Do You Fully Trust NFL Outcomes ?

[bm1475]

People were focusing on the word "rigged" on Twitter in the aftermath of the AFCCG and the Super Bowl, which is easy to hand wave away.

"Yes, that's right, they sit the players down and tell them how it's going to go and everyone agrees, like it's WWE." That isn't what happens.

What I think happens: during the bulk of the game, close judgment calls are generally (not always) made to match whatever keeps the game close. The key is to keep it one score, so they can find a judgment call late that actually does sway the game the way the league wants it. The "eye in the sky" makes it way easier to coordinate this.

This is why, in my opinion, it seems like there's been way more "instant classic" prime time/playoff games over the last decade or so than ever before, and big games decided by nonsensical/ticky tack calls than you used to see. It's also why they want things like the catch rule to remain vague and confusing (you could run back ten different catch/no catch decisions in a row and no pattern would emerge as to what was good and what wasn't), and why perpetuating the idea that the refs aren't very good is helpful. It's plausible deniability, "oh those crappy refs, what can you do?"

The players are doing their best. The players, coaches, etc. don't "rig" anything.

Also, sometimes the game is just a blowout and the refs can't do anything about it. This happened in Bengals-Bills. But best believe the Bengals weren't going to get a single break in KC after ruining the neutral site game and then rubbing the NFL's face in it.

Please remember, the NFL is legally classified as sports entertainment, and there's nothing stopping them from rigging games all they want.

[bm1475]

I've thought a LOT about this stuff over the last couple of years (a stupid amount, actually), and I'm rolling, so here's my response to some of the more common criticisms of the "NFL puts their finger on the scale" argument:

"Why would the NFL want a small market like KC to win?"

First of all, the NFL is mostly beyond market size. I think they don't like having a team in Jacksonville, but beyond that it doesn't matter THAT much. KC's "market" isn't just the city of Kansas City, it's pretty much the entire upper midwest, running down to Oklahoma, west until you get to Broncos Country, east/northeast to Bears territory, north to Vikings territory... they used to have a logo with like six states on it, they're a regional brand. But beyond that...

I dunno, what QB has the NFL been pushing as the heir apparent to the GOAT, Brady, since he took over the starting job? Which QB is on half the commercials on every game?

Once Mahomes hurt his ankle and the Bengals beat the Bills, the money storyline became making this postseason into Mahomes' Willis Reed moment. And that's what they got.

"If it's rigged, why don't the Cowboys make the Super Bowl every year?"

Because the Cowboys being where they are is the perfect place for them to be. Good enough for their fans to have hope, but always falling on their face tragically at the end of the year, and vindicating their haters. It's a more compelling, attention-grabbing story if they're good, but not great. Undertaker didn't have the championship very often in WWE, because he was a big enough deal that he didn't need the title. People watch the Super Bowl even if Dallas isn't in it.

"What do you mean, it was rigged for the Rams last year? What about that facemask on the Bengals touchdown?"

Re: the Bengals facemask touchdown, see my post about keeping the game close. All the Bengals have to do to set the city on fire is to be competitive. Maybe they'll decide to do the Burrow retribution/finally wins the big one storyline... maybe. I believe the NFL hates Mike Brown almost as much as they hate Mark Davis, and would never align the deck to try to get him a title (you're only really IN the club if you're in the global billionaire stratosphere anymore, and Mike isn't in those circles). Besides that, doing what they did last year and this year is good enough for the Bengals to try to bilk the city out of another stadium in a few years, which is the really important thing for the league.

LA, though... the only way you take attention from the Lakers is to bring home trophies. The Rams were going to win that title last year come hell or high water. The LA Rams project was the biggest priority of the last few years for the league. Too much money went into that team and stadium for them NOT to win one. That owner put billions, with a B, into that project, and it's tremendously valuable for the league. The league's TV network is in that stadium. That building is in the background of half the commercials the NFL runs. They were absolutely going to get Kroenke a Lombardi, no matter what.

[Wonderful Monds]

The NFL isn’t going to fix things for whatever minuscule bump they may theoretically get if their preferred QB wins when the downside is the complete loss of trust & integrity in the sport if they were to get busted

[Redsfaithful]

I believe the NFL hates Mike Brown almost as much as they hate Mark Davis

I wouldn't say it's hate, but I do think they have viewed him as someone they could take advantage of when it comes to things like scheduling and that's been a self-inflicted wound.

I remember an article that talked about him preferring early season home games to late lol I think he cited bad weather despite the obvious advantages to playing at home in the stretch of a playoff run.

I'm sure the other owners were like yeah Mike, we'll help you out! So not really hate. I think Katie is well respected and the franchise wants to win so it's kind of a moot point now, more of a historical discussion.

I've said in this thread I don't believe anything is rigged, however I wouldn't be upset if Zac and Tobin start leaning in that direction. Would be great if they think they need to load up and dominate to win, not leaving anything to chance, but I doubt they do, in the end I think they believe it's straight up. But who knows, maybe this coin flip thing this year will make them think they need to build a superteam.

[Redhook]

The NFL isn’t going to fix things for whatever minuscule bump they may theoretically get if their preferred QB wins when the downside is the complete loss of trust & integrity in the sport if they were to get busted

Until this year, I never believed anything was intentionally fixed. With all the shenanigans after the cancelled game favoring certain teams and the NFL, and the weird stuff in the playoffs it has caused me to at least consider some fixing could be in. I still highly doubt it, but it wouldn’t surprise me at all if it was true. And, as Bm1475 laid it out, it’s almost impossible to prove which is part genius on the NFL’s part.

On the minuscule bump, it would be interesting to see how much current ratings affect future advertisement dollars. They have so much guaranteed money that maybe it is a very minuscule amount. I really don’t know.

[traderumor]

plausible deniability gets you as far as keeping EVERYONE involved quiet. Once the birdies start to sing, conspiracy theory turns into conspiracy convictions.

[bucksfan2]

I wouldn't say it's hate, but I do think they have viewed him as someone they could take advantage of when it comes to things like scheduling and that's been a self-inflicted wound.

I remember an article that talked about him preferring early season home games to late lol I think he cited bad weather despite the obvious advantages to playing at home in the stretch of a playoff run.

I'm sure the other owners were like yeah Mike, we'll help you out! So not really hate. I think Katie is well respected and the franchise wants to win so it's kind of a moot point now, more of a historical discussion.

I've said in this thread I don't believe anything is rigged, however I wouldn't be upset if Zac and Tobin start leaning in that direction. Would be great if they think they need to load up and dominate to win, not leaving anything to chance, but I doubt they do, in the end I think they believe it's straight up. But who knows, maybe this coin flip thing this year will make them think they need to build a superteam.

I think there is an inner circle of favored owners that the Commissioner has. Owners that the NFL can count on to steer the game the way they want it to go. Guys like Kraft, the Rooney's in Pittsburgh, Mara in NY. I also think the NFL has had owners that they would rather not have. Owners who end up embarrassing the shield. Owners where its just one thing after another after another. Look at the Browns over the past two decades, the Jags and Kahn. The Titans former owner. They don't want a controversial owner, it makes the league look bad.

The best thing the NFL did was to take geography out of the game. Every team has a shot, each and every NFL team is worth north of $1B. The NFL's second most watched game this season was between two of the smallest market teams (KC and Cincinnati.) As for Kansas City, the AFC championship trophy is the Lamar Hunt trophy, the Hunts were one of the founding members of the current NFL. They have quite a bit of sway, regardless of where they are located.

[dubc47834]

plausible deniability gets you as far as keeping EVERYONE involved quiet. Once the birdies start to sing, conspiracy theory turns into conspiracy convictions.

Even if this were true, there'd still be way to many people to trust keeping a secret. I personally don't buy it!

[traderumor]

Even if this were true, there'd still be way to many people to trust keeping a secret. I personally don't buy it!

That is my point. Plausible deniability is necessary for conspirators, esp. the top dogs, but it also requires the lackeys to keep quiet, and they never will. That is what makes them lackeys

[Ky Fried Redleg]

People were focusing on the word "rigged" on Twitter in the aftermath of the AFCCG and the Super Bowl, which is easy to hand wave away.

"Yes, that's right, they sit the players down and tell them how it's going to go and everyone agrees, like it's WWE." That isn't what happens.

What I think happens: during the bulk of the game, close judgment calls are generally (not always) made to match whatever keeps the game close. The key is to keep it one score, so they can find a judgment call late that actually does sway the game the way the league wants it. The "eye in the sky" makes it way easier to coordinate this.

This is why, in my opinion, it seems like there's been way more "instant classic" prime time/playoff games over the last decade or so than ever before, and big games decided by nonsensical/ticky tack calls than you used to see. It's also why they want things like the catch rule to remain vague and confusing (you could run back ten different catch/no catch decisions in a row and no pattern would emerge as to what was good and what wasn't), and why perpetuating the idea that the refs aren't very good is helpful. It's plausible deniability, "oh those crappy refs, what can you do?"

The players are doing their best. The players, coaches, etc. don't "rig" anything.

Also, sometimes the game is just a blowout and the refs can't do anything about it. This happened in Bengals-Bills. But best believe the Bengals weren't going to get a single break in KC after ruining the neutral site game and then rubbing the NFL's face in it.

Please remember, the NFL is legally classified as sports entertainment, and there's nothing stopping them from rigging games all they want.

Good post. Anyone who doesn't think the league influences games is being extremely naive. If you ever go back and watch the AFCCG debacle , pay close attention to ball placement throughout the game. Drives can be stalled out or extended by bad ball placement and "no-calls" on penalties like holding. Drives can be easily and subtley manipulated by officials.