"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
Chizip said:
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.
WildHoneyAlways said:
But the question is why?
Money?
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.
Chizip said:
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.
WildHoneyAlways said:
So does this mean every Superbowl is fixed in some way?
Chizip said:
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.
StlElevation said: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
StlElevation said: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
StlElevation said:my point was moreso that it could have gone down as one of the best plays in NFL history
randhail said: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.
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.
stammer476 said:
Simmons, you're right. You really, really need to let this go.
speedracer said: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 said:
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.
Headache in a Suitcase said: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.
stammer476 said: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.
phanan said:From what I heard of Bailey's comment, he wasn't slowing down on purpose. He simply ran out of gas.
phanan said:
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).