stevev@tekchips.UUCP (Steve Vegdahl) (01/11/84)
As a 49er and Raider fan (who nonetheless has illusions of being objective), I must agree with Marie Carey that the Niners were extremely lucky to be in the position they were near the end of the game. There were clearly a couple bad calls during the game that went against the Skins (the "catch and fumble" by Tyler comes to mind as one that Marie did not mention). On the balance, I'd have to say SF came out no worse than even in the blown call department. With respect to the end of the Ms. Carey's message: Although I will be rooting for the Raiders in the Super Bowl, the Skins not a team that I dislike (I mean, how can you hate a team that whomps on the Cowboys). I do with, however that you would save your "Tee-hee's" and "Ha-ha's" for your conversations with other Redskin fans. Such riduculing of other teams by fans and players is what has put the Cowboys and Steelers at the bottom of my "favorite team" list over the years. Please don't tempt me to replace them with the Skins. With respect to the Super Bowl. Although the Skins have a better season record, they did it with an incredible turnover ratio. The Raiders, on the other hand, had an excellent record even though their turnovers ratio was abysmal. My contention is that the Raiders are two turnovers better than the Skins (that is to say, if the Raiders cough the ball up twice more than the Skins do, it should be an even contest). If the Raiders reject the notion that they must establish the run to win, they should be able to pass on the Redskins secondary. The Redskins, on the other hand are facing a secondary that, with the addition of Haynes, is clearly the class of the NFL. Furthermore, the Raiders have a physical defense that is less susceptible Riggo-wrecking than most. To summarize, then: the Skins best chance for winning is to force lots of turnovers. Failing that, the Raiders should walk away with the Super Bowl trophy. Steve Vegdahl