Football Football and My Crisis of Faith. - Page 8

**The Franchise** · 12-09-2013, 10:21 AM

It's getting harder and harder to watch football with other "fans". I'm not a "know it all"....but when people tell me that he couldn't have caught it because the WR was "double blocked" or complain every time the offense runs the ball because "the run never works!". .....I want to kill someone.

**Buehler445** · 12-09-2013, 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pestilence

It's getting harder and harder to watch football with other "fans". I'm not a "know it all"....but when people tell me that he couldn't have caught it because the WR was "double blocked" or complain every time the offense runs the ball because "the run never works!". .....I want to kill someone.

What? Who are you watching with?

On a hilarious (perhaps only to me) side note I went to the bar with my buddies in Sidney. I believe the NU game was on PPV. Anyway, they went to watch the game I went to drink. Well they got beat down and some old crusty bastard piped up and informed the bar that they should get a coach that runs the triple option and get some of those Nebraska farm kids on the line.

I laughed. Hard.

**The Franchise** · 12-09-2013, 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buehler445

What? Who are you watching with?

On a hilarious (perhaps only to me) side note I went to the bar with my buddies in Sidney. I believe the NU game was on PPV. Anyway, they went to watch the game I went to drink. Well they got beat down and some old crusty bastard piped up and informed the bar that they should get a coach that runs the triple option and get some of those Nebraska farm kids on the line.

I laughed. Hard.

The double blocked comment came from my wife.

I had to stop watching football with her.

Direckshun · 12-09-2013, 10:41 AM

You want to get really depressed?

The Kansas City Chiefs are not a grassroots team that is supported by the community and runs to represent it. It's a corporation built to make money off the community and is supported by a conglomerate of corporations who are all doing the same thing.

And that's what you're rooting for every Sunday.

Kind of takes the magic away from it, does it not?

**Rain Man** · 12-09-2013, 10:47 AM

A few responses that I would add to the discussion:

First, teams are welcome to make their own mistakes, and are independently managed. The Chiefs can make the bonehead decision to not draft a quarterback for 30 years, and that's their call. The league doesn't care about that stuff, and it's an independent issue.

Second, I don't think that refs are explicitly told to rig games for one team or another, though it wouldn't surprise me at this point. But I have no doubt that they're told to "keep things close" within the context of the game, and if you "keep things close" then that's going to favor the teams with the big quarterback stars since they're more likely to get a bolt of lightning score. Then, voila! Instant drama! And atop that of course you have rules that are tilted toward the attributes that make stars. We want star quarterbacks in this league, so you can't touch a receiver. If you touch a receiver, the quarterback gets four more chances.

Having said that, take a look at the Patriots call yesterday, or the personal foul call on Bernard Pollard in the Broncos game. Do you really want to watch a football game where Bernard Pollard's shoulder bump on Eric Decker warrants four more downs for Peyton Manning? I don't. It's not a sport any more if that's the way things work. Like I said, I don't think that the refs are explicitly told to rig games, but some of these calls that always seem to favor the stars really make me wonder when they produce more short-term revenue for the league.

Third, bearcat's earlier post hit it right on the spot. The league is a business, and the management team is being given orders to increase revenues and profits by XX percent per year. They're going to do that. If the sport of football gets in the way, then that's too bad. They're going to make the changes and do the things that will keep the multi-billion dollar business growing, per their orders. That's what really bothered me about their writing contest. It was a contest about people's love of football, and there was clearly no one in the judging room who loved football and protected the integrity of the game.

Fourth, I stand by my casino example. The league doesn't know in Week 1 who's going to win the Super Bowl. There's too much chaos on the field for that. But they know who they want to position for it from a revenue perspective, and they're going to tweak the odds here and there as they're able. Can the Chiefs win a Super Bowl? Yeah, if a whole bunch of stuff falls right and they can stop Manning and Brady on eight or nine downs when it should be three or four. Or maybe in the long run they can win if they blunder into drafting a media star. But the latter's not going to happen in flyover country.

Fifth, maybe this is just destiny. The league started small and it was a sport. It blew up into a national phenomenon and the dollars exploded and all of a sudden it was a multi-billion dollar business. At that point you have to start treating it like a multi-billion dollar business, and that's when the lawyers and the marketers and the p.r. people come in and the football people leave. But at this point they're just companies, not teams. I'm not going to buy a Medtronics shirt or a Boeing shirt and cheer loudly and high-five when their earnings reports come out. Why should I do that when an NFL company has success?

lazepoo · 12-09-2013, 10:57 AM

I completely understand how you feel. The notion of everything being a calculated production has extended itself past football for me though. I think that most major products are designed to appeal to the broadest market of groups even when that is at the expense of the groups that originally popularized whatever that product was. It's a slow creep towards ensuring that everything mainstream is completely accessible for casual enjoyment regardless of what that does to the integrity of the original product as the rough edges are sanded smooth and all the corners are padded.

The same thing has happened to mainstream music and literature. Most music is slickly produced and easily consumable without a substantive message, most books are written with a focus on accessibility to reading groups and casual readers (and familiar, formulaic plots) without regard for the literary characteristics of classic works. Look at movies: to paraphrase your original post, blockbusters today are an orgy of special effects. It's all in pursuit of the almighty dollar rather than the pursuit of a goal or artistic ideal.

Our world has been sapped of authenticity by commerce, and I would argue that this extends to our jobs as well. Businesses exist to make money first and provide a service second, and their focus is on doing what's right for them right now, not on the long term or the greater good.

So, what's happening in the NFL is just a reflection of what's happening in the world at large, we just didn't notice until it seeped into football, an area we'd believed was shielded from that sort of insidious effect by virtue of it being a game rather than a business, a fact that is no longer true.

**The Franchise** · 12-09-2013, 11:02 AM

Don't forget fantasy football. That shit is a multi-million dollar business. I'm not going to talk shit about it because I play it.

**Rain Man** · 12-09-2013, 11:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pestilence

Don't forget fantasy football. That shit is a multi-million dollar business. I'm not going to talk shit about it because I play it.

Despite my loss of faith in the league, I still highly recommend Sandbox Football as a game of skill.

Sannyasi · 12-09-2013, 11:49 AM

I don't see why it would make more sense for the NFL to rig games. Why would you risk the integrity of a multi-billion dollar industry to make things slightly easier for the marketing guys?

Strictly from a risk vs. reward standpoint, I don't see how anyone could come to the conclusion that fixing games would be in the best interest of the NFL.

**Rausch** · 12-09-2013, 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sannyasi

I don't see why it would make more sense for the NFL to rig games. Why would you risk the integrity of a multi-billion dollar industry to make things slightly easier for the marketing guys?

Strictly from a risk vs. reward standpoint, I don't see how anyone could come to the conclusion that fixing games would be in the best interest of the NFL.

For the same reason the NFL and MLB ignored steroids for so long...

Sannyasi · 12-09-2013, 12:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rausch

For the same reason the NFL and MLB ignored steroids for so long...

The NFL still ignores steroids because the fans don't care about them. Everyone knows that most of the players on every team are doing it.

Amnorix · 12-09-2013, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sannyasi

The NFL still ignores steroids because the fans don't care about them. Everyone knows that most of the players on every team are doing it.

This is true across all sports, pretty much. The leagues just want enough of a policy/system to avoid being perceived as ignoring it or in the bag allowing it, but ultimately they just hope there's never a scandal...

**Rain Man** · 12-09-2013, 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sannyasi

I don't see why it would make more sense for the NFL to rig games. Why would you risk the integrity of a multi-billion dollar industry to make things slightly easier for the marketing guys?

Strictly from a risk vs. reward standpoint, I don't see how anyone could come to the conclusion that fixing games would be in the best interest of the NFL.

Because you have orders to increase revenues by 3.5 percent a year, and the easiest way to do that and keep your multi-million dollar salary is to see the league's biggest stars playing in the games with large viewer ratings potential.

Again, I don't think they're fixing games to ensure who'll win. I think they're working to ensure that games are close and exciting and have last-minute scores to pull out victories, preferably by the league's biggest stars. The league isn't sitting down and saying "Listen, the Saints are going to win this year, and they're going to go 13-3 with losses at Green Bay, Houston, and Chicago." They can't do that. But they can say, "We want a passing offense because passes produce more consumer engagement, and we want our biggest stars to be in exciting games, so let's keep 'em close and give those guys every chance to win."

Sannyasi · 12-09-2013, 12:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rain Man

Because you have orders to increase revenues by 3.5 percent a year, and the easiest way to do that and keep your multi-million dollar salary is to see the league's biggest stars playing in the games with large viewer ratings potential.

Again, I don't think they're fixing games to ensure who'll win. I think they're working to ensure that games are close and exciting and have last-minute scores to pull out victories, preferably by the league's biggest stars. The league isn't sitting down and saying "Listen, the Saints are going to win this year, and they're going to go 13-3 with losses at Green Bay, Houston, and Chicago." They can't do that. But they can say, "We want a passing offense because passes produce more consumer engagement, and we want our biggest stars to be in exciting games, so let's keep 'em close and give those guys every chance to win."

I can see why the results in recent years would lead some people to those conclusions. After all, the NFL marketing guys get paid millions of dollars to craft storylines out of these results that appeal to the public and spark interest in the sport. If you are a public relations guy after the Saints win the Super Bowl you'd be stupid not to invoke the triumphant spirit of a team giving hope to a city still coming back from a natural disaster. That shit sells, specifically to the more sentimental viewers that the NFL seems keen on attracting. However, the fact that these narratives exist is not evidence that they have been reverse engineered.

As far as the preferential treatment for super star players, no one can pretend to know the individual psychology of each referee, but I don't see it as a policy. Maybe my memories are different, but I don't recall Brady or Manning needing massive intervention from the refs to win their championships. There are so many individual moments in a game that someone could point to in hindsight, but in reality, isn't it much simpler to admit that these players win because they are damn good?

**Bearcat** · 12-09-2013, 12:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sannyasi

I can see why the results in recent years would lead some people to those conclusions. After all, the NFL marketing guys get paid millions of dollars to craft storylines out of these results that appeal to the public and spark interest in the sport. If you are a public relations guy after the Saints win the Super Bowl you'd be stupid not to invoke the triumphant spirit of a team giving hope to a city still coming back from a natural disaster. That shit sells, specifically to the more sentimental viewers that the NFL seems keen on attracting. However, the fact that these narratives exist is not evidence that they have been reverse engineered.

As far as the preferential treatment for super star players, no one can pretend to know the individual psychology of each referee, but I don't see it as a policy. Maybe my memories are different, but I don't recall Brady or Manning needing massive intervention from the refs to win their championships. There are so many individual moments in a game that someone could point to in hindsight, but in reality, isn't it much simpler to admit that these players win because they are damn good?

I don't think anyone is really stating otherwise. The NFL has created a QB league for the high scores and excitement, so of course the best QBs are going to have the best chance of winning. And yes, it's easy to come up with a number of conspiracies in hindsight... you could list reasons why the NFL would want any team in the league to win a SB, but of course some reasons are better than others.

I don't really believe the conspiracies, but there's really no doubt the NFL would benefit from certain outcomes and there's really no doubt the NFL is all about money these days. Like Rain Man said, I don't think it's predetermined at all... if the Saints don't make the playoffs after Katrina, there are always other storylines... but once they're there, if it's all about business and entertainment, it would almost be dumb not to nudge the Saints along IF they need a little push along the way.

I agree with you for the most part... conspiracy nuts will always find a reason the NFL wanted team x to win a SB or spin a certain call or whatever, and those reasons existing doesn't make for a valid conspiracy... but, if the conference championship rolls around and there's a chance a team named the Patriots could make it to the SB right after 9/11, or the SB rolls around and the Saints have a chance to win it after Katrina, I don't think it's a big stretch the NFL would have something tucked away for such occasions.

12-09-2013, 10:21 AM	#1
The Franchise Most Valuable Villain Join Date: Dec 2006 Casino cash: $2055047	It's getting harder and harder to watch football with other "fans". I'm not a "know it all"....but when people tell me that he couldn't have caught it because the WR was "double blocked" or complain every time the offense runs the ball because "the run never works!". .....I want to kill someone.
Posts: 92,316

12-09-2013, 10:41 AM	#4
Direckshun __ Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Springpatch Casino cash: $2033447	You want to get really depressed? The Kansas City Chiefs are not a grassroots team that is supported by the community and runs to represent it. It's a corporation built to make money off the community and is supported by a conglomerate of corporations who are all doing the same thing. And that's what you're rooting for every Sunday. Kind of takes the magic away from it, does it not?
Posts: 59,693

12-09-2013, 10:47 AM	#5
Rain Man Seize life. Be an ermine. Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: My house Casino cash: $-762449 VARSITY	A few responses that I would add to the discussion: First, teams are welcome to make their own mistakes, and are independently managed. The Chiefs can make the bonehead decision to not draft a quarterback for 30 years, and that's their call. The league doesn't care about that stuff, and it's an independent issue. Second, I don't think that refs are explicitly told to rig games for one team or another, though it wouldn't surprise me at this point. But I have no doubt that they're told to "keep things close" within the context of the game, and if you "keep things close" then that's going to favor the teams with the big quarterback stars since they're more likely to get a bolt of lightning score. Then, voila! Instant drama! And atop that of course you have rules that are tilted toward the attributes that make stars. We want star quarterbacks in this league, so you can't touch a receiver. If you touch a receiver, the quarterback gets four more chances. Having said that, take a look at the Patriots call yesterday, or the personal foul call on Bernard Pollard in the Broncos game. Do you really want to watch a football game where Bernard Pollard's shoulder bump on Eric Decker warrants four more downs for Peyton Manning? I don't. It's not a sport any more if that's the way things work. Like I said, I don't think that the refs are explicitly told to rig games, but some of these calls that always seem to favor the stars really make me wonder when they produce more short-term revenue for the league. Third, bearcat's earlier post hit it right on the spot. The league is a business, and the management team is being given orders to increase revenues and profits by XX percent per year. They're going to do that. If the sport of football gets in the way, then that's too bad. They're going to make the changes and do the things that will keep the multi-billion dollar business growing, per their orders. That's what really bothered me about their writing contest. It was a contest about people's love of football, and there was clearly no one in the judging room who loved football and protected the integrity of the game. Fourth, I stand by my casino example. The league doesn't know in Week 1 who's going to win the Super Bowl. There's too much chaos on the field for that. But they know who they want to position for it from a revenue perspective, and they're going to tweak the odds here and there as they're able. Can the Chiefs win a Super Bowl? Yeah, if a whole bunch of stuff falls right and they can stop Manning and Brady on eight or nine downs when it should be three or four. Or maybe in the long run they can win if they blunder into drafting a media star. But the latter's not going to happen in flyover country. Fifth, maybe this is just destiny. The league started small and it was a sport. It blew up into a national phenomenon and the dollars exploded and all of a sudden it was a multi-billion dollar business. At that point you have to start treating it like a multi-billion dollar business, and that's when the lawyers and the marketers and the p.r. people come in and the football people leave. But at this point they're just companies, not teams. I'm not going to buy a Medtronics shirt or a Boeing shirt and cheer loudly and high-five when their earnings reports come out. Why should I do that when an NFL company has success? __________________ Active fan of the greatest team in NFL history.
Posts: 145,588

12-09-2013, 11:02 AM	#7
The Franchise Most Valuable Villain Join Date: Dec 2006 Casino cash: $2055047	Don't forget fantasy football. That shit is a multi-million dollar business. I'm not going to talk shit about it because I play it.
Posts: 92,316

12-09-2013, 11:49 AM	#9
Sannyasi Veteran Join Date: Jan 2010 Casino cash: $9963714	I don't see why it would make more sense for the NFL to rig games. Why would you risk the integrity of a multi-billion dollar industry to make things slightly easier for the marketing guys? Strictly from a risk vs. reward standpoint, I don't see how anyone could come to the conclusion that fixing games would be in the best interest of the NFL.
Posts: 2,616