The Refs and this “rigged” league

[H2o]

12 hours ago, Ethan in Cleveland said:

I get suspended for 24 hours for "crusading" about the lack of talent in WR group, and people can endlessly post about officiating conspiracies that don't exist. 

Letting threads like this persist diminishes us all.

Once you're "on the list", you're "on the list" my friend. Trust me  

 

The officiating thing is not even a conspiracy at this point anymore though. You can see it all over the place. It's also pretty crazy how certain teams are the beneficiaries of these types of calls, or lack thereof, seemingly game in and game out. It's also crazy how some teams get the short end of the stick in a lot of those instances. It's even being called out by announcers and analysts alike.

 

I would also tell you to follow the $$$. Look at the lines in some of these games and the last minute bets being placed on teams who are substantial underdogs to win outright. Me and a guy at work have been following this for the current season. There have been like 8 games where the money didn't fit the line in the end. Packers/Browns, Bills/Pats, Bills/Falcons, Jets/Bengals, Falcons/Dolphins, Bengals/Steelers are a few that I remember off top. 

Edited 4 hours ago by H2o

[Buffalo ill]

This is one of the reasons I feel any season without a superbowl victory is wasted.  The league is going downhill fast with stupid rule changes and sketchy officiating.  I want the Bills to win it all before the league turns into some bastardization of flag football and wwe, or worse yet the NBA.

[Augie]

28 minutes ago, Buffalo ill said:

This is one of the reasons I feel any season without a superbowl victory is wasted.  The league is going downhill fast with stupid rule changes and sketchy officiating.  I want the Bills to win it all before the league turns into some bastardization of flag football and wwe, or worse yet the NBA.

 

Did you enjoy the game last week? If you did, the season wasn’t wasted. If you didn’t, maybe a new pass time is in order?

 

Only one team wins the upper Bowl each year. Not being that one team does not mean the season was wasted. I try to focus on the ride, it can be a lot of fun! 

[4merper4mer]

2 hours ago, H2o said:

Once you're "on the list", you're "on the list" my friend. Trust me  

 

The officiating thing is not even a conspiracy at this point anymore though. You can see it all over the place. It's also pretty crazy how certain teams are the beneficiaries of these types of calls, or lack thereof, seemingly game in and game out. It's also crazy how some teams get the short end of the stick in a lot of rhose instances. It's even being called out by announcers and analysts alike.

 

I would also tell you to follow the $$$. Look at the lines in some of these games and the last minite bets being placed on teams who are substantial underdogs to win outright. Me and a guy at work have been following this for the current season. There have been like 8 games where the money didn't fit the line in the end. Packers/Browns, Bills/Pats, Bills/Falcons, Jets/Bengals, Falcons/Dolphins, Bengals/Steelers are a few that I remember off top. 

All that gambling stuff points to money but the real money is in pop stars who find a dupe tight end.  If Taylor had met Knox instead we’d have a few rings.

[Returntoglory]

NFL referees are not full-time employees; they are part-time contractors who hold other professional jobs, such as lawyers or doctors, during the week and offseason. While they are compensated well and have a year-round commitment to duties like training and rule study, they are not considered full-time employees by the league. 

 

THIS is the main problem as I see it.

 

 

[dcinmuncie]

7 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

All that gambling stuff points to money but the real money is in pop stars who find a dupe tight end.  If Taylor had met Knox instead we’d have a few rings.

Yup! I said something similar to this in another thread. 

[Dr. Who]

11 minutes ago, Returntoglory said:

NFL referees are not full-time employees; they are part-time contractors who hold other professional jobs, such as lawyers or doctors, during the week and offseason. While they are compensated well and have a year-round commitment to duties like training and rule study, they are not considered full-time employees by the league. 

 

THIS is the main problem as I see it.

 

 

The league clearly wants it that way.

[beebe]

34 minutes ago, Dr. Who said:

The league clearly wants it that way.

 

there’s like three dozen investigations into college hoops players potentially fixing games, on top of actual arrests made in the NBA for the same and similar. but yes, i’m sure the NFL is pulling off the greatest rigging operation in the world for seven plus seasons right in front of our eyes while the feds look the other way to protect their precious chiefs. 

 

the league would do just as well ratings wise, and likely better, if they rigged games for the cowboys, one of the four teams in NY or LA, a team in Chicago, or a team that isn’t in the middle of nowhere in the 4th smallest market. 

 

taylor swift is barely even shown on broadcasts this year, and as the Daily Mail recently reported, hasn’t been photographed entering a stadium this season. 

 

the NFL clearly desires parity, thus the salary cap, the worst teams picking first each year, results-based scheduling, expanded playoffs etc. given that, why would they try so hard to have a near 20-year dynasty (patriots) before then pivoting to a near decade dynasty (chiefs) without breaking stride? why would the other 31 owners stand by and let it happen? why would they allow for repeat super bowls (chiefs-eagles, chiefs-49ers) twice in the last six years? why would they let mahomes lose super bowls by scores of 40-22 (vs eagles) and 31-9 (vs bucs). it was the chiefs, not tampa bay, who got the worst of the whistle: kc had 11 penalties for 120 yards while tampa had just 4 for 39 yards, one of the biggest discrepancies in super bowl history.

 

a bills-lions super bowl, or anything involving the cowboys, would do better ratings than chiefs vs opponent X. 

[Returntoglory]

40 minutes ago, Dr. Who said:

The league clearly wants it that way.

And the results show.

[mannc]

3 hours ago, H2o said:

 

 

There have been like 8 games where the money didn't fit the line in the end. 

What does that mean?

[SC STATE NUPE]

I became a believer in that Eagles and Bills game two years ago! That game still leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I felt like the Patriots and Falcons games were officiated poorly and influenced outcomes. Those holding calls and touching of the receivers down the field kills drives and momentum. I felt like the Pats game was called the way it was to prevent the Bills from all but wrapping up the AFC East in October. The league doesn’t want teams playing meaningless games around the holidays like what happened last year. Now let’s see how the game gets officiated tomorrow… 

Edited 5 hours ago by SC STATE NUPE

[Dr. Who]

58 minutes ago, beebe said:

 

there’s like three dozen investigations into college hoops players potentially fixing games, on top of actual arrests made in the NBA for the same and similar. but yes, i’m sure the NFL is pulling off the greatest rigging operation in the world for seven plus seasons right in front of our eyes while the feds look the other way to protect their precious chiefs. 

 

the league would do just as well ratings wise, and likely better, if they rigged games for the cowboys, one of the four teams in NY or LA, a team in Chicago, or a team that isn’t in the middle of nowhere in the 4th smallest market. 

 

taylor swift is barely even shown on broadcasts this year, and as the Daily Mail recently reported, hasn’t been photographed entering a stadium this season. 

 

the NFL clearly desires parity, thus the salary cap, the worst teams picking first each year, results-based scheduling, expanded playoffs etc. given that, why would they try so hard to have a near 20-year dynasty (patriots) before then pivoting to a near decade dynasty (chiefs) without breaking stride? why would the other 31 owners stand by and let it happen? why would they allow for repeat super bowls (chiefs-eagles, chiefs-49ers) twice in the last six years? why would they let mahomes lose super bowls by scores of 40-22 (vs eagles) and 31-9 (vs bucs). it was the chiefs, not tampa bay, who got the worst of the whistle: kc had 11 penalties for 120 yards while tampa had just 4 for 39 yards, one of the biggest discrepancies in super bowl history.

 

a bills-lions super bowl, or anything involving the cowboys, would do better ratings than chiefs vs opponent X. 

There's some distance between rigging and putting your hand on the scale. The league does a lot of things that are not popular.

They're going to lose some audience, but it's mostly graybeards, so they don't care.

[H2o]

1 hour ago, mannc said:

What does that mean?

If there are a large number of big $$$ bets on overwhelming underdogs at the last minute, and to win outright, what do you think it means?

[mannc]

2 minutes ago, H2o said:

If there are a large number of big $$$ bets on overwhelming underdogs at the last minute, and to win outright, what do you think it means?

Thanks for clarifying.  I had not heard the term “money did not fit the line”.

[beebe]

45 minutes ago, Dr. Who said:

There's some distance between rigging and putting your hand on the scale. The league does a lot of things that are not popular.

They're going to lose some audience, but it's mostly graybeards, so they don't care.

puts their thumb on the scale, how, exactly? they communicate orders to the refs to help the chiefs? they'd risk EVERYTHING on the truth coming out, opening themselves to criminal charges, class-action lawsuits, discovery, etc? the nfl is in such a weak position financially that they need to risk it all to help the kansas city chiefs!?

[finn]

It's natural to look at controversial calls and conclude the refs are corrupt. It's equally natural to hear someone complain about corruption or conspiracies and conclude these people are just wrong, since refs are human and make mistakes. So which is true? 

 

I think some referees have shaved points on some games because a) simply enormous money is at stake b) NFL refs are just as prone to corruption or coercion as anyone else; c) they know they won't be caught; d) they've gotten away with it for years so why not continue? 

 

To rebut, skeptics almost always resort to fallacies: "No way all owners would agree" (who said they're involved?). "You're just a sore loser!" (which ignores the reasoning); "Bad calls don't mean corruption!" (There can't be both?)

 

Put it this way: Why wouldn't the people involved tweak game outcomes given the enormous upside and the virtually non-existent risk? Integrity? Love for the game? 

 

 

Edited 4 hours ago by finn

[SinceThe70s]

5 hours ago, H2o said:

Once you're "on the list", you're "on the list" my friend. Trust me  

 

The officiating thing is not even a conspiracy at this point anymore though. You can see it all over the place. It's also pretty crazy how certain teams are the beneficiaries of these types of calls, or lack thereof, seemingly game in and game out. It's also crazy how some teams get the short end of the stick in a lot of those instances. It's even being called out by announcers and analysts alike.

 

I would also tell you to follow the $$$. Look at the lines in some of these games and the last minute bets being placed on teams who are substantial underdogs to win outright. Me and a guy at work have been following this for the current season. There have been like 8 games where the money didn't fit the line in the end. Packers/Browns, Bills/Pats, Bills/Falcons, Jets/Bengals, Falcons/Dolphins, Bengals/Steelers are a few that I remember off top. 

 

I've noticed this too. 

 

I'm on the fence on rigged vs. poor officiating but more and more I wonder if it's because I don't want rigged to be true. As soon as I'm convinced it's true I'll walk away from something that I've enjoyed since...well you know.

[mannc]

The maddening thing is that the league could easily eliminate (through replay) outrageous, game-changing calls like the one Thursday night, but they’ve made a conscious decision not to do so.  That raises questions about the integrity of the sport…

[Dr. Who]

1 hour ago, beebe said:

puts their thumb on the scale, how, exactly? they communicate orders to the refs to help the chiefs? they'd risk EVERYTHING on the truth coming out, opening themselves to criminal charges, class-action lawsuits, discovery, etc? the nfl is in such a weak position financially that they need to risk it all to help the kansas city chiefs!?

Well, you're the fella who decides to come on another team's message board. If it infuriates you that folks think your team is one of the favored, perhaps you ought to stay away from message boards likely to hold opinions you don't like. It's not just Buffalo Bills fans who think certain teams get a better shake than others from the refs, for whatever reason. And other teams can count on the opposite.

 

It doesn't take much to skew the way a game goes, and it can be done without any kind of trail that would involve lawsuits. It could even be an unconscious bias in many cases. If the NFL wanted to institute reviews for blatant bad calls, or answer the complaints that there are double standards, they could make a concerted effort to answer critics. I've seen no evidence they want to do that on a consistent basis.

 

 

 

[beebe]

36 minutes ago, Dr. Who said:

Well, you're the fella who decides to come on another team's message board. If it infuriates you that folks think your team is one of the favored, perhaps you ought to stay away from message boards likely to hold opinions you don't like. It's not just Buffalo Bills fans who think certain teams get a better shake than others from the refs, for whatever reason. And other teams can count on the opposite.

 

It doesn't take much to skew the way a game goes, and it can be done without any kind of trail that would involve lawsuits. It could even be an unconscious bias in many cases. If the NFL wanted to institute reviews for blatant bad calls, or answer the complaints that there are double standards, they could make a concerted effort to answer critics. I've seen no evidence they want to do that on a consistent basis.

 

 

 

 

fans (who often don't even know the rules) are far more biased than the refs (who actually know the rules) could ever dream of being. if the argument was simply, "refs make bad calls," then of course i agree with that. human error has always existed. do a Google search for "bad call" or "controversial call," you'll see no shortage of articles spanning sports beyond the NFL. 

Edited 2 hours ago by beebe