I didn't say they didn't win fair and square. - Edit 1
Before modification by Joel at 07/02/2011 03:38:25 PM
the packers won fair and square, non-interference call to end the game and everything included. you're basically arguing that the pack should have won the game without the use of their defense when we all know it's a TEAM effort to win the game. we might as well talk of the lack of legitimacy of the cowboys win over the steelers because neil o'donnell threw those picks right at larry brown. "oh, the cowboys didn't deserve to win the super bowl because it was only their defense that let them get the short field necessary to score" 
I'm just saying give credit where due; this is hardly a vindication of the WCO. Even NFL.com says Rodgers was OK rather than electric, and despite Roethlisbergers gaffes Pittsburgh had 49 more net yards than Green Bay (that the Packers managed a whopping 52 rushing yards despite playing with a lead for almost the whole game is probably a lot of why). Sure, the better team won; even if say Roethlisberger gave it to ya'll (which I definitely am NOT) that's like saying O'Donnell gave it to Dallas, and all it would really mean even if true was that that's just one way in which the winner was better than the loser. Do you think I have any illusions about what won SB XXX though? As much as I liked the Cowboys offense during the Johnson glory days, they limped through the SB and never had a solid #2 WR after Alvin Harper (hence Deion playing the spot), and, like Green Bay last night, had maybe one championship worthy offensive drive all game. The rest of the time their D was gave them great field position, either with turnovers or by refusing to surrender points.