NFL Fixed???

[Sled21]

(01-11-2017, 11:32 AM)bengalguy71 Wrote: Yeah and Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK. Just a coincidence he was killed days later and there have been multiple mysterious deaths of key people over the years!  Way too many to keep quiet! 

Oswald did kill Kennedy. What they don't want to tell you though is that Kennedy was not the target, and was just hit because Oswald was an ok shot. Oswald was shooting at Gov. Connelly, who he blamed for ruining his life...... but, that would not look as good when you say the POTUS was just collateral damage.

[Sled21]

I think the NFL is fixed to a point. I do not believe the players and coaches are in on it though. IMO most games are played straight up, but when there is a marquee game the marquee teams get help from the refs at the direction of Goodell....

[*SHRacerX*]

(01-11-2017, 10:07 AM)Au165 Wrote: There is no fix, and it is kind of comical to believe there is. What people always seem to forget in a conspiracy is how many people they have to keep quiet in an age where book deals can make even the lowest rung of a conspiracy into a multi millionaire. The video is wrong in saying that there is no law against fixing their own games as there are some round about laws that could cause issues. If they in fact pay the officials more, or provide a benefit of some sort, for doing the fix it would fall under match fixing laws and would subject the person doing it and encouraging it to prosecution. If they can prove that multiple owners were in on it, and it was prevalent across the whole league, they could actually use RICO and go after everyone.

I believe there is tremendous bias, which implies the games are "fixed" to an extent. I haven't watched the videos but I've seen enough over the years to know why the officiating tilts toward certain makrkwts and fan bases.

If anyone doesn't want to believe theat, they are welcome to their own opinion. But to use the size of the dollars involved as a reason to claim it wouldn't allow for the corruption, I would argue the opposite. Greed is ugly, and it is very present in the NFL.

As close as a lot of these teams are matched, it only takes a few calls to alter the outcome of a game, and the NFL has done this more and more as more dollars are generated.

[bengalguy71]

(01-11-2017, 11:44 AM)Sled21 Wrote: Oswald did kill Kennedy. What they don't want to tell you though is that Kennedy was not the target, and was just hit because Oswald was an ok shot. Oswald was shooting at Gov. Connelly, who he blamed for ruining his life...... but, that would not look as good when you say the POTUS was just collateral damage.

Boy you are certainly the gullible one! 

[Ctfan73]

I think it makes no sense to say that the NFL fixes it's own games.  The league is hugely profitable regardless of who wins the games.  If the league office is directing the officials to favor a certain team, why has no official come forward and exposed it?  Are they being paid off?   The amount of $ you'd have to pay the officials to silence them would exceed any increase in profits due to higher ratings for a certain team winning vs. another.

They would not risk the integrity of the league when they already are so profitable and have been for decades.

IMO the officiating is not very good.  I've been following the league since the 1970's.  There was a lot of bad calls then, there are a lot of bad calls now.  It's very easy to take a call that favors a 'popular' team and say that's proof of fixing.  Doesn't make it true.

[WeezyBengal]

(01-11-2017, 10:07 AM)Au165 Wrote: There is no fix, and it is kind of comical to believe there is. What people always seem to forget in a conspiracy is how many people they have to keep quiet in an age where book deals can make even the lowest rung of a conspiracy into a multi millionaire.  The video is wrong in saying that there is no law against fixing their own games as there are some round about laws that could cause issues. If they in fact pay the officials more, or provide a benefit of some sort, for doing the fix it would fall under match fixing laws and would subject the person doing it and encouraging it to prosecution. If they can prove that multiple owners were in on it, and it was prevalent across the whole league, they could actually use RICO and go after everyone.

You dont think that some teams are getting preferential treatment from the league? 

In my opinion, I think its kind of hard to believe otherwise. 

A game doesnt necessarily have to be "fixed" in order for someone to have their hand in the outcome of it. Look at the NBA from a few years ago. Some of those refs came out and whole heartedly admitted that they gave some teams (bigger markets) preferential treatment during games. 

There is just too much money on the line and too much at stake to not believe that the results of these games are skewed in the direction of certain markets and teams. 

[Au165]

(01-11-2017, 01:02 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: You dont think that some teams are getting preferential treatment from the league? 

In my opinion, I think its kind of hard to believe otherwise. 

A game doesnt necessarily have to be "fixed" in order for someone to have their hand in the outcome of it. Look at the NBA from a few years ago. Some of those refs came out and whole heartedly admitted that they gave some teams (bigger markets) preferential treatment during games. 

There is just too much money on the line and too much at stake to not believe that the results of these games are skewed in the direction of certain markets and teams. 

If this was true LA would have won more game this year and the Jets wouldn't be irrelevant. Little old Green Bay Wisconsin has a tiny market yet they somehow win consistently. Dallas was irrelevant for almost 15 years, why would that be when that market is huge?

I think teams get preferential treatment in the way their players are fined/punished (although Brady got smakced), and in scheduling, and in new rule proposals. I do not however believe there is any organized directive from the league office to manipulate games. There is human bias in everything, so if a ref decides to do that on his own accord nothing you can do about it, but as I stated I do not believe there is a push from up top to change outcomes of games.

The money argument doesn't hold water. The revenue is driven by large national numbers across all markets. The guy in Iowa doesn't care that NE is winning. In fact one could argue they'd be better off making the big market teams that have had success lose in order to bring down a giant which the average man tends to eat up.

[WeezyBengal]

(01-11-2017, 01:01 PM)Ctfan73 Wrote: I think it makes no sense to say that the NFL fixes it's own games.  The league is hugely profitable regardless of who wins the games.  If the league office is directing the officials to favor a certain team, why has no official come forward and exposed it?  Are they being paid off?   The amount of $ you'd have to pay the officials to silence them would exceed any increase in profits due to higher ratings for a certain team winning vs. another.

They would not risk the integrity of the league when they already are so profitable and have been for decades.

IMO the officiating is not very good.  I've been following the league since the 1970's.  There was a lot of bad calls then, there are a lot of bad calls now.  It's very easy to take a call that favors a 'popular' team and say that's proof of fixing.  Doesn't make it true.

There is so much BS in this post its hard not to reply. 

It would benefit the league immensely to have who they want playing and winning in certain games. You dont think an AFC Championship game between the Pats and Steelers would draw more hype/publicity/viewers than an AFC Championship game of the Dolphins and Bengals? 

Integrity of the league? Youre kidding, right? The same league that covered up concussions for years, continuously lets players off the hook for bad life choices that are detrimental to the league, and has completely sold itself out to make a buck? 

It wouldnt be that hard to skew games in favor of certain teams. Meet with officials, tell them to call pass interference a little tighter for a certain team etc. Thats all it takes. 

If the NBA could do it, the NFL could certainly do it.  

[WeezyBengal]

(01-11-2017, 01:06 PM)Au165 Wrote: If this was true LA would have won more game this year and the Jets wouldn't be irrelevant. Little old Green Bay Wisconsin has a tiny market yet they somehow win consistently. Dallas was irrelevant for almost 15 years, why would that be when that market is huge?

I think teams get preferential treatment in the way their players are fined/punished (although Brady got smakced), and in scheduling, and in new rule proposals. I do not however believe there is any organized directive from the league office to manipulate games. There is human bias in everything, so if a ref decides to do that on his own accord nothing you can do about it, but as I stated I do not believe there is a push from up top to change outcomes of games.

The money argument doesn't hold water. The revenue is driven by large national numbers across all markets. The guy in Iowa doesn't care that NE is winning. In fact one could argue they'd be better off making the big market teams that have had success lose in order to bring down a giant which the average man tends to eat up.

So you do agree that certain teams get preferential treatment? 

The Jets and Cowboys sucked for years. Its hard to get preferential treatment during games when your team is just awful. Im not saying the league is talking to the opposing quarterback thats going up against a terrible Dallas team and saying "hey, throw 4 ints this game, the Cowboys need to win". 

Now that the Cowboys are relevant and winning are they going to get "looser" pass interference calls when they play a team like the Bengals or Browns in a relevant game that the league wants to affect the outcome of? Absolutely I do. 

Also, just an FYI, Green Bay has like the third biggest fan base in the NFL.

[McC]

(01-11-2017, 11:44 AM)Sled21 Wrote: Oswald did kill Kennedy. What they don't want to tell you though is that Kennedy was not the target, and was just hit because Oswald was an ok shot. Oswald was shooting at Gov. Connelly, who he blamed for ruining his life...... but, that would not look as good when you say the POTUS was just collateral damage.

Not to derail the thread, but if Connelly was the target, why was he hit once and Kennedy twice?  I've heard a lot of theories on that thing but never this one.

[Fan_in_Kettering]

The NFL is not fixed.  It’s broken.

[Au165]

(01-11-2017, 01:19 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: So you do agree that certain teams get preferential treatment? 

The Jets and Cowboys sucked for years. Its hard to get preferential treatment during games when your team is just awful. Im not saying the league is talking to the opposing quarterback thats going up against a terrible Dallas team and saying "hey, throw 4 ints this game, the Cowboys need to win". 

Now that the Cowboys are relevant and winning are they going to get "looser" pass interference calls when they play a team like the Bengals or Browns in a relevant game that the league wants to affect the outcome of? Absolutely I do. 

Also, just an FYI, Green Bay has like the third biggest fan base in the NFL.

I said I did, but preferential treatment and a potential RICO case are different.

They could have called holding or PI on those INTS. There were plenty of ways to influence outcomes if that was the idea.

This is just personal bias of your own with no real way to substantiate.

The Seahawks now have a huge following after being a shit following in a small market for years. After being good in recent years their popularity has grown, it is a reaction to being good they didn't get calls because of the market they were in. While Green Bay has a huge following now their following didn't really grow national until the early 90's.

Bias and criminal behavior are different. We have already been through this. The NFL isn't going to risk FBI investigations over getting the Steelers into the SB because frankly it will be the highest rated TV show of the year with or without them.

[Ctfan73]

(01-11-2017, 01:13 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: There is so much BS in this post its hard not to reply. 

It would benefit the league immensely to have who they want playing and winning in certain games. You dont think an AFC Championship game between the Pats and Steelers would draw more hype/publicity/viewers than an AFC Championship game of the Dolphins and Bengals? 

Integrity of the league? Youre kidding, right? The same league that covered up concussions for years, continuously lets players off the hook for bad life choices that are detrimental to the league, and has completely sold itself out to make a buck? 

It wouldnt be that hard to skew games in favor of certain teams. Meet with officials, tell them to call pass interference a little tighter for a certain team etc. Thats all it takes. 

If the NBA could do it, the NFL could certainly do it.  

OK, you just tell the refs which team to favor and they just do it.  If that was happening someone would have come forward to expose it.  How do they pull that off?

Yes, of course, certain match-ups will generate better ratings.  I don't believe it's worth risking the scandal that would occur if it ever came out that the league was fixing it's own games.

If you think the league is that corrupt why do you still follow it?

[WeezyBengal]

(01-11-2017, 01:32 PM)Au165 Wrote: I said I did, but preferential treatment and a potential RICO case are different.

They could have called holding or PI on those INTS. There were plenty of ways to influence outcomes if that was the idea.

This is just personal bias of your own with no real way to substantiate.

The Seahawks now have a huge following after being a shit following in a small market for years. After being good in recent years their popularity has grown, it is a reaction to being good they didn't get calls because of the market they were in. While Green Bay has a huge following now their following didn't really grow national until the early 90's.

Bias and criminal behavior are different. We have already been through this. The NFL isn't going to risk FBI investigations over getting the Steelers into the SB because frankly it will be the highest rated TV show of the year with or without them.

Sorry man, but we will just agree to disagree. Read the article below about the NBA ref scandal. Leagues can subtlety manipulate games and outcomes using refs. 

http://www.ibtimes.com/nba-rigged-ex-referee-tim-donaghy-claims-nba-instructed-officials-favor-nets-over-raptors-1575437

[WeezyBengal]

(01-11-2017, 01:32 PM)Ctfan73 Wrote: OK, you just tell the refs which team to favor and they just do it.  If that was happening someone would have come forward to expose it.  How do they pull that off?

Yes, of course, certain match-ups will generate better ratings.  I don't believe it's worth risking the scandal that would occur if it ever came out that the league was fixing it's own games.

If you think the league is that corrupt why do you still follow it?

I dont believe the league comes to the refs and says "hey, make sure the Cowboys win this week". 

I do think league officials may sit down with refs before certain games to meet, go over the game, review tape, and give their input like "hey that number 55 for the Bengals tends to hit low and mouth off to officials, lets make sure we call that tight this game and flag him on his first offense" or something along those lines. 

[Ctfan73]

(01-11-2017, 01:36 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: Sorry man, but we will just agree to disagree. Read the article below about the NBA ref scandal. Leagues can subtlety manipulate games and outcomes using refs. 

http://www.ibtimes.com/nba-rigged-ex-referee-tim-donaghy-claims-nba-instructed-officials-favor-nets-over-raptors-1575437

Tim Donaghy, that's a real credible source.

[WeezyBengal]

(01-11-2017, 01:41 PM)Ctfan73 Wrote: Tim Donaghy, that's a real credible source.

A former NBA referee who was caught manipulating the outcomes of games? Isnt that what we're talking about? 

[Au165]

(01-11-2017, 01:36 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: Sorry man, but we will just agree to disagree. Read the article below about the NBA ref scandal. Leagues can subtlety manipulate games and outcomes using refs. 

http://www.ibtimes.com/nba-rigged-ex-referee-tim-donaghy-claims-nba-instructed-officials-favor-nets-over-raptors-1575437

"Despite Donaghy’s claims, the box scores from the first two games of the Nets-Raptors series dispute the notion that Toronto was judged more harshly by officials. Through the two games, the Nets were whistled for more personal fouls (45) than the Raptors (44)."

SO....basically the FACTS don't support what the convicted felon is saying.

[Pat5775]

It's fixed. Without a doubt. Just to what extent is it fixed? Remember, we were able to win a game at Pittsburgh in 2012 on the 35th anniversary of the immaculate reception with a playoff spot on the line. It's all the media talked about all week and shockingly, the little guys were allowed to win without any controversy. It's fixed, but not fixed enough for little guys to never have chance to reach the elite level (see: Seahawks with Wilson and Carroll... You won't see them get screwed like Super Bowl XL again)

[Trademark]

Who really knows this year's playoffs has all the big market teams...Anyways if the NFL is fixed, expect the Bengals to win their first super bowl next season with it being Marvin's last before he retires