Is the NFL Fixed?

[Mojo Ram]

Tim Donaghy: must watch. From 60 minutes. Eye opening.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/ex-nba-ref-tim-donaghys-personal-foul/

My take is that there's no way that Tim Donaghy was an isolated incident in Sterns NBA. Its not an outrageous idea that this hasn't or isn't currently going on in the NFL either.

 

[bluecoconuts]

That's just it... the replacement refs WEREN'T in on it... and while they got calls wrong, it was really strange how some teams really stunk while the replacement refs called games straight up and all of a sudden got their groove back once the "real" refs came back.

If anything, those games were a wonderful experiment in what it looked like to have untainted games. Even with poor quality refereeing, we still got far less BIAS.

And frankly, the replacement refs got substantially better by the third game, so much so imho, that I really feel that the league started planting stories about how they had to go in the media and got with the refs to hash it out because they were losing money and not following their plan.

I mean really, teams were winning that....shouldn't!!!

Which teams? The Falcons, Cardinals, and Texans were the only undefeated teams, and they all continued to win after the replacement refs were gone. It's not just replacement refs though, real refs that have been in the league for a long time, they would eventually get the word out, the potential money from book/TV deals is far more than the NFL could afford to dish out for shutup money, especially when they need to dish it out to. There's been over 200 refs that have worked in the NFL, not including the replacements, potential TV/book deals would be in the millions, and high millions, and the refs wouldn't need to worry about lawsuits or anything like that for coming public, so there would be little incentive to keep their mouth shut once they retired. NFL simply cannot afford to dish out that kind of cash without outsiders taking note.

 

[Stranger]

Which teams? The Falcons, Cardinals, and Texans were the only undefeated teams, and they all continued to win after the replacement refs were gone. It's not just replacement refs though, real refs that have been in the league for a long time, they would eventually get the word out, the potential money from book/TV deals is far more than the NFL could afford to dish out for shutup money, especially when they need to dish it out to. There's been over 200 refs that have worked in the NFL, not including the replacements, potential TV/book deals would be in the millions, and high millions, and the refs wouldn't need to worry about lawsuits or anything like that for coming public, so there would be little incentive to keep their mouth shut once they retired. NFL simply cannot afford to dish out that kind of cash without outsiders taking note.

Your assumption is that publishers and media outlets would want the story, and would pay for the story. The assumption is also that even if a media outlet or publisher paid for the story, that the individual could remain credible in face of a huge PR machine that would inevitably dig-up every piece of evidence, manufactured or otherwise, that would discredit the person speaking-out. Your assumption also is that the individual would feel safe enough to disclose such information, even if there was an economic upside.

In short, it's infinitely more challenging and dangerous that I think you might realize.

 

[Thordaddy]

FWIW IF I truly thought it was fixed,I would quit watching,why watch .
Another aspect to this ,if the players aren't in on the "fix" and there's NO WAY they are ,then they would have another basis for law suit,injuries in a game that was fixed ,in other words exposing yourself to injury in a game that you didn't have a competitive chance of prevailing in, now that would be a massive suit and all these guys with billion dollar franchises would lose 90% of the value,meh the more I thin about it , it certainly isn't fixed BY the league.
Rogue officials ,paid off maybe or who were placing bets themselves possibly but not institutionally

 

[bluecoconuts]

Your assumption is that publishers and media outlets would want the story, and would pay for the story. The assumption is also that even if a media outlet or publisher paid for the story, that the individual could remain credible in face of a huge PR machine that would inevitably dig-up every piece of evidence, manufactured or otherwise, that would discredit the person speaking-out. Your assumption also is that the individual would feel safe enough to disclose such information, even if there was an economic upside.

In short, it's infinitely more challenging and dangerous that I think you might realize.

You really think that the media wouldn't want a story about the biggest sporting league in the states being a total farce with fixed games? They would eat that shit up, they jump on every little potential "scandal" story and run with it as much as they can, often much longer than they should, including sometimes getting people who actually ARE making things up that support their story.

Every media outlet would be on the story, most major publishers and TV/Movie studios would want the story, the sponsors would be interested, there's no amount of NFL PR that would be able to beat that story if the ref actually had evidence, which would not be hard to get if it was indeed fixed (as they would need to be told who to have win each game, etc)... The NFL couldn't physically do anything to the person without huge backlash, they couldn't bury it with PR, they wouldn't be able to do anything. They would crumble, lose fans, etc. Once the story leaked there would be additional looks into the league and the books, outside groups would be doing investigations, the government would likely get involved (because they always do), there's just almost no way the NFL would be able to beat it without removing pretty much every single person in charge, including owners, officials, etc, and totally rebuilding from the ground up, in an extremely transparent way that ensured fans they were being honest, which would take years.

It's just simply not plausible. They'd need to vet incoming officials to make sure they would be okay without giving anything up, need to make sure they never even told their families (which they likely do), never were willing to go public... It's too much.

 

[Stranger]

You really think that the media wouldn't want a story about the biggest sporting league in the states being a total farce with fixed games? They would eat that crap up, they jump on every little potential "scandal" story and run with it as much as they can, often much longer than they should, including sometimes getting people who actually ARE making things up that support their story.

Every media outlet would be on the story, most major publishers and TV/Movie studios would want the story, the sponsors would be interested, there's no amount of NFL PR that would be able to beat that story if the ref actually had evidence, which would not be hard to get if it was indeed fixed (as they would need to be told who to have win each game, etc)... The NFL couldn't physically do anything to the person without huge backlash, they couldn't bury it with PR, they wouldn't be able to do anything. They would crumble, lose fans, etc. Once the story leaked there would be additional looks into the league and the books, outside groups would be doing investigations, the government would likely get involved (because they always do), there's just almost no way the NFL would be able to beat it without removing pretty much every single person in charge, including owners, officials, etc, and totally rebuilding from the ground up, in an extremely transparent way that ensured fans they were being honest, which would take years.

It's just simply not plausible. They'd need to vet incoming officials to make sure they would be okay without giving anything up, need to make sure they never even told their families (which they likely do), never were willing to go public... It's too much.

No, this story is untouchable.

It's one thing to talk about isolated missteps, but it's quite another to bring credible evidence that can destroy an institution. In the case of the latter, the institution will do all that is necessary to defend itself.

 

[bluecoconuts]

No, this story is untouchable.

It's one thing to talk about isolated missteps, but it's quite another to bring credible evidence that can destroy an institution. In the case of the latter, the institution will do all that is necessary to defend itself.

Nothing is untouchable, it would get out, the fact that there has been NOTHING other than fans getting upset and wondering so they can justify why their team is losing without placing blame on them, there hasn't been squat. There would at the very least be something. The story isn't untouchable, everyone would love to be the reporter to break the story, and no matter how much the NFL tried to defend itself they couldn't do it. They would need to spend too much money to keep things quiet that could be spent without garnering attention, and they can't go out and kill people to keep them quiet because that also attracts a lot of attention.

I understand that you're big on finding the conspiracy, but there really isn't one here. We didn't lose because the NFL is fixed. NFL may be able to look the other way while some teams break rules more often, but they're not able to downright fix the league to get the results they want.

 

[Stranger]

Nothing is untouchable, it would get out, the fact that there has been NOTHING other than fans getting upset and wondering so they can justify why their team is losing without placing blame on them, there hasn't been squat. There would at the very least be something. The story isn't untouchable, everyone would love to be the reporter to break the story, and no matter how much the NFL tried to defend itself they couldn't do it. They would need to spend too much money to keep things quiet that could be spent without garnering attention, and they can't go out and kill people to keep them quiet because that also attracts a lot of attention.

I understand that you're big on finding the conspiracy, but there really isn't one here. We didn't lose because the NFL is fixed. NFL may be able to look the other way while some teams break rules more often, but they're not able to downright fix the league to get the results they want.

I couldn't disagree more. But we can only see what can see. I wish I could say more, but this isn't the venue for it.

Moreover, I hope people here realize that the use of the word "conspiracy", which is never a word I use, is infact it's own kind of social condemnation. Perhaps the worst thing someone can be labelled is a "conspiracy theorist", as it connotes crackpot, or one who shouldn't be listened to. It's the scarlet letter of credibility. But what does it really mean? It means a willingness to explore the undisclosed, the undiscussed, the socially uncomfortable. But we use it to squash conversation and exploration.

I've seen the term used regularly on this forum, especially as it pertains to my posts. Mostly because I'm frequently willing to step outside the traditional frames of socially acceptable conversation. It's a derogatory term, and I'm hopeful that the mods here see this and begin to temper its use as a conversational weapon.

 

[bluecoconuts]

I couldn't disagree more. But we can only see what can see. I wish I could say more, but this isn't the venue for it.

Moreover, I hope people here realize that the use of the word "conspiracy", which is never a word I use, is infact it's own kind of social condemnation. Perhaps the worst thing someone can be labelled is a "conspiracy theorist", as it connotes crackpot, or one who shouldn't be listened to. It's the scarlet letter of credibility. But what does it really mean? It means a willingness to explore the undisclosed, the undiscussed, the socially uncomfortable. But we use it to squash conversation and exploration.

I've seen the term used regularly on this forum, especially as it pertains to my posts. Mostly because I'm frequently willing to step outside the traditional frames of socially acceptable conversation. It's a derogatory term, and I'm hopeful that the mods here see this and begin to temper its use as a conversational weapon.

I disagree that this story would be somehow untouchable, when we have 24 hour news networks that try to make everything into a huge deal, even when they're not. CNN went on about that plane for months hoping there would be something.

However, and I may be mistaken, but aren't you one that pushes for free speech, but now you call on others to censor a word because you feel that it's derogatory? What other term would you use, because the idea that the NFL fixes games is by definition a conspiracy.

 

[Stranger]

I disagree that this story would be somehow untouchable, when we have 24 hour news networks that try to make everything into a huge deal, even when they're not. CNN went on about that plane for months hoping there would be something.

However, and I may be mistaken, but aren't you one that pushes for free speech, but now you call on others to censor a word because you feel that it's derogatory? What other term would you use, because the idea that the NFL fixes games is by definition a conspiracy.

General Motors makes cars for profit. That's a conspiracy by definition. Why don't we use the word in this case?

Look, I'm not asking for censorship, I'm just pointing out that the word or term is loaded in today's America. If one wants to use it, then it's only fair that this we discuss this aspect of it.

Anyway, I'm not sure what you're referring to when you mention CNN and "that plane".

But 24hr news cycles of highly controlled content is still control. The frames of allowed discussion are quite narrow in mainstream channels.

In summary, i realize we're not going to agree on this point. I'm okay with that.

 

[jjab360]

Nothing is untouchable, it would get out, the fact that there has been NOTHING other than fans getting upset and wondering so they can justify why their team is losing without placing blame on them, there hasn't been squat. There would at the very least be something. The story isn't untouchable, everyone would love to be the reporter to break the story, and no matter how much the NFL tried to defend itself they couldn't do it. They would need to spend too much money to keep things quiet that could be spent without garnering attention, and they can't go out and kill people to keep them quiet because that also attracts a lot of attention.

I understand that you're big on finding the conspiracy, but there really isn't one here. We didn't lose because the NFL is fixed. NFL may be able to look the other way while some teams break rules more often, but they're not able to downright fix the league to get the results they want.

Exactly. This is a competitive sports league with a shit ton of moving parts. The idea of it somehow being "fixed" is just ridiculous. A few dirty refs trying to make some money on the side, sure. But a complete institutional conspiracy of predetermined winners? Give me a break..

 

[Oldgeek]

I don't think it is fixed, but I think officials have prejudice against certain teams. Winners get the call for and losing teams against. Hard hitting teams like the Rams are considered "dirty" before the kickoff and teams like the Patsies are considered "clean".

 

[Faceplant]

The fact that the Ayes outnumber the Nays at this point is kind of telling. Especially here at ROD. A lot of intelligent posters here. It may not be a conspiracy, but there is certainly collusion at many levels happening in today's NFL. Not surprising, no. Just annoying that the Rams seemingly always appear to be the brunt of it, haha. Aliens......

 

[Thordaddy]

I couldn't disagree more. But we can only see what can see. I wish I could say more, but this isn't the venue for it.

Moreover, I hope people here realize that the use of the word "conspiracy", which is never a word I use, is infact it's own kind of social condemnation. Perhaps the worst thing someone can be labelled is a "conspiracy theorist", as it connotes crackpot, or one who shouldn't be listened to. It's the scarlet letter of credibility. But what does it really mean? It means a willingness to explore the undisclosed, the undiscussed, the socially uncomfortable. But we use it to squash conversation and exploration.

I've seen the term used regularly on this forum, especially as it pertains to my posts. Mostly because I'm frequently willing to step outside the traditional frames of socially acceptable conversation. It's a derogatory term, and I'm hopeful that the mods here see this and begin to temper its use as a conversational weapon.

Except of course Stranger you refer to those who disagree as being "programmed" , which is no less a conversational "weapon" and WHEN you do use that it makes you look like you are locked into your "theories" of "conspiracy" ,which you have not proven to the satisfaction of the "programmed" .

IOW FWIW ,you have no standing to complain about people being dismissive when you yourself are.

In the end even those who voted yes in this poll watch the games in hopes the Rams will win ,you yourself express your devotion to the Rams,devotion to a team that participates in lying to you? about the outcomes we so fervently wish for? devise draft strategies to enhance ,spend hours posting on this board about all the aspects of them down to whether the coach is responsible when we lose , who should be the quarterback ? I can't sell that contradiction to myself .

I don't root for people in soap operas, and if the league was fixed that's all it'd be a glorified soap opera ,so I doubt the complete acceptance of most of those yes votes , their actions as previously mentioned don't indicate a commitment to the conclusion, and neither do yours,you can't separate the Rams from the NFL,if we are being fooled the Rams are the entity we aught to be most upset with for toying with our emotions in the greatest measure ,about a lie.

 

[jjab360]

I don't think it is fixed, but I think officials have prejudice against certain teams. Winners get the call for and losing teams against. Hard hitting teams like the Rams are considered "dirty" before the kickoff and teams like the Patsies are considered "clean".

I agree with this. There's an understated bias towards certain teams by some refs and they head into games looking for certain penalties to be made by some teams based on the "scouting reports". Does it mean the entire league is fixed? No, but there is a plague of incompetence and favoritism going around lately.

 

[Thordaddy]

I agree with this. There's an understated bias towards certain teams by some refs and they head into games looking for certain penalties to be made by some teams based on the "scouting reports". Does it mean the entire league is fixed? No, but there is a plague of incompetence and favoritism going around lately.

Yeah AND I'd agree that when embarrassing things like Spygate occur the league office will get it swept under the rug as quickly as possible, because the integrity of outcomes is really all they have to sell .They admitted the Pats broke the rules ,probably could have vacated their win and maybe should have,but imagine the chaos that would cause . I'm confident there are things happening today that effect the integrity of the outcomes that aren't supposed to be,but institutionally, NO the league isn't fixed

 

[Thordaddy]

Your assumption is that publishers and media outlets would want the story, and would pay for the story. The assumption is also that even if a media outlet or publisher paid for the story, that the individual could remain credible in face of a huge PR machine that would inevitably dig-up every piece of evidence, manufactured or otherwise, that would discredit the person speaking-out. Your assumption also is that the individual would feel safe enough to disclose such information, even if there was an economic upside.

In short, it's infinitely more challenging and dangerous that I think you might realize.

TMZ would take it in a second,

 

[jjab360]

TMZ would take it in a second,

So would ESPN, NFL Network, hundreds of online sports/news websites...

 

[fearsomefour]

I do agree with PA Ram that there is a lot to fix in the NFL....the game certainly has gotten worse under Goodell.

If someone really believes the NFL is fixed, why the hell would you keep watching it?
Frankly, the idea of fixing makes no sense in the bigger picture.

 

[thirteen28]

I do agree with PA Ram that there is a lot to fix in the NFL....the game certainly has gotten worse under Goodell.

If someone really believes the NFL is fixed, why the hell would you keep watching it?
Frankly, the idea of fixing makes no sense in the bigger picture.

I voted "nay" and qualified my answer as "not fixed WWE style, but believe the NFL (or officials) put their thumb on the scale sometimes in an attempt to obtain a preferred outcome." And to answer your question, I watch a lot less NFL football these days. Still try to catch the Rams game if I can, but other than that, not so much. Haven't watched a non-Rams Thursday night game or a non-Rams Monday night game in years, and those were things I used to never miss.