FU**ING RIGGED

"Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. (or incompetence)"

But in the heat of passion, it sure is hard sometimes...

 

Are there shady dealings in almost every facet of life? Of course. You'd have to be naive not to think so. But not everything is a damned conspiracy. To see conspiracy everywhere is the definition of paranoia. "But I can connect the dots." No. No you can't. You only think you can and it's all coincidence, leaps in logic, and seeing patterns where there really aren't any. (Saying "you" in the generic sense here. Not meaning you personally)

Don't get me wrong. I despise Roger Goodell and everything he stands for. I DO believe he has rigged the game in the sense of creating rules and putting greater than necessary emphasis on other rules. This greatly benefits some teams, and severely hampers others.

Did he set out to help the Pats, Packers, etc (read: high flying offenses)? No. Not specifically and intentionally. What he DID intend was to increase offense as he believes the average fan, and especially new fans or casual fans are bored if there's not a ton of scoring. And some teams just so happened to be built in such a way as to capitalize on it. Other teams suffered because their very identity and style of play were now deemed verboten.

I don't think he set out to hurt the Steelers. I think we were a casualty in his overall plan. Does he pay particular attention to, and indeed, be harsh on us? You bet. But why? I don't believe it's a simple as "Screw Pittsburgh." It's even easier. We were a top dog. We had a ton of attention from fans and media. And we were guilty of playing in the manner he wanted to stop. It could easily have been, say, the Raiders if we were in a different era.

Do I think he covered up Spygate and destroyed evidence rather than fully prosecute and punish the Patsies. ABSOLUTELY. But I don't think he did it just to be a swell guy to Bob Kraft (even if I tease that he did occasionally). I think that whatever that evidence was was SO damaging as to give the entire league a huge black eye. He made a deal with the devil, so to speak, to protect the league as a whole. A better man would have rained vengeance down on NE with great fury and furious anger, and withstood and weathered any firestorm from the media and possibly congress. But Goodell is a weasel and will always take the easy way out.

Have games been influenced in the past, even recent past? Probably. All it takes is a single ref or 2 at most to heavily influence a game. And refs are human. Every man has his price. But I still don't see how that would prove an organizational conspiracy to rig games or even whole seasons. To do that would require a great deal of people involved. And the more people involved, the more likely you are to get caught.

And if YOU believe so, then maybe we should THANK Roger for the 2005 season... (edit: Tags was still comish then. But I'm sure as being high up the ladder, Roger still had some pull. )

 

Right.

 

FWIW, here's an interview with the ref after the game.

Q: [on the batting of the ball ruling following the Green Bay’s blocked field goal]


Cheffers: We had a blocked field goal, so that is a loose ball play and that remains a field goal, it remains a scrimmage kick, unless we rule that [the ball] has been possessed at some point during that play, which we did not rule on the field. We ruled that the ball continued to be a loose ball throughout the play. Batting is an intentional act. It’s when you strike the ball, and you cannot do that in the direction of your own goal line. So if you bat the ball forward, it is an illegal act. So we ruled that the player batted the ball forward, it was during the loose ball part of the scrimmage play and the only place we can enforce that foul is from the previous spot. So we went back to where the ball was snapped, we enforced the yardage, I believe it was half the distance [to the goal], and a foul on the defense is an automatic first down. So that’s basically how the play panned out.


Q: [on if there was a lot of discussion between the officials about whether or not there was possession during the play]


Cheffers: Yes, we did take quite a bit of time on that play, as I’m sure you saw, and the discussion revolved around whether or not there was possession in the field of play, and we ruled that there was no possession in the field of play, so that’s why we enforced it as a foul during a loose ball and went to the previous spot.


Q: [on if the Packers could have advanced the ball had they recovered the blocked field goal]


Cheffers: Yes, that is a good point. Any time the ball ends up back behind the line of scrimmage, and in this case it never crossed the line of scrimmage, but any time the ball is behind the line of scrimmage on a blocked field goal like that, the offensive team has every right to advance the ball. So there is an advantage to the defense to try and keep them from recovering the ball. So that is why there are rules about holding and all of that kind of stuff to try and keep the opponent from recovering the ball.