Game 16: January 1st, 2012, Detroit Lions @ Green Bay Packers

**ycm57** · 01-02-2012, 03:30 PM

Originally Posted by Cylander

I doubt Lions fans would be talking about conspiracy theories if the roles were reversed. Lions fans discredit the Vikings face mask, but if you read the Vikings forums, they absolutely feel they got jobbed. Some compelling evidence would be former refs coming forward and talking about the NFL fixing games. If there is a big league wide scandal, something would've hit the fan by now. It seems like it would be hard to keep a league wide scandal under wraps for so long.

I’m not convinced the Vikings non call wouldn’t be part of this too. This is not just about screwing or helping the Lions.

You need teams in the playoffs, you need developing storylines.

Why would former refs have to come forward? Unless they are facing criminal charges, there is no incentive for them to do so.

**Cylander** · 01-02-2012, 03:32 PM

Could you imagine the book deals if someone blew the whistle on the NFL? Seems like incentive to me. Why did Canseco blow the whistle on MLB?

**ycm57** · 01-02-2012, 03:35 PM

Originally Posted by Cylander

Could you imagine the book deals if someone blew the whistle on the NFL? Seems like incentive to me. Why did Canseco blow the whistle on MLB?

At the end of the day, how much did Canseco really profit? What is the value of the possible repercussions for blowing the whistle?

**T&P_Fan** · 01-02-2012, 03:36 PM

Think of it like this Cylander. We both have the same exact evidence, we read the same stories, watch the same games. The difference between you and I is that from the same evidence I believe corruption, you believe no way. We both have the same questions, we just suspect much different things.

**Cylander** · 01-02-2012, 03:38 PM

That's not how it works. You are making an accusation of wrongdoing so the burden of proof is on you to show there is such wrongdoing.

**sabretooth** · 01-02-2012, 03:41 PM

Originally Posted by Cylander

That's not how it works. You are making an accusation of wrongdoing so the burden of proof is on you to show there is such wrongdoing.

No, I think that if you deny that the Moon is made out of green cheese you really are denying the existence of the Moon. Then again, maybe the referees really only exist in our minds....

Another mystery wrapped in an enema.

**T&P_Fan** · 01-02-2012, 03:42 PM

Originally Posted by Cylander

That's not how it works. You are making an accusation of wrongdoing so the burden of proof is on you to show there is such wrongdoing.

Of course the burden of proof is on me. But getting ****ing serious man. Should I quit my job and pursue this? It was brought up on this board and I agreed.

**T&P_Fan** · 01-02-2012, 03:43 PM

Originally Posted by sabretooth

No, I think that if you deny that the Moon is made out of green cheese you really are denying the existence of the Moon. Then again, maybe the referees really only exist in our minds....

Another mystery wrapped in an enema.

You seem like a guy who could use a Merry Pranksters experience.

**sabretooth** · 01-02-2012, 03:49 PM

Originally Posted by T&P_Fan

You seem like a guy who could use a Merry Pranksters experience.

I think I just had one thanks to the latter part of this thread.

**Dawgs** · 01-02-2012, 03:55 PM

Originally Posted by Cylander

The basketball refs are totally different than what you are describing. That was a point shaving scandal. It wasn't the league saying we need this market to win. It was a gambling ring by a couple refs. If the league was really fixing games, would they really want the Pistons to beat the Shaq and Kobe Lakers in dominating fashion in the Finals? That totally blows your conspiracy out of the water. The Lakers are the biggest market, have two superstars while the Pistons had none and played a boring defense first game.

And the next season they changed the rules to ensure that superstar basketball would forevermore trump grinding team basketball.

I dont prescribe to the conspiracy theories for or against specific teams, but I do believe there is an inherent bias in favor of whatever makes the most money for ESPN. ESPN is the most powerful force in sports, well ahead of fair play.

Yesterdays refs absolutely were the single biggest factor in deciding the outcome. Reprehensible. The head ref should be fired. He called that game like he had money on it.

**ycm57** · 01-02-2012, 04:28 PM

Originally Posted by Cylander

That's not how it works. You are making an accusation of wrongdoing so the burden of proof is on you to show there is such wrongdoing.

The events and outcome of this game aside, would you minimally concede that the possibility a ref could tamper with a game exists?

**Yoda** · 01-02-2012, 04:37 PM

Why does someone have to show proof if it's just a theory? There's no way to prove something like that, so that would make for a pretty boring discussion. We're not arguing something that can be proven/disproven by statistics.

**RedRamage** · 01-02-2012, 04:43 PM

Originally Posted by ycm57

At the end of the day, how much did Canseco really profit? What is the value of the possible repercussions for blowing the whistle?

$100,000 for his first book. I don't know how much more of other things like his second book, appearance fees, interviews, etc. etc.

**Sports_Freak** · 01-02-2012, 04:45 PM

No conspiracy. Just terrible officiating and horrible league rules.

Change the replay rules. If a coach wins, it's a wash. He still gets 2, until he loses both, even with no timeouts left.

Replay EVERY scoring play, ruled a TD or not. (the same way they review every ruled scoring play)
Do it quickly upstairs, just as fast as the replays on TV.
Alert the on-field officials of any mistake(s) and change the ruling on the field.

But I don't know about the horrible penalty calling. Allow them to be reviewed? I guess the bottom line is you want the call made correctly, no matter the outcome.
So, I think certain penalties should be allowed to be reviewed.

Most of this just seems to make more sense than the system in place at this point.

**RedRamage** · 01-02-2012, 04:54 PM

Originally Posted by ycm57

The events and outcome of this game aside, would you minimally concede that the possibility a ref could tamper with a game exists?

Possible, sure... but that doesn't mean it does happen. Nor does it mean if it did happen that it was an orchestrated effort by the league.

Reminds me of that old joke about the woman who takes her husbands fishing book out on to the lake just for a ride. A wildlife officer comes by and asks to see her fishing license. When she can't produce one he says he needs to write her a citation. She objects saying that she wasn't fishing, just going around the lake. The officer responds: "But you have all the equipment to fish right here in your boat. You're out in the middle of the lake. It's obvious what you intend to do."

She replies... "Well, then I'm going to have to have you arrested for attempted rape."

"Preposterious!" the officer said. "I'm not trying to rape you."

"But you have all the equipment and you're right here next to me. It's obvious what you intend to do."

The moral of the story, of course, is that just because someone has the ability to do something, does mean that they are doing it. Just because a ref could tamper with a game doesn't mean it has happened.

**T&P_Fan** · 01-02-2012, 05:07 PM

Originally Posted by RedRamage

The moral of the story, of course, is that just because someone has the ability to do something, does mean that they are doing it. Just because a ref could tamper with a game doesn't mean it has happened.

Of course it could be both ways. People just view things differently. Like I said earlier, we both have the same amount of info, its just viewed differently.

**Vonlenska** · 01-02-2012, 06:13 PM

I have very little respect for a person's intelligence if they honestly believe that there are circumstances and outcomes of NFL games that are dictated by referees or some other higher power without any sniff or wind of it ever coming out. It is nothing, literally NOTHING based on any sort of logic or any kind of provable evidence. I hate how the NFL refs call games as much as anyone. I find many rules stupid, vague, and/or counterproductive. Games are frustrating to watch, achingly sliced and diced for a casual TV audience, and devoid of any real joy or enthusiasm due to the fact that every single important play needs to be reviewed and reviewed. I certainly believe that the referees do influence the outcome of games on occasion, but not from any bias or outside influence in any way whatsoever.

To harbor the opinion that the games are consciously controlled and outcomes influenced or even ORCHESTRATED by a group of officials is nothing short of outstanding ignorance. I say this as politely as possible.

**Mr. Bigglesworth** · 01-02-2012, 08:06 PM

The guy down the street from me cheated on his wife, and it turns out I have a female co-worker who flirts with me and another I sometimes go to lunch with. Clearly I am cheating on my wife.

**ycm57** · 01-02-2012, 09:17 PM

Originally Posted by Vonlenska

I have very little respect for a person's intelligence if they honestly believe that there are circumstances and outcomes of NFL games that are dictated by referees or some other higher power without any sniff or wind of it ever coming out. It is nothing, literally NOTHING based on any sort of logic or any kind of provable evidence. I hate how the NFL refs call games as much as anyone. I find many rules stupid, vague, and/or counterproductive. Games are frustrating to watch, achingly sliced and diced for a casual TV audience, and devoid of any real joy or enthusiasm due to the fact that every single important play needs to be reviewed and reviewed. I certainly believe that the referees do influence the outcome of games on occasion, but not from any bias or outside influence in any way whatsoever.

To harbor the opinion that the games are consciously controlled and outcomes influenced or even ORCHESTRATED by a group of officials is nothing short of outstanding ignorance. I say this as politely as possible.

Just to understand my level of ignorance, I am ignorant if I think it happened in one sport but not another?

**Vonlenska** · 01-02-2012, 09:23 PM

Yes. For making such a poor and irresponsible correlation.

**ycm57** · 01-02-2012, 09:31 PM

Originally Posted by Vonlenska

Yes. For making such a poor and irresponsible correlation.

So you're denying it has happened in other major professional sports leagues?

**RedRamage** · 01-02-2012, 09:41 PM

Originally Posted by ycm57

So you're denying it has happened in other major professional sports leagues?

I haven't seen that there has been an orchestrated effort from the league to nudge games.

**ycm57** · 01-02-2012, 09:42 PM

Originally Posted by RedRamage

I haven't seen that there has been an orchestrated effort from the league to nudge games.

Specifically the NFL or all leagues?

**RJBBREZ** · 01-03-2012, 02:00 AM

This game still hurts to even think about. Words can't describe the rage I felt toward the officials and well.. the Lions secondary.

**RedRamage** · 01-03-2012, 09:40 AM

Originally Posted by ycm57

Specifically the NFL or all leagues?

In all leagues... within the last 50-60 years at least. I put that condition in only because I haven't researched enough to really know beyond that. I'm not confident that there never has been in the more distant past, especially when media coverage with significantly less major and when various leagues were just starting.

I'll also readily admit that I don't know all the details in the NBA situation. My understanding is that 1.) there was one ref who was fixing games to benefit gambling. 2.) He may or may not have been working with some other refs. 3.) He also claims that the NBA directly told nudge games.

I know 1 is true. I don't know that 2 or 3 have been proven true.

**Mr. Bigglesworth** · 01-03-2012, 09:50 AM

Whether or not the NBA has willingly and regularly engaged in game rigging through referees means relatively little to me as it pertains to the NFL.

Just because one league as done something does not mean other leagues do it anymore than someone lying or cheating means I am more likely to lie or cheat.

**Gehringer_2** · 01-03-2012, 10:02 AM

Originally Posted by Mr. Bigglesworth

Whether or not the NBA has willingly and regularly engaged in game rigging through referees means relatively little to me as it pertains to the NFL.

Just because one league as done something does not mean other leagues do it anymore than someone lying or cheating means I am more likely to lie or cheat.

Individual game rigging is a separate issue, but the statistical evidence is overwhelming that NBA refs are consistently biased toward the home team. In the NBAs case it's a necessary marketing strategy

**michiganbob2** · 01-03-2012, 10:52 AM

I Just went through this whole thread today. My thoughts...

1. NFL rules are crazy. All reviews should be done in the booth (no challenges). If they are going to review all scoring plays that should include possible scoring plays.

2. It's very hard to referee basketball.

3. The Lions secondary has been putrid for years and still is. Sometimes the play up front mask it.

4. If you are Lions fan and a Wolverines fan it should be pretty obvious there is a bias with refs. I don't know what the reason is but the Lions get screwed a lot and Michigan gets the call a lot. I don't think it effects the outcomes of the games much but it can be frustrating.

5. It seems most Tigers games are called pretty fair

**Mr. Bigglesworth** · 01-03-2012, 10:53 AM

Originally Posted by Gehringer_2

Individual game rigging is a separate issue, but the statistical evidence is overwhelming that NBA refs are consistently biased toward the home team. In the NBAs case it's a necessary marketing strategy

IIRC there are those who claim baseball's home field advantage (as such) is based largely on this as well.

I don't think it is the league making that decision. I think it is referees subconsciously biasing thier calls slightly to the home team.

**Mr. Bigglesworth** · 01-03-2012, 10:59 AM

I also believe there is a sub-group of every team's fan base that believes the league is corrupt and screws their favorite team more than any other.

That doesn't mean it isn't so, but I take the 'so many calls go against team x, it must mean there is an effort to screw team x (or help team y)' with a monster sized grain of salt, if for no other reason I have heard it an awful lot for an awful lot of teams. They can't all be getting screwed in the conspiracy, otherwise it wouldn't be much of a conspiracy.

**michiganbob2** · 01-03-2012, 11:01 AM

I think there is bias for home teams, teams and players. It's most likely because its hard to not have some sort of bias as an individual person. It would be awful tough for league's to get away with conspiracies but I suppose anything is possible.

**Biff Mayhem** · 01-03-2012, 11:55 AM

Referee fixing games? Well, it'd be a non-issue if the Lions could have taken care of business against the Packers' second string. But they didn't. Two blown referee calls would be rendered moot if the away team's defense handled their end of the bargain.

**Mr. Bigglesworth** · 01-03-2012, 03:49 PM

Originally Posted by Mr. Bigglesworth

Final score prediction

Lions: 4,365
Packers: 4

I almost got the aggregate summed score right.

**nd1377** · 01-03-2012, 06:04 PM

Originally Posted by michiganbob2

5. It seems most Tigers games are called pretty fair

Except for one of the most heartbreaking calls in baseball history.

**michiganbob2** · 01-04-2012, 09:28 AM

Originally Posted by nd1377

Except for one of the most heartbreaking calls in baseball history.

Yep. I thought about that. I recall some pretty crappy called games in Boston too. The strike zone seems to really tighten up in Yankees and Boston games. It's no wonder the games take forever. That said, I thought they were pretty generous to Scherzer against NY in the playoffs.