Under the dumb rule it wasn't a catch. The ball was being jostled with at first and then Bryant didn't maintain possession thru the ground. From a common sense standpoint, that's a catch. He held onto it long enough. But not in a world where Calvin Johnson's a few years ago wasn't a catch, this isn't either. That was more control. He went to the ground with his feet under control and slammed the ball to the ground to relinquish it seemingly intentionally. They should change the rule, but it is the rule.
Anyways, what's being conveniently ignored to focus on the controversy because it means more catharsis and better ratings, is regardless the Packers would have only needed a couple points and moved the ball into fg range on the subsequent drive with a fresh set of downs and a ton of time to spare. So the Cowboys likely wouldn't have won anyway.
I thought it last week when the Cowboys benefited from a controversial call, and one which I actually agreed under the rules was wrong. It's loser's lament to blame officiating when the totality of calls didn't heavily go against you or a late call didn't pretty much definitively make the difference between winning a losing. The Lions still had over 8 minutes and allowed a long drive for a td, and then fumbled away the game. In this case the Cowboys still had over 4 minutes to play but allowed multiple first downs for the Packers to ice the game. In both cases, the right teams probably won still.
All this said, if I fly to Dallas to see my boy Tony fight, will you put me up at your home for free? :icon_chee
I think it would be great if the Packers won the Super Bowl, and then Tony, a Packers' fan, wore a green and gold colored shirt in front of the Dallas fans with the slogan, "it's all part of the process". He wears a Brewers' colored Showtime Pettis shirt as of now.