Concerning Super Bowl

[Gramz]

On ‎1‎/‎21‎/‎2019 at 12:55 PM, GoPats said:

If there's something you want to say to me you should say it... I'm a big boy, I can handle it Gramz. I consider us pals but I also found a way to be happy for you every time the Colts or Broncos beat the Patriots. 

 

 

I think I addressed this earlier, but I have been thinking about it a little more,  and yes,  you were very gracious Peyton's final year when the Broncos beat the Pats and he and the Broncos went on  and he got his 2nd SB .    

 

Aside from a select group,   I think the majority of NFL fans, and fellow athletes and players were also very happy for him.      It's a little different scenario. than watching Tom and the Pats in practically every  AFC game and several Super Bowls for the better part of the past two decades.

 

 Years earlier it appeared that Peyton may have be done for good...   after his surgery he could barely toss the football to his wife Ashley, let alone step foot on the field and be competitive.   He worked Hard to get back to where he was.   It was impressive, it was admirable, and pretty spectacular that he accomplished that.   I still get emotional when I think of how hard he worked.

You knew how much that SB win meant to me, and you did reach out with very kind comments.  I remember well.

 

If I said something this week that you thought was harsh,   I meant no offense to you personally,  and if I said something that gave you that impression, I apologize.

 

I know you are happy to see your team return to the big stage once again.   As a friend,  I am happy for you,  just not happy about the overall situation.     The outcome of the Saints/Rams game and the drama involved with the non-call  had left a sour taste with me regarding the NFL before the Pats/Chiefs game even started.    At this point I have no interest in watching the game.   That is in no way meant to be offensive to you.   I understand your excitement.  I've been there several times myself.  

 

Enjoy the game!

 

 

[Gramz]

Super Bowl jerseys available

 

/ meant as fun, folks.  

[esmort]

6 hours ago, Narcosys said:

 The 2010 spygate case. The ruling provided does not explicitly state they can, yet the ruling contends the NFL is only an entertainment event as argued by the NFL. The wording of the ruling allows for wiggle room. There are also currently no laws on the books that prevent a sports organization from influencing the outcome of their own events (look to WWE as example). The quiz show act only applies to contests of intellectual skills and knowledge. Nor does the sports bribery act apply because it applies to those outside of an organization from influencing the events within.

 

I do not believe you are interpreting the laws correctly and/or not taking into account other laws that would cover fixing games. I am not a lawyer, and I am not going to devote the time to do the legal research it would take to list the laws and cases; but I know there are a couple posters who are lawyers that could probably weigh in.

 

I am not going to say a referee has never been paid off, but in the big picture it would be nearly impossible to fix games on the level many here are suggesting (too many moving parts, too many people who would have to stay quiet, etc ....).  If the NFL was legally allowed to fix games there would be multiple discussions of it in sports media. There would be entire sections in sports law classes devoted to it, I know many people who have taken those classes and never was it ever even mentioned.

 

The main proof ... why risk killing the golden goose. They are going to make their money without fixing games; and IF they were doing it there would be so many MUCH more profitable "storylines".

[Narcosys]

5 hours ago, esmort said:

 

I do not believe you are interpreting the laws correctly and/or not taking into account other laws that would cover fixing games. I am not a lawyer, and I am not going to devote the time to do the legal research it would take to list the laws and cases; but I know there are a couple posters who are lawyers that could probably weigh in.

 

I am not going to say a referee has never been paid off, but in the big picture it would be nearly impossible to fix games on the level many here are suggesting (too many moving parts, too many people who would have to stay quiet, etc ....).  If the NFL was legally allowed to fix games there would be multiple discussions of it in sports media. There would be entire sections in sports law classes devoted to it, I know many people who have taken those classes and never was it ever even mentioned.

 

The main proof ... why risk killing the golden goose. They are going to make their money without fixing games; and IF they were doing it there would be so many MUCH more profitable "storylines".

The reason you are not going to devote time is the same reason nobody else really does. Thus nothing ever really gets proven or scrutinized. People will continue to believe what they want because they don't want to question it.

 

Why would the sports media call out something they are making money from? Would you really delegitimize the very thing your making your livelihood from? I think not, therefore why even attempt to question it. Plus, this isn't common knowledge. Nobody in the sports media cares to research the laws because they do not see it as real. Once you look into it, it could very well be a possibility, but you don't know what it is that you don't know. There is nothing to discuss because they are legally allowed to do it only by what they are told they cannot do. Nothing explicitly states it, but therein lies the reason they can do it, because nothing explicitly says they cannot either.

 

The go to argument against saying there are to many moving parts is a fallacy. You only need the refs for the most part. That is not a lot. The refs are not permitted to talk to the media, and guaranteed they are under non-disclosure agreements about anything the NFL does or does not do.  So long as the games go as they want, there is nothing to be done, but if not the refs can help. It does not need to be all 256 games, only select few to ensure certain teams are in the playoffs and certain teams make it to the championships.

[esmort]

1 hour ago, Narcosys said:

The reason you are not going to devote time is the same reason nobody else really does. Thus nothing ever really gets proven or scrutinized.

 

I do not believe it is happening and since I am only a fan I don't have a reason to spend the necessary time to research it.  But, I am sure plenty of other people do and have researched it.

 

1 hour ago, Narcosys said:

Why would the sports media call out something they are making money from? Would you really delegitimize the very thing your making your livelihood from? I think not, therefore why even attempt to question it.

 

Because many in the sports media don't just report on football, a story like this would make a journalist's career.  They would question it because not every journalist (even sports journalists) is beholden to the NFL.

 

1 hour ago, Narcosys said:

Plus, this isn't common knowledge.

 

If it's not common knowledge how are you privy to it.  It's a conspiracy theory

 

1 hour ago, Narcosys said:

There is nothing to discuss because they are legally allowed to do it only by what they are told they cannot do. Nothing explicitly states it, but therein lies the reason they can do it, because nothing explicitly says they cannot either.

 

A law doesn't have to specifically say "NFL you are not allowed to do X" for it to be illegal.  There are plenty of laws covering all aspects of business, sports, etc ... which could apply.  There is no law on the books that specifically says "esmort you are prohibited from hitting people in the head with rocks", but there are dozens if not hundreds of laws that will cover that situation.

 

I am not even going to go into the mess of laws and regulations that come into play with sports betting (especially with its expansion), and fantasy being allowed online because it is a "game of skill".  I am sure there are many laws in this area that prohibit fixing NFL games (even if they don't mention the NFL specifically).

 

1 hour ago, Narcosys said:

The go to argument against saying there are to many moving parts is a fallacy. You only need the refs for the most part. That is not a lot. The refs are not permitted to talk to the media, and guaranteed they are under non-disclosure agreements about anything the NFL does or does not do.  So long as the games go as they want, there is nothing to be done, but if not the refs can help. It does not need to be all 256 games, only select few to ensure certain teams are in the playoffs and certain teams make it to the championships.

 

It's not a fallacy ... it's naive to think fixing a multi-billion dollar industry only takes a few refs. First - who is driving the ship ... Goodell? The owners of the teams aren't that stupid ... So all the owners must be in it on it right?  Except a lot of the owners are worth far more than their team and aren't in it for the money. So Billionaires like Jerry Jones, Paul Allen, etc ... are all good with the Patriots narrative? I think not (too many big egos being just one of many issues). 

 

So now on top of all that you got the refs you have paid off and any other organizational people who might have been brought in, found out, etc ... and not one has gotten greedy and demanded more money and went public when they didn't get it (or decided to leak it to TMZ for a nice payday)? Come on now!!!

 

Like I said in an earlier post I am sure there have been isolated instances of paid refs shaving points etc... throughout the years, but this idea that the entire league is rigged is a ridiculous conspiracy theory.  There's too much to lose; and if they have been "rigging the narrative" they haven't been doing a very good job because there are tons of games and championships that they could have "arranged" that would be far more profitable for both viewership numbers and growing the brand than what "they set up"!

[GoPats]

17 hours ago, Gramz said:

I think I addressed this earlier, but I have been thinking about it a little more,  and yes,  you were very gracious Peyton's final year when the Broncos beat the Pats and he and the Broncos went on  and he got his 2nd SB .    

 

Aside from a select group,   I think the majority of NFL fans, and fellow athletes and players were also very happy for him.      It's a little different scenario. than watching Tom and the Pats in practically every  AFC game and several Super Bowls for the better part of the past two decades.

 

 Years earlier it appeared that Peyton may have be done for good...   after his surgery he could barely toss the football to his wife Ashley, let alone step foot on the field and be competitive.   He worked Hard to get back to where he was.   It was impressive, it was admirable, and pretty spectacular that he accomplished that.   I still get emotional when I think of how hard he worked.

You knew how much that SB win meant to me, and you did reach out with very kind comments.  I remember well.

 

If I said something this week that you thought was harsh,   I meant no offense to you personally,  and if I said something that gave you that impression, I apologize.

 

I know you are happy to see your team return to the big stage once again.   As a friend,  I am happy for you,  just not happy about the overall situation.     The outcome of the Saints/Rams game and the drama involved with the non-call  had left a sour taste with me regarding the NFL before the Pats/Chiefs game even started.    At this point I have no interest in watching the game.   That is in no way meant to be offensive to you.   I understand your excitement.  I've been there several times myself.  

 

Enjoy the game!

 

 

 

Thank you Gramz! My interactions with you over the years have definitely had an influence on how I felt about the rivalry, etc. There is always a silver lining and mine was folks like  you and Jaric getting to enjoy the thrills of watching your team win. I appreciate your response very much and my apologies as well if anything this week was over-the-line. 

[Gramz]

23 minutes ago, GoPats said:

 

Thank you Gramz! My interactions with you over the years have definitely had an influence on how I felt about the rivalry, etc. There is always a silver lining and mine was folks like  you and Jaric getting to enjoy the thrills of watching your team win. I appreciate your response very much and my apologies as well if anything this week was over-the-line. 

Thanks!  Our conversation here could have and maybe should have been in the personal messenger, but I thought some of the newbies reading this should understand you're one of the good guys, 

 

A good poster who has in fact, been around here even longer than me. 

[Gramz]

I may not be interested in the Super Bowl, but I must say it's been nice connecting with all of you again this season and chatting on here.

[LJpalmbeacher2]

7 hours ago, esmort said:

 

I do not believe it is happening and since I am only a fan I don't have a reason to spend the necessary time to research it.  But, I am sure plenty of other people do and have researched it.

 

 

Because many in the sports media don't just report on football, a story like this would make a journalist's career.  They would question it because not every journalist (even sports journalists) is beholden to the NFL.

 

 

If it's not common knowledge how are you privy to it.  It's a conspiracy theory

 

 

A law doesn't have to specifically say "NFL you are not allowed to do X" for it to be illegal.  There are plenty of laws covering all aspects of business, sports, etc ... which could apply.  There is no law on the books that specifically says "esmort you are prohibited from hitting people in the head with rocks", but there are dozens if not hundreds of laws that will cover that situation.

 

I am not even going to go into the mess of laws and regulations that come into play with sports betting (especially with its expansion), and fantasy being allowed online because it is a "game of skill".  I am sure there are many laws in this area that prohibit fixing NFL games (even if they don't mention the NFL specifically).

 

 

It's not a fallacy ... it's naive to think fixing a multi-billion dollar industry only takes a few refs. First - who is driving the ship ... Goodell? The owners of the teams aren't that stupid ... So all the owners must be in it on it right?  Except a lot of the owners are worth far more than their team and aren't in it for the money. So Billionaires like Jerry Jones, Paul Allen, etc ... are all good with the Patriots narrative? I think not (too many big egos being just one of many issues). 

 

So now on top of all that you got the refs you have paid off and any other organizational people who might have been brought in, found out, etc ... and not one has gotten greedy and demanded more money and went public when they didn't get it (or decided to leak it to TMZ for a nice payday)? Come on now!!!

 

Like I said in an earlier post I am sure there have been isolated instances of paid refs shaving points etc... throughout the years, but this idea that the entire league is rigged is a ridiculous conspiracy theory.  There's too much to lose; and if they have been "rigging the narrative" they haven't been doing a very good job because there are tons of games and championships that they could have "arranged" that would be far more profitable for both viewership numbers and growing the brand than what "they set up"!

 

Decades ago a journalist, Jessica Savage, was given a new show called Frontline. I beleive it was on PBS.

 

I beleive near the end of the first season she did a piece if the NFL is Fixed? She said in the second season they will do a follow up with more information and assumption of fixing. 

 

Before the 2nd season came her car's brakes mysteriously malfunctioned and Jessica Savage Died in the car accident. The follow up story of if the NFL is Fixed never aired in Frontline's 2nd season or any others that followed.