Is the NFL and its refs out to "get us"?

[BigRedChief]

You conspiracy nuts need to stop this crap.The game wasn't fixed. This poor old me routine on here is getting old.



The NFL loves the Chiefs and Mahomes. They are the exact team they want playing in the NFL. GMF is nothing but a Mahomes lovefest every morning. All of the NFL network shows tout Mahomes and the Chiefs offense. They flexed us into two straight weeks on SNF. Its so obvious other teams fans are bitching about the constant Mahomes/Chiefs love fest.But, they are out to get us?

Another one is the NFL doesnt want a small market winning the SB. Are these conspiracy nuts paying attention? Small markets don't matter if your the big dog. Rogers in GB, Manning in Indy, Hello....evidence you can see with your own eyes.

With all this evidence we can see on a daily basis, somehow you get the idea that the NFL wants the Chiefs to lose. That makes no sense. They are not out to "get us". The NFL is promoting the shit out of us on a daily basis. This conspiracy BS is just that, BS.

[rabblerouser]

Originally Posted by LoneWolf

The Patriots were awful until they found Brady. They’ll be awful again when he retires.

The Pats were awful until Bob Kraft and Bill Parcells/Bill Belichick.

Parcells and Kraft were at odds until Belichick came aboard, then they went to a Super Bowl in Feb 1997 - Tom Brady was in high school.

For the record.

[rabblerouser]

Originally Posted by 38yrsfan

How much did the Tooth Fairy leave under your pillow when you had the implants?

@ Fish's dumbass, who doesn't get how higher TV ratings correlates to more $$ in the NFL's pocket.

And the dumbest "they wouldn't risk it" comment ever.

1. People like Fish and LoneWolf who refuse to believe it ensure that the NFL can do whatever it wants, and there's a core contingent of people who will stay loyal to the brand.

And

2. What major network or newspaper would dare do an expose on the cash cow? The NFL has major deals with ESPN/ABC/Time Warner, NBC, CBS, and FOX. Why would they want to do ANYTHING that may possibly detract viewers?? Remember - more ratings = more money.

[rabblerouser]

Originally Posted by BlackOp

The refs are on the LA express...owners are extremely worried about the Chargers lack of interest while having a 4 BILLION dollar stadium being built. They cant even fill a soccer stadium...what are optics going to be when they have a real stadium to fill in a city that doesn't care. Spanos signed a 20 year lease he cant get out of....it's a cluster****.

They are hoping that manufacturing a winning team in 2018 will win them a new fan base...it why there is all this universal hype around a team that hasn't even been a WC for 5 years...and didn't beat a winning team last year.

Chargers have had two consecutive games where the refs have made glaring, bogus calls.

I would say the Patriots/Rams officiating has as much to do about keeping the Chargers relevant this season. Having the Chiefs running away with the division isnt exactly going to get new Chargers fans hyped enough to buy season tickets. They have already cut expectation by 75%....

The NFL was ABSOLUTLEY banking on Mahomes having opening day jitters...and hoped the Chargers would win at home against KC to kick off the year. It was a deliberate scheduling..along with Steelers on the road in week 2. KC hadn't won there in 30 years. They wanted the Chiefs at 0-2 to start...to drum up the LA hype train...didn't happen.

You can find a post from the offseason where I stated that I hoped we could recover from a possible 0-2 start to get to 2-2 and then 4-4 en route to a 10-6 record and Wild Card loss.

You know...Tru Fan Style.

[rabblerouser]

Originally Posted by Fish

You don't even know how the profits work, dope. The TV network hosting the game charges for ads during telecast.

The NFL is already making buckets of money, they don't need to risk a conspiracy. It's not feasible anyway.

http://thefixisin.net/theproof.html

Doing what it is I do, I find myself in many arguments concerning the true nature of professional sports. Perhaps you find yourself in similar situations as well. If that's the case -- or if you think there is no possible way the professional sports leagues could manipulate, script or outright rig the results of one of their own games -- then the following five facts are for you.


1.
The "Big Four" professional sports leagues - the National Football League (NFL), Major League Baseball (MLB), National Basketball Association (NBA), and National Hockey League (NHL) - possess drafts, anti-trust exemptions and revenue sharing. If the teams within these leagues were truly independent entities, none of this would exist as its flies in the face of the free market companies they purport to be.

The NFL shares 70 to 75 percent of its $10+ billion-a-year income including television/broadcast/internet rights and licensing. Ticket sales are split 66 percent for the home team and the other 34 percent shared equally among all franchises. Only luxury boxes sales (which explains the "need" for new stadiums), local advertising & sponsorships, and official pro shop sales are not shared. No other league shares as much of its income as the NFL.

While also sharing its national TV & internet income, the NBA agreed to a new revenue sharing plan which began with the 2013-14 season. The radical new change in this plan will be that all teams will put 50 percent of its total revenue (minus a few allowable expenses) into a pool. After averaging the total contributed by all teams as well as every team's total payroll, the lowest contributing teams will be able to take out their "fair" share. This will redistribute approximately $140 million within the NBA each season. The most a team could receive under this plan is $16 million. There are limits in place to protect the NBA's highest revenue teams -- including the Boston Celtics, Chicago Bulls, Los Angeles Lakers, New York Knicks, and Orlando Magic -- as prior to the 2011-12 lockout, reportedly only 10 NBA teams were profitable, earning a combined $150 million in the 2010-11 season.

The NHL was the last league to implement a revenue sharing plan. The one it currently possesses is extremely complex. The gist of it is the top 10 money-making teams contribute to a pool from which the bottom 15 teams can collect; however, certain guidelines and benchmarks must first be met before any money can be received. Also, teams in markets with more than 2.5 million television households do not qualify for assistance in this program, meaning the New York Rangers, New York Islanders, Chicago Blackhawks, Los Angeles Kings, Dallas Stars, New Jersey Devils, Philadelphia Flyers, Anaheim Ducks, and San Jose Sharks can only contribute, not receive.

Major League Baseball's plan originally saw each team contribute 31 percent of its local revenue into a pot which was then divided equally amongst the franchises. At the same time, lower-revenue generating teams were granted a larger proportional share of the league's national TV deal. However, MLB's plan recently changed as well, if only slightly, to monitor what teams are doing with that revenue-sharing money they receive -- meaning it must go towards "improving" the team. Supposedly by 2016, 15 teams will not be eligible for any of this money: New York Yankees, New York Mets, Los Angeles Dodgers, Anaheim Angels, Chicago Cubs, Chicago White Sox, Philadelphia Phillies, Boston Red Sox, Texas Rangers, Atlanta Braves, Washington Nationals, Toronto Blue Jays, Houston Astros, San Francisco Giants and Oakland A's.

Just so you're aware, these four leagues generated $21.6 billion in revenue in 2009-10. Of that, $9.7 billion went to their respective athletes. As of 2014, the four leagues' revenue topped $25 billion.

2.

While we call these leagues "sports," they are in fact businesses. Their business is entertainment. The NFL, for one, has actually argued this fact before the Supreme Court as recently as 2010. Being "entertainment," the leagues are legally entitled to do what is needed to entertain their audience, such as the creation and promotion of certain "storylines." Despite arguments to the contrary, this makes the NFL, MLB, NBA, and NHL on par with Roller Derby and Professional Wrestling.



3.

The ticket you purchase to a sporting event reflects this notion of sports being simply entertainment. The "Spygate" lawsuit proves this. In this lawsuit, a New York Jets fan sued the New England Patriots for illegally (by NFL rules) videotaping their opponents' coaching signals. The lawsuit asked for the Jets ticket holders' money back in 10 years worth of games -- the duration of the Patriots "cheating" via this videotaping.

While you can read the U.S. Appeals Court's complete ruling in this case here, Senior Judge Robert E. Cowen's main conclusion was this: "At best, he [Carl Mayer, the plaintive] possessed nothing more than a contractual right to a seat from which to watch an NFL game between the Jets and the Patriots, and this right was clearly honored....Mayer possessed either a license or, at best, a contractual right to enter Giants Stadium and to have a seat from which to watch a professional football game. In the clear language of the ticket stub, ‘[t]his ticket only grants entry into the stadium and a spectator seat for the specified NFL game.’ Mayer actually was allowed to enter the stadium and witnessed the ‘specified NFL game[s]’ between the Jets and Patriots. He thereby suffered no cognizable injury to a legally protected right or interest."

Cowen concluded, "We do not condone the conduct on the part of the Patriots and the team’s head coach, and we likewise refrain from assessing whether the NFL’s sanctions (and its alleged destruction of the videotapes themselves) were otherwise appropriate. We further recognize that professional football, like other professional sports, is a multi-billion dollar business. In turn, ticket-holders and other fans may have legitimate issues with the manner in which they are treated….Significantly, our ruling also does not leave Mayer and other ticket-holders without any recourse. Instead, fans could speak out against the Patriots, their coach, and the NFL itself. In fact, they could even go so far as to refuse to purchase tickets or NFL-related merchandise….However, the one thing they cannot do is bring a legal action in a court of law. [emphasis in original].”

If that is the best protection a ticket provides a fan, do you honestly believe watching a game on television grants one more legal protection?

4.

There is no law preventing a league from fixing its own contest. The two closest federal laws on the books are these:

The "Quiz Show" law which was passed after it was revealed that television networks had been fixing the outcome of nationally televised game shows including Twenty-One and the $64,000 Challenge. The law reads: "(a) Influencing, prearranging, or predetermining outcome
It shall be unlawful for any person, with intent to deceive the listening or viewing public—

(1) To supply to any contestant in a purportedly bona fide contest of intellectual knowledge or intellectual skill any special and secret assistance whereby the outcome of such contest will be in whole or in part prearranged or predetermined.

(2) By means of persuasion, bribery, intimidation, or otherwise, to induce or cause any contestant in a purportedly bona fide contest of intellectual knowledge or intellectual skill to refrain in any manner from using or displaying his knowledge or skill in such contest, whereby the outcome thereof will be in whole or in part prearranged or predetermined.

(3) To engage in any artifice or scheme for the purpose of prearranging or predetermining in whole or in part the outcome of a purportedly bona fide contest of intellectual knowledge, intellectual skill, or chance.

(4) To produce or participate in the production for broadcasting of, to broadcast or participate in the broadcasting of, to offer to a licensee for broadcasting, or to sponsor, any radio program, knowing or having reasonable ground for believing that, in connection with a purportedly bona fide contest of intellectual knowledge, intellectual skill, or chance constituting any part of such program, any person has done or is going to do any act or thing referred to in paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of this subsection.

(5) To conspire with any other person or persons to do any act or thing prohibited by paragraph (1), (2), (3), or (4) of this subsection, if one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of such conspiracy."

Note the repeated use of the word "intellectual" -- not physical. Therefore, this law does not apply to sports.

The Sports Bribery Act of 1964 which was passed to protect the "integrity" of sports from mafia and gambling interests. It reads: "Whoever carries into effect, attempts to carry into effect, or conspires with any other person to carry into effect any scheme in commerce to influence, in any way, by bribery any sporting contest, with knowledge that the purpose of such scheme is to influence by bribery that contest, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both."

The key word in this law being "bribery." If a league instructs one of its employees -- be it an official, coach or athlete -- to influence and/or manipulate an outcome in a certain manner, such action does not break this law.

No one has been arrested for violating the Sports Bribery Act in relation to a professional sporting event -- ever.

5.

It is legal for the media to lie to us all. Not just in the realm of sports, but in every aspect of journalism and mass media. Don't believe me? Read this.

Then go on to realize that the New York Times recently admitted that it -- and virtually every major media outlet -- allows the government to censor its work. The jaw-dropping article/admission can be found here (the full piece is embedded within the linked article).

If this can occur, do you honestly believe that ESPN/ABC/Disney, CBS, FOX, NBC/Universal and Time Warner (which owns TBS, TNT and Sports Illustrated) report truly and accurately on the professional sports world which they fund?

Four of these five mass media conglomerates give the NFL alone $6 billion a season. Are they then going to turn around and investigation any improprieties within the league that threatens those investments? Especially when they are able to legally lie to their consumers while censoring the work of individuals who may be committed to reporting the truth?

As Karl Taro Greenfeld recent wrote in Businessweek, "In a real sense, ESPN no longer covers sports. It controls sports."

With all of this being true, what then is preventing a league -- or all of the leagues -- from fixing the outcome of their own games to maximize profit and revenue which is the very reason why they put on these exhibitions?

The short answer is obvious: Nothing

[BlackOp]

Originally Posted by rabblerouser

You can find a post from the offseason where I stated that I hoped we could recover from a possible 0-2 start to get to 2-2 and then 4-4 en route to a 10-6 record and Wild Card loss.

You know...Tru Fan Style.

The NFL unequivocally wanted the Chargers to win the AFC West...they planted that narrative in the off-season with an "All LA" Superbowl prediction....you know, even though the Chargers haven't beaten a relevant team in years. They didn't plan on Mahomes setting the NFL on fire...

Here is Schein being the mouthpiece he is....https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl...owl/vp-BBMSVMo

They implemented this EXACT manipulative method with the Raiders in 2016...Oakland hype came out of left field as they, too, hadn't won any meaningful games. They were all of a sudden SB favorites created out of thin air. The one common thread was they both were in play for a new stadium...

Raiders went on to set an NFL record for 4th quarter comebacks in 2016...that was heavily aided by the officials. They are actually #2 on my all-time rigged game list...in Mexico vs. the Texans. Ref's short spotted the RB by a yard on two consecutive plays..and even when they challenged didn't give it them. It would have potentially put Houston up two scores late...

They have won 6 games since...in two years. They got their stadium though....suckers.

[rabblerouser]

Originally Posted by BlackOp

The NFL unequivocally wanted the Chargers to win the AFC West...they planted that narrative in the off-season with an "All LA" Superbowl prediction....you know, even though the Chargers haven't beaten a relevant team in years. They didn't plan on Mahomes setting the NFL on fire...

They implemented this EXACT manipulative method with the Raiders in 2016...Oakland hype came out of left field as they, too, hadn't won any meaningful games. They were all of a sudden SB favorites created out of thin air. The one common thread was they both were in play for a new stadium...

Raiders went on to set an NFL record for 4th quarter comebacks in 2016...that was heavily aided by the officials.

They have won 6 games since...in two years. They got their stadium though....suckers.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap300...for-2018-title

[BlackOp]

Originally Posted by rabblerouser

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap300...for-2018-title

People dont want to accept that is an agenda...

[rabblerouser]

Originally Posted by Easy 6

The holier than thou crowd wont get any traction with me

Supposed top shelf professionals dont make that many blatant mistakes

All-Stars!

[rabblerouser]

Originally Posted by BlackOp

People dont want to accept that is an agenda...

Totally.

[TimeForWasp]

I shouldn't have answered this poll while drunk.

[007]

This is a flawed poll. Are the refs out to "get us"? No they are not.

But to say they don't purposely swing a game a certain way from time to time is intellectually dishonest. You see it week in and week out in the NFL. Stars get breaks. Shit teams get shit on. Big market gets aided while small market gets ignored.

I also noticed the Green Bay and Indy comment. How many superbowls have they won in the last 30 years? Yeah, they get shit on too, just not quite as bad.

The refs may not control the game but they do influence certain outcomes. By influence, I mean they steer it a certain way. That doesn't mean a team can't overcome it. The Chiefs had their shot twice Monday night and blew it. But don't try to tell me those refs weren't steering the game.

All that said, it was an incredible game and the Chiefs have proven they belong on the field with the best of the best. Now they just have to overcome and put themselves in that elite tier that gets the favorable calls.

[Imon Yourside]

Originally Posted by 007

This is a flawed poll. Are the refs out to "get us"? No they are not.

But to say they don't purposely swing a game a certain way from time to time is intellectually dishonest. You see it week in and week out in the NFL. Stars get breaks. Shit teams get shit on. Big market gets aided while small market gets ignored.

I also noticed the Green Bay and Indy comment. How many superbowls have they won in the last 30 years? Yeah, they get shit on too, just not quite as bad.

The refs may not control the game but they do influence certain outcomes. By influence, I mean they steer it a certain way. That doesn't mean a team can't overcome it. The Chiefs had their shot twice Monday night and blew it. But don't try to tell me those refs weren't steering the game.

All that said, it was an incredible game and the Chiefs have proven they belong on the field with the best of the best. Now they just have to overcome and put themselves in that elite tier that gets the favorable calls.

Dude the refs are gonna git us, I saw them land in a weird looking space craft and they approached the neighborhood with anal probes drawn. You all would have been smart to run, them anal things hurt I tell ya...HURT!

[rabblerouser]

Originally Posted by 007

This is a flawed poll. Are the refs out to "get us"? No they are not.

But to say they don't purposely swing a game a certain way from time to time is intellectually dishonest. You see it week in and week out in the NFL. Stars get breaks. Shit teams get shit on. Big market gets aided while small market gets ignored.

I also noticed the Green Bay and Indy comment. How many superbowls have they won in the last 30 years? Yeah, they get shit on too, just not quite as bad.

Indy got their one SB the year before their brand new stadium opened.

Coincidence?

Then Peyton moved on to Denver and they get Andrew Luck.

Green Bay is one of the NFL's original franchises and has an historical significance; they'll seemingly win one every 15/20 years or so, even with a HC as terrible as McCarthy (because, let's face it, GB could've won more if they had better coaching.)

Originally Posted by 007

The refs may not control the game but they do influence certain outcomes. By influence, I mean they steer it a certain way. That doesn't mean a team can't overcome it. The Chiefs had their shot twice Monday night and blew it. But don't try to tell me those refs weren't steering the game.

All that said, it was an incredible game and the Chiefs have proven they belong on the field with the best of the best. Now they just have to overcome and put themselves in that elite tier that gets the favorable calls.

100% accurate. The NFL wouldn't stand for such horrid officiating unless in fact it was desired by the NFL.

[Mile High Mania]

[HemiEd]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

Okay, so I've given this issue a lot of thought over the past 45 seconds, and here's what I think.

First, the league has no vendetta against the Chiefs. They don't care about the Chiefs at all.

And that is precisely the problem. If you want clear proof, look at the playoff game last year. The league didn't care if the Chiefs lost or the Titans won. Both of those franchises are irrelevant to them, which is why they rewarded the worst referee in the league the game as a retirement gift instead of following their procedures and assigning refs to games based on their scoring. That's not opinion, right? Didn't the league or Triplette or someone come out and say that the game was a retirement farewell gift to Triplette?

So now let's ask ourselves. Would the league have assigned a known-to-be-subpar referee to a game with the Patriots or the Giants or another big market team? No way. They assigned Triplette to the Chiefs-Titans game because they didn't care about the Chiefs-Titans game, and they trusted the Triplette was at least competent enough to not make a scandal out of it. It turned out that they were wrong and he made a game-changing error that sent the wrong team to the next round, but whatever. Who cares. It was just the Chiefs and the Titans.

So then when you get to games like this, it's easy for a conspiracy theory to be built. There's a very strong business case to be made that the Los Angeles fan base needs to solidified. We all know Los Angeles. If their team gets behind by 10 points they're going to switch channels and watch a rerun of Breaking Bad or Entourage. I spend a lot of time in the LA area, and there's no sports culture there. It's hard to even find a sports bar that's any good. So a conspiracy theorist would say that the two Los Angeles teams need to win and be successful in their first few years in the city, or they'll fade to irrelevancy, which is why the Rams and Raiders (and even the Chargers in their first year) all left in the first place. Oh, and who's the other team in the big game? Kansas City? Meh, Kansas City doesn't matter. (Maybe that changes in the future with Patrick Mahomes II, but it clearly hasn't taken root yet.)

The game last night feeds conspiracy theories because the officiating was completely off the hook biased until the Rams got a 13 point lead. After that, it ratcheted back and was generally evenly called. Maybe that's a coincidence, but simple math (and a few reasonable assumptions) says that the odds are 1,024 to 1 against having one team called for the first 10 penalties of the game and other being called for zero. So yes, maybe it's a coincidence, but it's a rare one. Statistically, you would expect that to happen in one game leaguewide every four years, so it's going to happen, but not often.

The more charitable view, but still an evil one, is that the league wants offense. We know that the league wants offense. They were billing this game as a shootout all week, so if you're a business-oriented league, you tell the refs who are your employees to let the offenses play and be sure that we get some scoring early. This isn't even a conspiracy because it's not favoring one team over the other. It's a business decision, albeit an unethical one. I'd openly believe this, but the theory fell into question when the Chiefs' first offensive play was an 18 yard gain that was called back on a penalty that we never saw.

So yes, there are very clear business reasons for the NFL to want certain markets to do well at certain times (e.g., Los Angeles teams in the 2018-2020 time frame), and there are very clear business reasons for the NFL to want 24/7 offense. We're just supposed to have faith that the league will sacrifice those business interests in the short term to protect the long-term integrity of the sport. Look at Roger Goodell and raise your hand if you believe that he's going to do that. (And I still remember him telling a free agent, 'Why are you considering that small market team? You should be playing in New York.)

Now, are those pressures new? No. There have always been business interests competing with the integrity of the sport, all the way back to 1920. But the differences today are twofold - there's massive, massive money involved now, first and foremost. And second, because there's massive money, the ownership profile has changed. I would trust Lamar Hunt and George Halas and Paul Brown and Ralph Wilson to protect the integrity of the sport. I don't trust Robert Kraft and Stan Kroenke and Jerry Jones at all.

And then on top of all this, we have the problem of technology, which makes it much easier to be critical. In 1965, when the officials called a penalty, you just shrugged and said, "Dang. Penalty." You couldn't go back and see what happened. Now we can. Even if the game is clean as a whistle, there's going to be inconsistency in the officiating, and what's more, replays make the definition of penalties much more complex. Technology is the reason that we've seen endless debates over what is a catch, or what is control of a ball when a player goes over the goal line. The rules are necessarily becoming more complex, and that means that more penalties must be called and more judgments must be made in real time. And that's a major, major problem. If you believe the games are clean, what we're seeing is that human referees cannot judge the complexity of the game accurately in real time.

Even if we assume that the game is clean as a whistle and that everyone at every level of every organization is acting in the best interest of the sport, a very clear imperative is that we need to simplify the rules. Right now, roughly 10 percent of the plays on the field result in a penalty, and the number is rising. That cannot continue. We can't have games like last night where 30 percent of the first quarter's plays are the result of penalty calls. Not only does it damage the entertainment value, but it leads to inconsistency and the appearance of bias. If the league is pure and honest and clean, their next mission HAS to be changes to the game to simplify the rulebook.

Okay, that was rambling. I feel like the Unabomber now.

This post needs more attention, outstanding.