NFL Thread Part Three, Take Two

[Chizip]

and if jerry porter, a guy who actually plays in the nfl, is suspicious of refs trying to influence the game, then i think i should be allowed to be too

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

100% missed calls in my book, but hey... have fun with that 1% there mr. stone

"Probably the only good thing that's happened to a .Manning boy in the last week is Eli killed an 11-point buck last Friday."
-Archie Manning

 

[WildHoneyAlways]

did you see the clips? they are blatantly bad/missed calls.

so either this guy is extremely imcompotent, which is possible considering how bad the refs have been lately, or maaaaaaybe there was something up.

like i said, 99% of me thinks the guy is just an idiot, but after reading some things ive read about game fixing, there is 1% of me that thinks something might have been going on.

But the question is why?
Money?

 

[Chizip]

But the question is why?
Money?

yes, you do know the superbowl is the most bet on game in t he world right. with sooooo much money riding on it, that can only lead some people to try to corrupt it in a way they can profit.

i think people are incredibly naive to believe that no ref has ever received money to try to influence a game

Several years ago, I received a copy of an FBI-302 report, which detailed the FBI's investigation of NFL referees and game officials. The report stated that "two or three referees" had been paid $100,000 by a New York Mafia figure for their participation in each of eight allegedly fixed games--which I list on page 308 of Interference. The referees' alleged job was to ensure that the unnamed mob figure covered the spread and, thus, won his bets. The referees' names were not mentioned in the FBI report.

"The bookmakers have contacts with every owner in the league." - Al Davis, owner of the Raiders and former business partner with Allen Glick who managed Las Vegas casino investments for the mob. Davis arranged the sale of the 49ers to the DeBartolo family in the 1970s. p. 32.

"We have a basic rule in the NFL," says a former law enforcement official who advises the NFL of security matters." It is to keep it upbeat and keep it positive. But above all keep in quiet." p. 33

Phil Manuel, former Senate investigator: "The oldest trick in the book is to hire old Justice Department officials and make them understand that they are to protect the security of the NFL owners.

"The retired law-enforcement guys maintain their ties to their old agencies, and they can tell which investigations are being done and whether they migt be troublesome. When some wrongdoing is ready to go public, the NFL security people can go to their old fellow workers and say,'We can handle this ourselves. Give us a chance to straighten this mess out without all the attention your public investigation will bring.'" p. 37

Ralph Salerno, former supervisor of detectives for the NYPD: "How does the NFL protect itself with one guy in each NFL city. They do it illegally. The local NFL security guy takes the local police commissioner, the chief of detectives, and other important law enforcement officials and gives him season tickets and box seats. They get wined and dined.

"And then these public employees who are paid with public funds come up with criminal information and turn it over to profit-making corporations. And that is illegal. Do the police do that for every trucking company or furniture manufacturer? Of course not. But they do it for the NFL. The whole NFL Security operation that Rozelle {brags} about is simply and illegal operation." p. 37

An IRS agent taken off an NFL-related gambling probe: "What we've got here are connections among the Cosa Nostra, the federal government, the big attorneys in the D.C. area, sports figures, and the television news media. We were getting too close to the people at the top. [He} was being protected by people within the Justice Department. P. 171

From Interference: How Organized Crime Influences Professional Football by Dan Moldea.

http://www.moldea.com/gamefixing.html

 

[Hewson]

The Rams were 14 point favorites in that game, if some official were trying to help somebody win on the Pats, they would have just made sure the game were close, not made sure the Pats won.

 

[WildHoneyAlways]

yes, you do know the superbowl is the most bet on game in t he world right. with sooooo much money riding on it, that can only lead some people to try to corrupt it in a way they can profit.

So does this mean every Superbowl is fixed in some way?

 

[Chizip]

So does this mean every Superbowl is fixed in some way?

no im not saying that every superbowl is fixed, what i am saying i dont think its outside the realm of possibility for some games to have had outside influence

just ask jerry porter what he thinks about that

 

[speedracer]

Mike Vrabel's hand comes up into Kurt Warner's facemask, then he brings him down around the collarbone area. Refs do not call game-altering penalties on plays like that. I'm terribly, terribly sorry.

Kukar tried to overturn the holding penalty on Willie McGinest because he didn't see it.

And Brady's throwaway was plausible enough to be considered an incompletion to the receiver running upfield.

Pete Morelli didn't try to fix the Colts game, he just misinterpreted an unnecessarily complex rule. If the refs were trying to jack the Steelers, they would have called pass interference on that last Colts pass into the endzone (a fair amount of contact, but a correct no-call in my opinion).

If I were a ref, you couldn't offer me enough money to fix a playoff game, much less the Super Bowl. The truth always comes out one way or another, and...well...when it did, I'd have to be very afraid for my life. Not joking.

 

[phanan]

yes but we all know about the tuck, which gave them the opportunity for the win.

now while i dont really think there was any sort of fixing going on in the superbowl, there is about 1% of me that there is a possibility that the head official, Bernie Kukar was in on something.

If he wasn't, then he is an extremely incompotent ref who missed a few very obvious calls.

By going through all this in excruciating detail, I'd say it's more than 1% of you that thinks that way...

As in most important games (like this past weekend), there are going to be some questionable calls. That's just the way it is. That's all it was in that Super Bowl, and that's all it was this weekend.

 

[popacrobat]

theres questionable calls in everygame, theyre just maginified when its a huge game.

 

[stammer476]

I'm not saying that I believe in the conspiracies, but with all the money that goes on in gambling for the Super Bowl, it makes you wonder.

To quote the Million Dollar Man, "Everyone has a price."

 

[Donovan McNabb]

hey guys

turns out that tom isnt so great after all

i bet peyton was just sick

thats what it was

marvin harrison had to call his plays

he was about to throw up

too bad i wasnt in there

i woulda won

but my heroic season-ending surgery prevented that

next year though guys

we dont need that whiney receiver

fly eagles fly

bye guys

 

[popacrobat]

NFL VP of Officiating Mike Pereira said he'd guess that Champ Bailey's interception return Saturday was a touchback, but the video replay couldn't prove it.
"If I had to guess, it's in the end zone for a touchback," Pereira told WFAN in New York. The Patriots were trailing 10-6 at the time. If they got the ball back at the 20 and went on to win, Watson's play may have gone down as one of the all time NFL moments

 

[stammer476]

NFL VP of Officiating Mike Pereira said he'd guess that Champ Bailey's interception return Saturday was a touchback, but the video replay couldn't prove it.
"If I had to guess, it's in the end zone for a touchback," Pereira told WFAN in New York. The Patriots were trailing 10-6 at the time. If they got the ball back at the 20 and went on to win, Watson's play may have gone down as one of the all time NFL moments

And yet, it doesn't make a difference.



I have all the respect for the Patriots in the world. They were one of the great winners and I enjoyed watching them. But seriously, they won several games playoff games with questionable calls. You can't get all worked up when it finally goes the other way.

 

[speedracer]

NFL VP of Officiating Mike Pereira said he'd guess that Champ Bailey's interception return Saturday was a touchback, but the video replay couldn't prove it.
"If I had to guess, it's in the end zone for a touchback," Pereira told WFAN in New York. The Patriots were trailing 10-6 at the time. If they got the ball back at the 20 and went on to win, Watson's play may have gone down as one of the all time NFL moments

With camera shots from two different angles and some software, you could pin down the exact location of the ball as it crossed the sideline. I don't know how expensive this would be.

It's hard to blame the refs too much for not being able to sprint 100 yards with Champ Bailey to get a close-up view of the ball.

 

[popacrobat]

oh im not really blaming the refs, i was just saying i thought that was interesting. i don't blame them at all , that's a very difficult call to make no matter what. but if they are going to call polamalu's intereception not an interception...


my point was moreso that it could have gone down as one of the best plays in NFL history much like albert pujols' game 5 homer off of lidge and that two out rally in game 5 of the nlcs...if the cardinals went on to win that series. which they didn't. and that call wasn't overturned, and the patriots didn't win- so it isn't.

 

[stammer476]

my point was moreso that it could have gone down as one of the best plays in NFL history

Which brings up another point. How is it that "one of the best plays in NFL history" occurs when Tom Brady throws a terrible pass that is intercepted, and the only reason it wasn't a touchdown was because Champ Bailey (foolishly) slowed down? Would it be one of the greatest plays in history if it was called correctly and the Broncos had still gone on to win?

I just don't get the logic here. Tom Brady screws up. Champ Bailey screws up. Just because one guy hustles (as he should) doesn't make it one of the best plays.

 

[randhail]

People love hustle and seeing people doing stupid things...think Leon Lett. It would've definitely been remembered but to call one of the best plays in NFL history may be a stretch.

 

[stammer476]

People love hustle and seeing people doing stupid things...think Leon Lett. It would've definitely been remembered but to call one of the best plays in NFL history may be a stretch.

Exactly. People hustle all the time. People do stupid things all the time. Not exactly historical.

 

[stammer476]

This was my personal favorite response, courtesy of the Sports Guy:

swear, I'm not blaming the officiating for the Pats' loss. Really, I'm not. I know it seems that way ... I just can't handle it when my favorite team gets screwed over by bad calls. For my sake, let's look at the Bailey fumble logically, and only because I slow-mo'ed it on TiVo 345,323 times this weekend before ultimately bludgeoning myself with the remote.

A. There's Champ running full-speed down the left sideline with ball in his right hand, with young Ben Watson heroically running full-speed toward him at a 55-degree angle.

B. Watson nails Champ at the 2-yard line, but because Champ has so much forward momentum going, he doesn't really start to fumble until he's one-and-a-half yards from the goal line. Also, the direction of Watson's hit pushes Champ toward the sideline.

C. Again, he's carrying the ball in his right hand -- the same side where Watson popped him. Watson's momentum pushes the arm forward before he fumbles, so his hand probably released the ball one yard from the goal line.

E. Here's the best way to describe the direction of the ball after it comes out: If Champ fumbled in a direction of a clock, the ball would have gone toward 10:30 on the clock.

My first point: Given Bailey's position on the field, his momentum from running full-speed, how close he was to the goal line, and where the ball eventually landed, it would have been logistically impossible for the football to go out of bounds before it crossed the goal line. There is no possible way. It's impossible. The football would have had to have taken a hard-left (almost a 90-degree angle), then a hard-right (to end up where it ended up). Almost like the magic bullet embedding itself into Gov. John Connelly's back.

My second point: With all of the technology we have, isn't there an ironclad way to prove this once and for all? If that was ruled a touchback, the Pats would have been down only 10-6. With an entire quarter to play. Starting another drive from their own 20. I find this to be significant. Not as significant as Jason Priestley making his TV comeback in a show called "Love Monkey," then spending the entire show deadpanning lines with his head tilted upwards like George Plimpton ... but significant nonetheless.

My third point: As Las Vegas reader Kyle tells us, "I was at the Pats-Broncos game, sitting in Section 111, Row 7. That Bailey interception return came right at me. Let me tell you, that was a freaking touchback. But, there wasn't a ref or cameraman within 20 yards of the play. Even the Broncos fans knew it was a touchback and were screaming for Shanahan to get the play off. Also, Ben Watson levelled Champ. Champ was on the ground for the entire review time."

My fourth point: I really, really need to let this go.

Riiiiiiiight. Because, as we all know, it's a prerequisite for any NFL official to have a degree in physics. And it's protocal to use said degree when making a call in every NFL game.

Simmons, you're right. You really, really need to let this go.

 

[speedracer]

Simmons, you're right. You really, really need to let this go.

Ah, let him rant. After all, in a couple days one of Isiah Thomas's cronies is going to be depositing him in the East River.

 

[stammer476]

Ah, let him rant. After all, in a couple days one of Isiah Thomas's cronies is going to be depositing him in the East River.

Actually, Isaiah would hire Al Pacino, based on his work in the Godfather, to knock him off for the price of $25 Million. Of course, Isaiah is oblivous to the fact Pacino is now 65 years old and never was a mob boss / hitman in real life.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

i enjoy the sports guy when he's making jokes.

when he's attempting to make serious commentarys on sports, i move on to something else.

do i think the ball was a touchback? yes... was there enough evidence to overturn it? no.

i crack jokes about how paul tagliabeu was on the horn with the ref durring that interception overturn... but not for a second do i actually believe it.

as for the pats/rams, the pats had a sizeable lead heading into the 4th quarter. did the refs cause the three ram turnovers? were the refs rigging the game when they called a holding penalty on willie mcginist, negating a fumble recovery that was returned for a touchdown that would have made the game 24-3 in the 4th quarter? please...

and oh yea, i bet on the rams

 

[phanan]

Which brings up another point. How is it that "one of the best plays in NFL history" occurs when Tom Brady throws a terrible pass that is intercepted, and the only reason it wasn't a touchdown was because Champ Bailey (foolishly) slowed down? Would it be one of the greatest plays in history if it was called correctly and the Broncos had still gone on to win?

I just don't get the logic here. Tom Brady screws up. Champ Bailey screws up. Just because one guy hustles (as he should) doesn't make it one of the best plays.

From what I heard of Bailey's comment, he wasn't slowing down on purpose. He simply ran out of gas. So if Watson is able to run him down because he's got more speed and can sustain it longer, and had forced a touchback, it would have been an incredible play from that standpoint.

Brady is the only one who screwed up here.

 

[stammer476]

i enjoy the sports guy when he's making jokes.

when he's attempting to make serious commentarys on sports, i move on to something else.

The problem with the Sports Guy in a nutshell. He needs to spend more time hanging out with other analysts at ESPN and sharpen his skills.

 

[phanan]

This was my personal favorite response, courtesy of the Sports Guy:



Riiiiiiiight. Because, as we all know, it's a prerequisite for any NFL official to have a degree in physics. And it's protocal to use said degree when making a call in every NFL game.

Simmons, you're right. You really, really need to let this go.

I thought the article was interesting and humorous.

Where's the physics talk, by the way? I don't see it.

 

[stammer476]

From what I heard of Bailey's comment, he wasn't slowing down on purpose. He simply ran out of gas.

Are you serious? A world class athlete should never, ever, ever, ever run out of gas from running 100 yards. Let me know the next time you watch a track meet and the sprinters look gassed after the first 100 meters.

 

[phanan]

dp

 

[stammer476]

I thought the article was interesting and humorous.

Where's the physics talk, by the way? I don't see it.

running full-speed down the left sideline

running full-speed toward him at a 55-degree angle

Champ has so much forward momentum going

Given Bailey's position on the field, his momentum from running full-speed, how close he was to the goal line, and where the ball eventually landed, it would have been logistically impossible for the football to go out of bounds before it crossed the goal line. There is no possible way. It's impossible. The football would have had to have taken a hard-left (almost a 90-degree angle), then a hard-right (to end up where it ended up).

Call me crazy, but I just can't see the ref explaining, "While the video reply does not give us evidence, we've contacted Dr. Keeman Lonschilde, professor of Phsyics at MIT, and he has concluded that the ball did in fact go out of bounds inside the goal line. Therefore, New England will receive the ball on the 20."

 

[speedracer]

Sprinting 100 yards in full equipment after playing one half of football at a mile above sea level is pretty tiring. These guys are built to be football players, not sprinters.

And phanan is right -- we shouldn't take Bill Simmons so seriously. I think we can all agree that we don't want him studying to be a NFL analyst under Sean Salisbury.