NFL is Fixed

[Boffo97]

Referees on the fix in a Playoff Game is by definition of "Massive."
This isn't like hustling pool at Me & Ed's Pizza Parlor

But nonetheless, I'm not suggesting massive conspiracy or arguing that that's what it is, but let's look at that for a moment:

With this scenario only, I'm saying there has to be 3 refs and outside forces involved. Cause these guys are by the nature of their profession (refs) under MASSIVE scrutiny. So there has to be some plan. That is all I am saying. Someone outside themselves has to place the bets - or the order has to be given by the NFL higher ups to skew things one way or the other. And they have to be super super clean with how they perform that task, especially in today's society with all the technology involved. It's getting harder and harder to pull something off. So there has to be something massive going on for it to be on such a big stage.

My point again is this:
Last Night's call is not a play that illustrates elite match fixing prowess because then there would have never picked up the flag. That's my point. (I gave my reasons above)
And that Last Night's call is only proof of a SUPER FAST GAME that is filled with a crap load of rules that things guys have a hard time with, and it is just an extraordinarily bad call, especially when there are so many judgement calls.

You're again making assumptions in my argument that aren't there. I never said anything about bets.

I just think officials aren't calling the games down the middle. It might not even be deliberate on their parts. But the bad calls are NOT evening out as they should be if bad calls were the only factor in play.

 

[den-the-coach]

The NFL needs to go to full time officials and what really pisses me off is when the NFL responds...."What do they do in the off season?" Okay here's a thought you pencil neck geeks, how about you have them train like the athletes have too and take a series of tests as well so the know the freaking rules? Then maybe they could get the correct call.

 

[Stranger]

Nothing has been fed to me since I was about 2 years old (give or take 5 years).

Where did you get the "Conspiracy Theory" meme? That came from a multi-million dollar media machine, including Hollywood, radio, TV, news print, and book publishing. This meme didn't just come out of thin air.

Conspiracy theories are usually just an easy way for lazy people to get out of doing the hard work needed to find out why something actually is what it is.

As far as all your "Questions", I guess I'd be in the camp of being too lazy to answer them. That's essentially what you're saying, right?

On the other hand, how come you're too lazy to understand the long and well developed science of propaganda? Why do you default to memes handed to you by consumer media to define your perspective on the world? How come you don't understand how your brain works, how a system of objects impacts your ability to perceive, and how the social construction of reality is perpetrated?

You strive for some semblance of rationality, but then don't have the foundational understanding to even delve into a meaningful discussion. The answers aren't taught in school, or handed out through the mainstream. But they are, however, available, and provided by highly credible and recognized sources backed up by years of well funded research. Why isn't this knowledge in your realm of understanding?

PS. In another thread, from a few months ago, I provided a credible answer that explains motive. I'll have to find that and refer to it.

 

[Stranger]

how about negative passbook savings by some institutions for 2015

ouch. are you talking across the bank's entire portfolio? fiat is toast.

 

[Alan]

Stranger misreading me:
As far as all your "Questions", I guess I'd be in the camp of being too lazy to answer them. That's essentially what you're saying, right?

That's not what I'm saying Stranger. The "are usually just" part of what I said means that I'm not talking about you in particular or I would have said you instead of that. I was speaking in general terms.

Sorry for the confusion. :seizure:

 

[duckhunter]

I disagreed with everything you said in your last post but most of your points require an extensive explanation to debunk. Except the one I'm quoting.

We're in a recession and the government's prime interest rate is effectively at 0%. I won't go into the reasons why it's so except to say that by pumping all that money into the economy we're not in the horrendous shape that Europe and most of the rest of the world is. Supply and demand (I assume you like capitalism?) insures that the banks (they aren't philanthropic organizations you know ) have no need to pay savings accounts (where they normally get much of their money to lend) any interest because the supply of "free" money from the government is virtually limitless and the demand (borrowers) is small. When the cost to borrow from the government goes up (causing the supply to go down) so will the interest on your savings account. Meanwhile, they still have to cover their costs of housing your money (unless you want to put it under your mattress) and those fees cause a negative rate of return.

Where's the conspiracy?

I can explain everything else in your post too via PM if you'd like.

I really don't need an explanation of economics, accounting or Government/corporate management. I have a lifetime of education, a passionate advocacy of study of the most brilliant economic and philosophic minds in the last few centuries and experience in such fields. I will agree that we are in recession but as you are aware the government's rejiggered/manipulated GDP reports since 2008 show small growth for each quarter since then (a separate debate unto itself and in conflict with your statement of recession and my agreement). Not to belabor any points, but savings is the lifeblood and texture of 'capital' formation. It is paramount to future growth and it is paramount to banker solvency and liquidity under most circumstances. What has occurred is as you say, the Fed's cheap money policy which is actually what the classical economists define as 'monetizing the debt' and has all the dire consequences or more appropriately horrors associated creating money out of thin air (taking money out of your left pocket and putting it into your right pocket and calling that growth), credit over saturation of nations, corporations and individuals. More presciently, we are in Kondratieff's winter. I'm sure you are familiar with the father of K-Wave theory and cyclical theory in general. I'd love to hear your views on Hayak or Von Mises, if you care to share them.

The conspiracy theory that I mock is main stream media, Wall Street, and Wash DCs insistence to hanging onto watered down, more correctly bastardized reliance and application of the Keynesian economic model. Once upon a time, conventional economic, financial, accounting, and banking diciplines recognized that upon entering recession, cleansing of balance sheets a prerequisite for the next cycle of new growth. Now most financial and fiscal authorities are deathly afraid of removing any rot from anyone's books in the world because no one really knows the dominoes that fall as a result in the $1.25 quadrillion derivative world, their tool box is essentially bare and we will soon find out how ineffective and insufficient. Essentially, bankers are afraid to loan unless government guarantees coincide. I would watch the death rattle of bankers most recent foray into junk oil and gas world. Simply put, when one refers to conspiracy, in a left-handed way, they are exalting conventional wisdom which is very similar to hanging onto ideas like the world is flat. So as I approach my jumping off place in life, I cry for the mess we leave our children and am ashamed of my generation's dropping the ball.

I'll leave it that. But if you want to enlighten me by all means send me a email.

 

[beej]

I don't know if the nfl is fixed. I do know that I quit watching the NBA a long time ago because of their officiating. Just became disinterested. It could happen to football too.

 

[duckhunter]

ouch. are you talking across the bank's entire portfolio? fiat is toast.

Already in parts of the world, negative passbook savings exist. Arbitrary haircuts have been applied to pension funds and depositors, here and abroad. We are not far behind. Of more concern, under new and current banking crisis rules and regulations, bank depositors have been reclassified as unsecured creditors. Once the FDIC Ponzi scheme or safety net (however you want to look at it) goes up in smoke since it is leveraged under 1% similar to AIG (the Federal Reserve still owns much of the company) and the new bankruptcy laws are instituted depositors will fall in the pecking order behind bond holders and ahead of bank shareholders. So the government will chose an arbitrary large number to give depositors their haircuts. It's not a question of if, but when.

I would suggest daily reading of Zerohedge.com to anyone. I don't mind sending 'you' or a few others email back and forth.

 

[Alan]

duckhunter wanting to be enlightened:
But if you want to enlighten me by all means send me a email.