I dont think that dominating means knowing your other teams plays and tricks. it would be called cheating if it would be poker or any other type of game. its a game thats meant to show who is the best of the best for that year. knowing your other teams plays, and tricks is cheating. they couldnt won against the raiders if they wouldnt have known about the pump fake, gannon made during that year. i know you should study the team you are playing but not cheat your way to victory. if you were to know all the answers for a test in school that another teacher gave to you, it would too be called cheating.
2007-02-02 00:43:15 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Football (American)
You know what, if the teacher gave you a test one day, and then gave you the answers, and gave you the same test the next day, would that be cheating?
Chucky Gruden was the coach of the Raiders. He was the one responsible for much of the success there. He left town and went to Tampa. Bill Callahan takes over "Chucky's Team" and does not make any changes. Chucky goes to Tampa, and they meet in the Super Bowl.
Is it any wonder that Chucky knew Gannon's tendencies? Chucky groomed Gannon. He was a jouneyman QB before Chucky came to Oakland. Maybe Gannon should have spent a few more hours on the practice fields trying some new tricks to fool Chucky.
Not the Bucs fault the Raiders were too stupid to make any changes to their offensive play calling after Chucky left town.
2007-02-02 02:29:51 · answer #1 · answered by d b 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No way. Studying the other team is part of the game. Are you saying that in the weeks prceeding SB 37, the raiders did not study the Buccs tapes ? Of course they did. Of course they tried to guess what the Buccs offense was going to pull off.
Cheating would mean obtaining some sort of advantage the other team does not possess. It does not apply here since the raiders had access to all the info.
A football team is much more than the players. It includes coaches, trainers, gms and owners... Preparing your team for the game is not just some random process. It is part of the winning process...
The Buccs were just better on that occasion, both on and off the field...
2007-02-02 09:03:01 · answer #2 · answered by luc564 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Would you like some cheese with that whine. That was spoken like a true Raiders fan, a moron. Basically, you theory is "If you study for a test (or team) it's cheating. You should just show up to class (or the game) and let it ride. News for you Raider fan "No on plans to fail, they only fail to plan." The Raiders were read like a cheap book and the Bucs took advantage of them. It also helps when your coach knows all the opposing players weaknesses too.
2007-02-02 09:15:15 · answer #3 · answered by Casual Traveler 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Don't know whether the Bucs cheated in XXXVII, but I seem to remember the MVP was Dexter Jackson with two interceptions.
Even if you know the other team's plays, I think these two interceptions made a big difference in allowing the Bucs D to dominate by attacking Gannon rather than laying off.
2007-02-02 08:52:41 · answer #4 · answered by the_lipsiot 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Buccaneers had the number one ranked defense that year. And that sure as hell showed in the big game. Defense always prevails! Or should for that matter.
Nothing against Rich Gannon, but he isn't THAT good. Where is he now?
2007-02-02 10:10:27 · answer #5 · answered by EC 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You should change the drugs you are on, because what you are taking now has done weird things to your brain, pal. The Bucs kicked the crap out of the Raiders....you know it...I know it...and anybody who knows anything about football knows it. Why don't you ask some of the Raider players...better yet, ask some of their fans. Even Al Davis knows.................
2007-02-02 09:00:32 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋