compare---this play was
> better. Super Bowl son, Super Bowl...not a playoff
> game.
>
> And I\'m a Cowboys fan, so trust me, no bias on my
> part.
Someone with no historical perspective calling me \"son\"?? You would have to be around 65 years old to call me son. Your answer sounds like someone too youthful to understand the magnitude of those 2 plays. Calling Tyree\'s catch better is beyond absurd.
The Immaculate Reception, one of the most controversial plays in NFL history, helped launch perhaps the greatest dynasty of the Super Bowl era. It was their first playoff victory and, although they lost the next week to the undefeated Miami team, went on to dominate the 70\'s.
\"The Catch\" also launched the 49ers onto the national stage as one of the premier franchises for the next 15 years. It started the Montana legacy, one that has earned him the status of one of the all time greats. It is a signature in NFL history.
Look, Tyree\'s catch was spectacular. But if the Giants don\'t score that TD, how memorable would it be?? If that play occurred in the end zone, you are absolutely 100% correct. But it didn\'t. A non-scoring play hailed as the greatest play....go figure. The previously 2 plays stand alone. Enjoy the game, the catch, the money you won, etc... Just don\'t call it better than the other plays. Or if you want an analogy to help you better understand.....
Tyree\'s catch is Ragozin, the IM and The Catch are Thorograph. I will also add that I am a longtime Raiders fan....no bias here either. I hate Pitt and SF.
JB, as a long-time Giants fan.......can you help me convince this guy??? This is getting ridiculous.