Originally Posted by cosmo20002 (Post 12095296)

Why do think anything you've stated is accurate?

Originally Posted by Anyong Bluth (Post 12095229)

C'mon - what is more plausible? Some games are being fixed in the biggest sport in America that has been setting the line week in and week out for decades. ESPN openly talks about the spread, and the NFL has plenty of business leverage to quash it if they wanted.

Is it collusion on a grand scale?
No

Outside parties I'm sure bribe to influence an outcome.

Since Goddell, whose was always entrenched in the marketing of the NFL, has taken over. I wouldn't be surprised if outcomes and storylines have been desired to create drama and drive the popularity - including massaging a desired way to have things play out. Obviously, not scripted, but subtlely. A few calls or how a game is called can dictate a lot in terms of impact. It's not blatantly rigging the outcome as much as putting your finger on the scale to favor one side .


Not a lot of owners are going to be outraged when the league is making them more profit year after year. These guys aren't Joe Q Public the diehard fan- their billionaire businessmen who can flaunt their wealth by owning an NFL franchise and make tens of millions of dollars a year.

Originally Posted by New World Order (Post 12095324)

1. Multiple consensus betting sites show the money piling on NE,



2.

The betting action in Las Vegas is piling up on the New England Patriots, leaving sportsbooks with a decision heading into championship Sunday.

On Saturday, the Patriots were holding steady as three-point favorites over the Denver Broncos in the AFC Championship Game. The money was lopsided on New England.

At Caesars Palace sportsbooks, five times as much money had been wagered on the Patriots compared to the underdog Broncos. At William Hill's Nevada book, 85 percent of the money bet was on New England. The story was the same almost everywhere.

http://espn.go.com/chalk/story/_/id/...iots-las-vegas

Originally Posted by cosmo20002 (Post 12095287)

...and then everything after you say that indicates you meant to say "yes."

Putting your finger on a scale, as you put it, requires the collusion of not a small amount of people. "They" are either telling refs and/or players/coaches to throw the game or not. There's no kinda.

Originally Posted by Amnorix (Post 12094953)

This is rabblerouser. I hope he's a mult, because if he isn't he's about the dumbest poster on here. He pretty much believes every conspiracy theory out there.

Originally Posted by Dinny Blues (Post 12095336)

Would anyone care for a spot of tea?

Dinny

Originally Posted by Anyong Bluth (Post 12095339)

Oh, like points of emphasis they instruct officials on week to week. . .

Originally Posted by rabblerouser (Post 12095347)

And when officials tell QBs that they 'aren't old enough' to receive certain calls??

Wtf is THAT shit??

ROFL

just goes to prove that the officials don't actually enforce rules; they interpret them, and enforce them arbitrarily. Which is damn close to "game fixing".

Originally Posted by Dinny Blues (Post 12095336)

Would anyone care for a spot of tea?

Dinny

Originally Posted by ptlyon (Post 12095361)

Crambone that tea up your limey ass! :D

Originally Posted by Sully (Post 12095360)

You can't, at the same time, argue against the tuck rule, and also complain about rules being "interpreted."

Originally Posted by rabblerouser (Post 12095390)

I didn't argue against the tuck rule. You're mistaking me with someone else.

I think they got the call correct, and I said as much when it happened, before the replay ruling was announced.

Besides...**** THE RAIDERS.

Originally Posted by B2chiefsfan (Post 12070197)

Cam literally stepped away from the fumble... WTF