Colonel_Reb
Hall of Famer
I was a little surpised when it was announced that it was the second most watched SB. I figured it would be a little lower than that.
Super Bowl
- Thread starter Don Wassall
- Start date
Freethinker
Hall of Famer
To clarify, by fix I mean that one team gets preferential treatment in terms of calls. If Arizona outplayed Pittsburgh in every aspect of the game, then they would have won handily and a few key calls would not matter. Does the NFL and the commishioner actually tell the refs these things? I don't know.
It may be more about an ingrained perception. For example, many remember in the NBA when the Kings were screwed out of the chance to go to the finals against the Lakers. The Lakers got all of the close calls. The Lakers are somewhat of a basketball equivalent of the Steelers in football. Maybe, its just natural these teams get the benefits of calls from the refs.
Lastly, even though the Cards only started 2 whites, the powers that be had more to gain with the Steelers winning. Youngest coach to win a Super Bowl is now a black guy. This proves Rooney's Rule works and you can expect more of these absurd hirings to continue.
If Arizona won, what agenda would have been pushed. All sumo lines? Got that already. All black defenses? Check for that too.
I would have much rather seen Kurt Warner, who has been stepped on and caste away by the NFL, teams and coaches numerous times, and Coach Whisenhunt win. Seeing the Tomlin/Rooney/Obama contingent win was sickening!
It may be more about an ingrained perception. For example, many remember in the NBA when the Kings were screwed out of the chance to go to the finals against the Lakers. The Lakers got all of the close calls. The Lakers are somewhat of a basketball equivalent of the Steelers in football. Maybe, its just natural these teams get the benefits of calls from the refs.
Lastly, even though the Cards only started 2 whites, the powers that be had more to gain with the Steelers winning. Youngest coach to win a Super Bowl is now a black guy. This proves Rooney's Rule works and you can expect more of these absurd hirings to continue.
If Arizona won, what agenda would have been pushed. All sumo lines? Got that already. All black defenses? Check for that too.
I would have much rather seen Kurt Warner, who has been stepped on and caste away by the NFL, teams and coaches numerous times, and Coach Whisenhunt win. Seeing the Tomlin/Rooney/Obama contingent win was sickening!
OldSchoolBoy75
Guru
This morning I woke up to "Mike & Mike" on ESPN and the weasel (Greenberg) was carping on about who didn't watch the Super Bowl, which apparently was a serious issue for him. Moron.
At least we didn't hear the ridiculous "worldwide audience of one billion" mantra as much for this Super Bowl, a figure which reflects American hubris and self-importance rather than reality. The vast majority of those who watch the game are in the U.S. I did hear Steve Mariucci say something about "people watching in 140 countries," but most watching outside the U.S. are servicemen, tourists, ex-pats, and a few fans of American football.
Unbelievable! I didn't happen to see it but apparently Ch. 4 in Detroit ran the following scroll everytime Matt Millen was on camera during the Super Bowl.
"Matt Millen was president of the Lions for the worst eight-year run in the history of the NFL. Knowing his history with the team, is there a credibility issue as he now serves as an analyst for NBC Sports?"
Yahoo story:
Matt Millen's NBC commentary comes with a warning label
NBC might want to trot Matt Millen out in front of the cameras like nothing ever happened, but WDIV, NBC's affiliate in Detroit, isn't about to forgive or forget what he did to the Lions. From the Detroit Free Press:
Every time a certain familiar face showed up on camera Sunday during NBC's Super Bowl pregame show, Channel 4 ran a scroll at the bottom of the screen:
"Matt Millen was president of the Lions for the worst eight-year run in the history of the NFL. Knowing his history with the team, is there a credibility issue as he now serves as an analyst for NBC Sports?"
Ah, if only the NFL was like professional wrestling. Matt Millen could put on a mask, get a new set of tights, and just like that, have a whole new identity. "Hi, I'm Bob Costas, alongside Jerome Bettis and The Masked Franchise Destroyer ... "
He will forever be Matt Millen, though, and the name Matt Millen will forever be synonymous with losing. I've written about this before, and I don't think that being an absolute train wreck of a general manager means that Matt Millen couldn't also be a good analyst.
At the same time, of course, I also couldn't blame anyone in Detroit if they held a grudge against Millen for the next, oh, 1,000 years or so. I'll readily admit that if he did that kind of a hatchet job on my favorite team, I'd have no interest in ever hearing any ignorant word that ever came out of his mouth.
Outstanding work, Channel 4. I think this is something we can expand and use in all sports, on all networks. When Tony Kornheiser starts talking on Monday nights, we can have a scrolling warning that reads, "CAUTION: In two years of work here, this man has never said anything that has added any value whatsoever to a broadcast, and we seriously doubt that he's going to start now."
"Matt Millen was president of the Lions for the worst eight-year run in the history of the NFL. Knowing his history with the team, is there a credibility issue as he now serves as an analyst for NBC Sports?"
Yahoo story:
Matt Millen's NBC commentary comes with a warning label
NBC might want to trot Matt Millen out in front of the cameras like nothing ever happened, but WDIV, NBC's affiliate in Detroit, isn't about to forgive or forget what he did to the Lions. From the Detroit Free Press:
Every time a certain familiar face showed up on camera Sunday during NBC's Super Bowl pregame show, Channel 4 ran a scroll at the bottom of the screen:
"Matt Millen was president of the Lions for the worst eight-year run in the history of the NFL. Knowing his history with the team, is there a credibility issue as he now serves as an analyst for NBC Sports?"
Ah, if only the NFL was like professional wrestling. Matt Millen could put on a mask, get a new set of tights, and just like that, have a whole new identity. "Hi, I'm Bob Costas, alongside Jerome Bettis and The Masked Franchise Destroyer ... "
He will forever be Matt Millen, though, and the name Matt Millen will forever be synonymous with losing. I've written about this before, and I don't think that being an absolute train wreck of a general manager means that Matt Millen couldn't also be a good analyst.
At the same time, of course, I also couldn't blame anyone in Detroit if they held a grudge against Millen for the next, oh, 1,000 years or so. I'll readily admit that if he did that kind of a hatchet job on my favorite team, I'd have no interest in ever hearing any ignorant word that ever came out of his mouth.
Outstanding work, Channel 4. I think this is something we can expand and use in all sports, on all networks. When Tony Kornheiser starts talking on Monday nights, we can have a scrolling warning that reads, "CAUTION: In two years of work here, this man has never said anything that has added any value whatsoever to a broadcast, and we seriously doubt that he's going to start now."
The Peter Principle has no application when it comes to Matt Millen. For reasons unclear, this ogre has pretty much led a charmed life.
white is right
Hall of Famer
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2006
- Messages
- 10,035
They could also mention he has fetish for underwhelming wide receivers......jaxvid said:
If I knew exactly how the fix worked, I'd be able to profit financially from it. I've been watching these games for decades, and became firmly convinced they were fixed by the mid-'70s. It used to be a lot easier to predict these games- there were only a handful of "chosen" teams (Cowboys, Steelers, Raiders, Dolphins), so you pretty much knew one of them was going to win the Super Bowl in any given year.
I don't think any player or coach would protest the "fix" for a few very good reasons. First, since the media is obviously in on the whole charade, who would they protest to? Second, they all are paid very well to do something they love. It's not exactly hard work, and the fringe benefits are awesome. You might as well wait for one of the WWE wrestlers to protest their scripted matches publicly.
Regardless of which team is scripted to win, as long as holding, pass interference and illegal blocks in the back are only called selectively, when they happen all the time, I will not believe the games are legitimate. As long as the jock-sniffing announcers ignore this issue, even when it's right before their eyes, I will not believe the games are legitimate.
As I've said before, how can anyone here find it far fetched that the corrupt overlords of the Caste system would fix the outcomes of the games? The NFL is clearly and obviously "fixed" against white players. That's the main topic of discussion on this forum. Why would you suppose these same odious forces would have a scintilla of morality or decency, and not permit the games to be less than legitimate?
I don't understand why it hasn't been fixed for more black QBs to win it all, but that doesn't change the shady nature of what goes on in virtually every NFL game. The Steelers were clearly the "chosen" team here, for the Tomlin factor alone. Not every game has to have a racial element involved; the primary "fix" against white players, and in favor of less qualified black players, takes place year round. Combines, the draft, playing time in preseason games, cuts, etc., constitute a huge "fix" in favor of blacks and against whites.
I'm glad to see some of you are willing to consider my wild and crazy theory. I trust very little of what goes on today in professional (or big time college) sports.
I don't think any player or coach would protest the "fix" for a few very good reasons. First, since the media is obviously in on the whole charade, who would they protest to? Second, they all are paid very well to do something they love. It's not exactly hard work, and the fringe benefits are awesome. You might as well wait for one of the WWE wrestlers to protest their scripted matches publicly.
Regardless of which team is scripted to win, as long as holding, pass interference and illegal blocks in the back are only called selectively, when they happen all the time, I will not believe the games are legitimate. As long as the jock-sniffing announcers ignore this issue, even when it's right before their eyes, I will not believe the games are legitimate.
As I've said before, how can anyone here find it far fetched that the corrupt overlords of the Caste system would fix the outcomes of the games? The NFL is clearly and obviously "fixed" against white players. That's the main topic of discussion on this forum. Why would you suppose these same odious forces would have a scintilla of morality or decency, and not permit the games to be less than legitimate?
I don't understand why it hasn't been fixed for more black QBs to win it all, but that doesn't change the shady nature of what goes on in virtually every NFL game. The Steelers were clearly the "chosen" team here, for the Tomlin factor alone. Not every game has to have a racial element involved; the primary "fix" against white players, and in favor of less qualified black players, takes place year round. Combines, the draft, playing time in preseason games, cuts, etc., constitute a huge "fix" in favor of blacks and against whites.
I'm glad to see some of you are willing to consider my wild and crazy theory. I trust very little of what goes on today in professional (or big time college) sports.
Jack Lambert
Hall of Famer
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2009
- Messages
- 4,743
I saw Mike and Mike on Monday morining, and Greene was making his case for Ben to be the MVP of the SB. Also citing the play on 1st and 20, where Ben avoid 2 sacks, and got the ball to Holmes for 14 yards. Caste boy Golic though
said McNabb could do what Ben did better.
I was surprised that Greene would say that. Even though the Steelers started 2 white DEs, I saw a lot of useless Orphous Roye and Nick Eason.
.
Fightingtowin
Guru
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2008
- Messages
- 462
Matt Millen is the epitome of a DWF. The three receivers he got so excited about (Rogers, Williams and Wiliams) were all known for being LAZY. And M. Williams was slower than most linebackers.jaxvid said:
sport historian
Master
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2004
- Messages
- 2,952
Did they fix the game in which Peyton Hillis gained over a 100 yards? What if Warner had thrown up a Hail Mary before the fumble on the last possession and it bounced to one of his men for a freak TD? How could the fixers have prevented that? If you "don't know" something, or "don't understand" why they don't fix it so black QB's win the Super Bowl, why should we waste our time arguing about a ridiculous notion?
There was an attempt to fix the 1946 NFL Championship game. It blew up in the faces of the fixers. Football is harder to fix than baseball or basketball. In baseball, you can do it with a pitcher. In basketball, there are fewer players.
I once read an account of one of the Kentucky players in the college basketball point shaving of the early 1950's. He said that he would play his normal game on offense, but would let up on defense. This was almost impossible to spot if you weren't looking for it.
Football has more players which means more can go wrong if a fix was attempted. A basketball player can let up on defense, but if a football player tries to go easy, he is likely to be injured, maybe seriously. Every ex-football player I have talked to says that letting up will get you injured.
There was an attempt to fix the 1946 NFL Championship game. It blew up in the faces of the fixers. Football is harder to fix than baseball or basketball. In baseball, you can do it with a pitcher. In basketball, there are fewer players.
I once read an account of one of the Kentucky players in the college basketball point shaving of the early 1950's. He said that he would play his normal game on offense, but would let up on defense. This was almost impossible to spot if you weren't looking for it.
Football has more players which means more can go wrong if a fix was attempted. A basketball player can let up on defense, but if a football player tries to go easy, he is likely to be injured, maybe seriously. Every ex-football player I have talked to says that letting up will get you injured.
white is right
Hall of Famer
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2006
- Messages
- 10,035
If you want to fix games, corrupt the underpaid zebras. SB XL had pass interference calls that directly affected the games. This game had holding calls. Why do the refs ignore many holding calls, yet called the hold late against Pittsburgh to give the Cardinals the safety. Also Gandy might have committed a hold on every pass play and he was only called about 3 times in the game.bigunreal said:
sport historian,
If you haven't read my previous posts on this subject, search the forum. I'll try to recap why I believe these games are fixed.
First of all, while you may not think that Super Bowl III was fixed, for instance, Bubba Smith of the Colts- who played in the game- certainly thought it was. Bubba came out publicly some 20 years after the game, and said that he and many of his teammates suspected the game was fixed. Who can forget the infamous flea-flicker play, where Earl Morrall ignored a wide open Jimmy Orr, waving his arms in vain downfield, for several seconds, and then threw an interception right to a Jets' defender. Think about this- the play was designed to be a bomb thrown to Orr, who was wide open. Morrall, dsepite no pressure, completely ignored the primary receiver. How can you explain a veteran QB doing something like that?
Interestingly enough, Bubba Smith, who up until that point had something of an acting career going on (lots of beer commercials, the ridiculous "Police Academy" movies) became persona non grata after that. I don't recall seeing him on television or in movies since he went public with his "crazy" talk about this subject.
Irving Fryar publicly admitted that he was paid to throw the NCAA championship game against Miami when he played for Nebraska. His revelations made only a small ripple in the media. No followup. No investigation into who paid him. No questioning of the entire NCAA system, since if this happened once, it is obviously pretty likely that it happened more than that. Fryar was not condemned at all. His pro career didn't suffer, and the matter was quickly forgotten by everyone. So, I guess what you term my "ridiculous notion" wasn't so ridiculous on at least one occasion, was it?
You say that the NFL allowed Peyton Hillis to get 100 yards in a game, so it couldn't have been fixed. Yet, I'm sure you would agree it was "fixed" that he had to become a blocking fullback in college, and "fixed" that he had to wait to carry the ball until all the other black ball carriers got hurt. And, I feel it's safe to predict that it will be "fixed" against him once again next season, when the organization does everything it can to find a less skilled black runner and moves him back to his "proper" role of blocking fullback. Now, according to your view, this shouldn't happen, because of course the coaches would want the best players on the field, wouldn't they? Their primary goal is to win, isn't it? Yet, somehow, all these general managers and coaches willfully play less skilled players-players who are criminally prone off the field, and addicted to stupid penalties on the field, while refusing to play their better players, who would obviously give them a better chance to win, because of their skin color. I'm sure every jock sniffer in the media, and every drunk white fan in the stands would think that this situation, which we point out all the time on this forum, is a "ridiculous notion," too.
Even the jock sniffers in the media acknowledge that holding can be called on every play. It isn't. Why? If you watch these games, you also realize that pass interference can be called on every passing play. It isn't. Why? It's also evident that an illegal block can be called on every return play. It isn't. Why? Even with instant repley, the referees make wrong call after wrong call. Haven't you ever questioned why these men take so long to uphold or overturn a play, even when a 10 year old child can tell within 15 seconds which is the right call? These men are not clowns, nor should we weep for their relatively small salaries. They are usually high powered people- judges, lawyers, etc. They know exactly what they are doing.
NFL games are completely intertwined with gambling interests. Why do you think they have point spreads? Did you ever get a good look at the likes of Jimmy "The Greek" Snyder? Did that guy look legitimate to you? Al Davis, in his heyday, exuded the greasy mob persona. I'm sure that the likes of Jerry Jones and Daniel Snyder would be morally opposed to fixed games. Now, bets are placed on everything from which team will score first in the Super Bowl to how many TDs a certain player will score. Some of the biggest betting takes place, believe it or not, on the coin toss.
Everything we know about the NFL, from the Caste system aspect alone, should make us question whether or not the games are legitimate. We certainly know the team rosters are not legitimate, because massive discrimination takes place against white players, while affirmative action for less skilled black players is rampant. That exposes the lie that this is about winning. There is nothing honest or upright about the NFL, and I can't understand why anyone who posts here would place the least bit of trust in the integrity of its product. Edited by: bigunreal
If you haven't read my previous posts on this subject, search the forum. I'll try to recap why I believe these games are fixed.
First of all, while you may not think that Super Bowl III was fixed, for instance, Bubba Smith of the Colts- who played in the game- certainly thought it was. Bubba came out publicly some 20 years after the game, and said that he and many of his teammates suspected the game was fixed. Who can forget the infamous flea-flicker play, where Earl Morrall ignored a wide open Jimmy Orr, waving his arms in vain downfield, for several seconds, and then threw an interception right to a Jets' defender. Think about this- the play was designed to be a bomb thrown to Orr, who was wide open. Morrall, dsepite no pressure, completely ignored the primary receiver. How can you explain a veteran QB doing something like that?
Interestingly enough, Bubba Smith, who up until that point had something of an acting career going on (lots of beer commercials, the ridiculous "Police Academy" movies) became persona non grata after that. I don't recall seeing him on television or in movies since he went public with his "crazy" talk about this subject.
Irving Fryar publicly admitted that he was paid to throw the NCAA championship game against Miami when he played for Nebraska. His revelations made only a small ripple in the media. No followup. No investigation into who paid him. No questioning of the entire NCAA system, since if this happened once, it is obviously pretty likely that it happened more than that. Fryar was not condemned at all. His pro career didn't suffer, and the matter was quickly forgotten by everyone. So, I guess what you term my "ridiculous notion" wasn't so ridiculous on at least one occasion, was it?
You say that the NFL allowed Peyton Hillis to get 100 yards in a game, so it couldn't have been fixed. Yet, I'm sure you would agree it was "fixed" that he had to become a blocking fullback in college, and "fixed" that he had to wait to carry the ball until all the other black ball carriers got hurt. And, I feel it's safe to predict that it will be "fixed" against him once again next season, when the organization does everything it can to find a less skilled black runner and moves him back to his "proper" role of blocking fullback. Now, according to your view, this shouldn't happen, because of course the coaches would want the best players on the field, wouldn't they? Their primary goal is to win, isn't it? Yet, somehow, all these general managers and coaches willfully play less skilled players-players who are criminally prone off the field, and addicted to stupid penalties on the field, while refusing to play their better players, who would obviously give them a better chance to win, because of their skin color. I'm sure every jock sniffer in the media, and every drunk white fan in the stands would think that this situation, which we point out all the time on this forum, is a "ridiculous notion," too.
Even the jock sniffers in the media acknowledge that holding can be called on every play. It isn't. Why? If you watch these games, you also realize that pass interference can be called on every passing play. It isn't. Why? It's also evident that an illegal block can be called on every return play. It isn't. Why? Even with instant repley, the referees make wrong call after wrong call. Haven't you ever questioned why these men take so long to uphold or overturn a play, even when a 10 year old child can tell within 15 seconds which is the right call? These men are not clowns, nor should we weep for their relatively small salaries. They are usually high powered people- judges, lawyers, etc. They know exactly what they are doing.
NFL games are completely intertwined with gambling interests. Why do you think they have point spreads? Did you ever get a good look at the likes of Jimmy "The Greek" Snyder? Did that guy look legitimate to you? Al Davis, in his heyday, exuded the greasy mob persona. I'm sure that the likes of Jerry Jones and Daniel Snyder would be morally opposed to fixed games. Now, bets are placed on everything from which team will score first in the Super Bowl to how many TDs a certain player will score. Some of the biggest betting takes place, believe it or not, on the coin toss.
Everything we know about the NFL, from the Caste system aspect alone, should make us question whether or not the games are legitimate. We certainly know the team rosters are not legitimate, because massive discrimination takes place against white players, while affirmative action for less skilled black players is rampant. That exposes the lie that this is about winning. There is nothing honest or upright about the NFL, and I can't understand why anyone who posts here would place the least bit of trust in the integrity of its product. Edited by: bigunreal
Deadlift
Hall of Famer
If the game was "fixed" -- why didn't Big Ben leave the game with a so-called injury at the beginning of Pittsburgh's last drive, thus having Leftwich lead them to victory? He could then have a big embrace with Tomlin (the man with the huge BUG-EYES that EVERY woman I've spoken to is repulsed by), and they both could then be carried off the field by the insanely strong sumo linemen!!
BTW, Tomlin gives me a bit of a coke-head/(abuser of prescription pills) vibe. What do you guys think?
P.S. -- It looks like Tampa has hired 2 White coordinators, Bates and Jagodzinski. I was hoping that Tampa would be the "first" NFL team with an ALL-black coaching staff! Now we know that Raheem is going to be sleeping on his soft bed while the coordinators are up all night game-planning.... With all the assistant coaches on a staff today, does a "head coach" (especially one artificially elevated) in the NFL even do anything?
As an aside, ESPN said Josh McDaniel was "too young" to be Denver's coach, but didn't say anything negative about Raheem. They are afraid of the possibility that Josh succeeds and is therefore a coach for a long time. Also, all Whites are supposed to be old.
Oddly enough, Will Smith has really aged from some mysterious ailment that's not identified as of yet, which is why he has been making a ton of movies now. Somebody call a doctor... Clarence Thomas has White hair; Can't allow the sheeple to see that!
BTW, Tomlin gives me a bit of a coke-head/(abuser of prescription pills) vibe. What do you guys think?
P.S. -- It looks like Tampa has hired 2 White coordinators, Bates and Jagodzinski. I was hoping that Tampa would be the "first" NFL team with an ALL-black coaching staff! Now we know that Raheem is going to be sleeping on his soft bed while the coordinators are up all night game-planning.... With all the assistant coaches on a staff today, does a "head coach" (especially one artificially elevated) in the NFL even do anything?
As an aside, ESPN said Josh McDaniel was "too young" to be Denver's coach, but didn't say anything negative about Raheem. They are afraid of the possibility that Josh succeeds and is therefore a coach for a long time. Also, all Whites are supposed to be old.
Oddly enough, Will Smith has really aged from some mysterious ailment that's not identified as of yet, which is why he has been making a ton of movies now. Somebody call a doctor... Clarence Thomas has White hair; Can't allow the sheeple to see that!
White Shogun
Hall of Famer
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2005
- Messages
- 6,285
Every player in the game doesn't have to be paid in order to fix a game or push the outcome one way or the other. A key player, a coach who calls the wrong play or someone slipping the other team the play on a crucial down, or just a ref or two could be enough to push the game to a certain conclusion.
I don't think the games would be fixed to push a caste agenda. A story line to garner interest...maybe but not as likely as it all being about the money.
I haven't looked it up but does anyone know if Arizona covered the spread?
There was certainly blocking in the back on the 100 yard runback, and why didn't they review the fumble by Warner at the end? If those aren't two of the most spectacular non-calls in the history of the game I don't know what is.
I used to complain that the refs manipulated the outcome of games in the NBA. So much so I stopped watching basketball. I was called a conspiracy nut and crazy. Well, lo and behold what happens? Why, it turns out that NBA refs were making bank to throw games. Who'd have ever thought something like that could happen...
For me personally, it's ludicrous to believe that every single player, coach, and ref in the game is 100% honest and incapable of being influenced to do something unethical in a game. Guys could get paid to deliberately injure another player by 'accident,' drop a certain number of balls, cough up the ball on a fumble, throw a deliberate interception, call or not call a particular foul a certain number of times per game, etc. Sure, it may not be 'likely,' and it doesn't 'fix' the outcome of the game itself, but it could certainly happen and it could also steer the game in a certain direction.
My .02.
I don't think the games would be fixed to push a caste agenda. A story line to garner interest...maybe but not as likely as it all being about the money.
I haven't looked it up but does anyone know if Arizona covered the spread?
There was certainly blocking in the back on the 100 yard runback, and why didn't they review the fumble by Warner at the end? If those aren't two of the most spectacular non-calls in the history of the game I don't know what is.
I used to complain that the refs manipulated the outcome of games in the NBA. So much so I stopped watching basketball. I was called a conspiracy nut and crazy. Well, lo and behold what happens? Why, it turns out that NBA refs were making bank to throw games. Who'd have ever thought something like that could happen...
For me personally, it's ludicrous to believe that every single player, coach, and ref in the game is 100% honest and incapable of being influenced to do something unethical in a game. Guys could get paid to deliberately injure another player by 'accident,' drop a certain number of balls, cough up the ball on a fumble, throw a deliberate interception, call or not call a particular foul a certain number of times per game, etc. Sure, it may not be 'likely,' and it doesn't 'fix' the outcome of the game itself, but it could certainly happen and it could also steer the game in a certain direction.
My .02.
sport historian
Master
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2004
- Messages
- 2,952
Yawn. None of my points about fixing were answered. Here is another one. Did the NFL fix Super Bowl XXXIX so that Tom Brady's Patriots could defeat Donovan McNabb's Eagles? By the way, the coaches and teams can barely control most of the players. How do they get them to accept being told when they can win?
A few months ago, it was pointed out that there were fewer people posting. This thread is a good reason why. I think I can find better things to do myself.
A few months ago, it was pointed out that there were fewer people posting. This thread is a good reason why. I think I can find better things to do myself.
This is what Peter King wrote of the Warner fumble at the end of the game. BTW, the glaring fact that only one black QB has ever won a Super Bowl game makes all the "fix" speculation look pretty silly. Was the perfect throw and catch by Big Ben and Holmes choreographed?:
Wow. What a Super Bowl to take in. What an amazing game, and yes, I still say it's the best ever ... but let's examine the quality of the officiating, the quality of the game and then Ben Roethlisberger's performance for the ages:
- The Kurt Warner fumble with five seconds to go actually was reviewed -- and upheld. There is no question that, cosmetically, replay assistant Bob McGrath, sitting upstairs, should have called for a booth review and let Terry McAulay see the play down on the field. But understand the mechanics of the way this process works -- and understand the process was aided by a penalty call on the field.
When the ball was knocked loose from Warner and the Steelers recovered, an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty was called on LaMarr Woodley for excessive celebration. So now, in the replay booth, McGrath had extra time, well over a minute, to use the touch-screen system of examining replays of the play. I don't know how many McGrath saw; he had 16 angles to choose from, and he used the extra time -- not only the time that comes with a change of possession and a re-spotting of the ball and a new play clock commencing, but now a discussion among the officials of the penalty and the spot of the penalty and walking off the penalty.
McGrath had around 90 seconds from the time of the loose ball to examine the replays to see if McAulay needed to examine the call himself -- and McGrath judged, and was later backed by the league, that officials on the field made the correct judgment that Warner fumbled before his arm started going forward. I agree that it was close. Very close. I wish McGrath had given McAulay a look. But I don't believe McGrath made the wrong call.
As far as overall officiating, 20 penalties (18 accepted ones, for 162 yards) is a lot. I thought the Karlos Dansby roughness call on Roethlisberger was patently absurd, and that was a big call in the game. I saw a ticky-tack holding call. But overall, other than those two, I thought the officials called penalties when there were penalties.Edited by: Don Wassall
Wow. What a Super Bowl to take in. What an amazing game, and yes, I still say it's the best ever ... but let's examine the quality of the officiating, the quality of the game and then Ben Roethlisberger's performance for the ages:
- The Kurt Warner fumble with five seconds to go actually was reviewed -- and upheld. There is no question that, cosmetically, replay assistant Bob McGrath, sitting upstairs, should have called for a booth review and let Terry McAulay see the play down on the field. But understand the mechanics of the way this process works -- and understand the process was aided by a penalty call on the field.
When the ball was knocked loose from Warner and the Steelers recovered, an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty was called on LaMarr Woodley for excessive celebration. So now, in the replay booth, McGrath had extra time, well over a minute, to use the touch-screen system of examining replays of the play. I don't know how many McGrath saw; he had 16 angles to choose from, and he used the extra time -- not only the time that comes with a change of possession and a re-spotting of the ball and a new play clock commencing, but now a discussion among the officials of the penalty and the spot of the penalty and walking off the penalty.
McGrath had around 90 seconds from the time of the loose ball to examine the replays to see if McAulay needed to examine the call himself -- and McGrath judged, and was later backed by the league, that officials on the field made the correct judgment that Warner fumbled before his arm started going forward. I agree that it was close. Very close. I wish McGrath had given McAulay a look. But I don't believe McGrath made the wrong call.
As far as overall officiating, 20 penalties (18 accepted ones, for 162 yards) is a lot. I thought the Karlos Dansby roughness call on Roethlisberger was patently absurd, and that was a big call in the game. I saw a ticky-tack holding call. But overall, other than those two, I thought the officials called penalties when there were penalties.Edited by: Don Wassall
G
Guest
Guest
Watching Favre pitch up balls always made me suspicious that he was allowing for the point spread to go the way that someone wanted. Just sayin.
I think if there is any fixing involved it's on a much smaller scale with players and refs who might have a gambling debt they need to pay off or something similar. Widespread fixing has too many moving parts to be successful in the NFL, somebody will talk and there is enough alternative and new media out there now to almost guarantee someone will listen.
White Shogun said:
Agreed. Also, there have been far too many questionable and outright bogus callsinfluencing outcomes of games. How often have we seen a teamfacing a third andforever get new lifewith the aidof undetectable holding penalties, or Mickey Mouse pass interference,or ridiculous roughing the passer flags.
Just one of those plays can spell victory or defeat. I have seen too much of this in last few years totoss it all aside and claim it ismerely due to human error.
No, I do not feel every play or game is scripted, butI believe the refs can determine the outcomes of games quite easily. It doesn't take too much tinkering, especially at critical junctures of the game.
whiteathlete33
Hall of Famer
I saw an article yesterday stating about how "good" it was not to hear about race in this Superbowl. It sure was up until I read the article. It was the same old media worship of Tomlin.
Don Wassall said:
Peter King's explanation doesn't resolve the questions. We have seen many plays of lesser importance reviewed on the field by zebras under the booth. Why was this one allegedly reviewed upstairs only? Then what is the purpose of having an official on the field peer under the hood to make determinations, if it could be done upstairs just as well?Of course this leads people to question the veracity of those involved. If the man on the field is not allowed to review the play, there is NO chance of reversing the original ruling if the man upstairs had an agenda, would it?
Common sense and past history would clearly indicate the prudence of going through all the appropriate steps especially on such a controversial play in the most important game of the year.
Thrashen
Hall of Famer
"I'm sure every jock sniffer in the media, and every drunk white fan in the stands would think that this situation, which we point out all the time on this forum, is a "ridiculous notion," too."
Bigunreal, that wasreally well put.
Sportshistorian and Don, I dont think race has much to do with the fixing of games, because that issue is more than "taken care of" during the offseason (combine, draft, training camp, cuts).
Simply suggesting things like "McNabb and other black QB's should have won multiple superbowls" doesnt really make sense in this case. Race has nothing do to with gambling, and money is the be-all and end-all in the NFL.
That being said, none of us really know if games are fixed or not, but there certainly goodarguments to support both sides. There's no need to get pissed at one another.Edited by: Thrashen
Bigunreal, that wasreally well put.
Sportshistorian and Don, I dont think race has much to do with the fixing of games, because that issue is more than "taken care of" during the offseason (combine, draft, training camp, cuts).
Simply suggesting things like "McNabb and other black QB's should have won multiple superbowls" doesnt really make sense in this case. Race has nothing do to with gambling, and money is the be-all and end-all in the NFL.
That being said, none of us really know if games are fixed or not, but there certainly goodarguments to support both sides. There's no need to get pissed at one another.Edited by: Thrashen
Thrashen said:
I didn't realize I was "pissed." Thanks for letting me know.
When race is indeed such a factor in every other facet of the NFL, then the lack of black QBs being on a winning Super Bowl team is highly relevantif one wants to make a case that the games are fixed. What would have been a better "script" for this season than for Donovan McNabb to get over the hump and lead his team to a victory in the Super Bowl?
Additionally, the NFL is incredibly lucrative. Every team makes lots of money without having to fix games, and most franchises are now valued in the range of a billion dollars or so. When an owner sells a team, he makes hundreds of millions of dollars. The NFL is one of the most profitable businesses in the U.S. Where is the need to commit felonies and fix games under such circumstances? It would also entail all the owners, with their competitive, alpha male personalities, agreeing to it. How about the coaches who work their tails off, is that all a charade? Also, all the players, including the white ones we admire so much?
I've mentioned before that it's possible particular games may be "tweaked," through the corruption of a few individuals. The NBA's crooked ref scandal (which was effectively swept under the rug) is evidence of that. But the hypothesis that every game is scripted ala pro wrestling has been beaten to death every year with no new light shed to support it. It really belongs in a Happy Hour thread at this point.