Is the NFL rigged?

[ssbledsoe]

No one actually believes the NFL is rigged.

There's only 2 possible outcomes to the NFL being rigged:
You bet the rigged side and have generational wealth

OR

You're hopelessly stupid for not betting the rigged side

Legitimately no other options.

[Jaysabz]

Originally Posted by bmf

This one comes to mind:
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DEm4j...5ldnV0a2FyeDE2

I still can't stand watching that....

Eagles win on 2/9 and it'll be as if that never happened..

[Jaysabz]

Originally Posted by BGT Masters

Yep. I’m not going to dive into semantics but there is zero way any logical person can explain that non call in the Saints/Rams playoff game years back. About as blatant as it gets. Didn’t give a damn about either team or who won.

Did they have booth-assisted replay back then for those types of calls?

Do they now? I feel like they do but I could be wrong.

If they don't, they should b/c that guy just got straight taken out. Not even a play on the ball...

[Fenway55]

Originally Posted by Jaysabz

Did they have booth-assisted replay back then for those types of calls?

No.

Originally Posted by Jaysabz

Do they now?

No.

There was 1 season where pass interference could be challenged (so it was a challenge-replay, not a booth-assisted one), but they decided not to keep it.

[Scottish Punk]

Originally Posted by fabiani12333

This seems far more plausible to me.

The reason the rules on hitting QBs exist is to keep the league's money-makers healthy and on the field.

Mahomes is the biggest star in the league. He's highly accomplished and likeable. He's going to get favorable treatment -- it's only natural.

yes, this is a much better argument. Has stated before, the top "faces" of the league - Brady, Peyton, Mahomes will get a quicker whistle and more protection from the refs than Big Ben, Lamar, Allen, etc. This isn't "rigged" nor does it cause the other team to lose the game. Bills did not lose the game because of a couple crappy roughing calls. They had plenty of chances to stop the Chiefs and score themselves.

And no, the really bad Saints/Rams call isn't some smoking gun evidence of refs cheating. It was an extremely bad call which the league apologized for (not that really makes up for it). That call didn't even really cost the Saints the game either. They went up three with a FG after that play, couldn't stop the Rams with 1:40 left for them to kick a FG to tie. Saints got the ball first in overtime and didn't score. I am a Brees fan and was rooting for them at the time. I had full confidence tha Brees could work the team down the field in overtime for a game winning FG, but nope.

[Fenway55]

Originally Posted by Scottish Punk

And no, the really bad Saints/Rams call isn't some smoking gun evidence of refs cheating. It was an extremely bad call which the league apologized for (not that really makes up for it). That call didn't even really cost the Saints the game either.

If the right call was made, it would have taken something absolutely crazy for LA to win that game. NO would have been able to kill most of the clock and kick the go ahead FG with 20 seconds to go. Instead they kicked the go ahead FG with 1:48 to go. Huge difference.

[Scottish Punk]

Originally Posted by Fenway55

If the right call was made, it would have taken something absolutely crazy for LA to win that game. NO would have been able to kill most of the clock and kick the go ahead FG with 20 seconds to go. Instead they kicked the go ahead FG with 1:48 to go. Huge difference.

Oh I get, they could have run the clock out and than kicked the FG. Still doesn't mean that play cost them the game. It cost them a chance to put the game away, yes. There is a difference. Saints still had opportunities to win. Complaining about that call and pointing to that one play from the game stating that is why they lost just makes that person sound like a whiny loser.

[TSonn]

No, I don't think it's rigged.

With how prominent sports betting is now, there might be one or two bad refs much like the NBA, but no script.

One common theme with the "bad" calls that have become major talking points lately is the overreaction of the commentator(s) before having all the information (or just blatantly ignoring the actual penalty).

Case in point: the holding call on Philly in SB5. Greg Olson reacts to a replay by saying "he's got his hand on his back" which is referring to the part of the play AFTER the hold takes place. I don't know if he didn't see the whole replay or not, but the part of the play he's reacting to was not why it was called a hold. Even in the clip shared above, it's doctored to take out the first part of the replay that shows the Philly player with a handful of JuJu's jersey.

Same with Aikman and the Anderson hit on Mahomes in the divisional round. First replays didn't show the helmet to helmet hit so Aikman reacted how he did. Later when a replay finally showed that Anderson's helmet hit Mahomes' helmet, he and Buck didn't retract their initial assessment and overreaction.

[Fenway55]

Originally Posted by TSonn

Same with Aikman and the Anderson hit on Mahomes in the divisional round. First replays didn't show the helmet to helmet hit so Aikman reacted how he did. Later when a replay finally showed that Anderson's helmet hit Mahomes' helmet, he and Buck didn't retract their initial assessment and overreaction.

Nor should they have

[Above the Rim]

Lots of different opinions here. You can always believe what you want to believe.

You win some you lose some. Perhaps Bills/Chiefs was simply one of the worst called lopsided games in recent memory for no apparent reason other than "randomness" and the refs were just simply "off". Statistically that will happen every once in a blue moon. Or not.

[JohnnyHatesJazz]

Originally Posted by TSonn

No, I don't think it's rigged.

With how prominent sports betting is now, there might be one or two bad refs much like the NBA, but no script.

One common theme with the "bad" calls that have become major talking points lately is the overreaction of the commentator(s) before having all the information (or just blatantly ignoring the actual penalty).

Case in point: the holding call on Philly in SB5. Greg Olson reacts to a replay by saying "he's got his hand on his back" which is referring to the part of the play AFTER the hold takes place. I don't know if he didn't see the whole replay or not, but the part of the play he's reacting to was not why it was called a hold. Even in the clip shared above, it's doctored to take out the first part of the replay that shows the Philly player with a handful of JuJu's jersey.

Same with Aikman and the Anderson hit on Mahomes in the divisional round. First replays didn't show the helmet to helmet hit so Aikman reacted how he did. Later when a replay finally showed that Anderson's helmet hit Mahomes' helmet, he and Buck didn't retract their initial assessment and overreaction.

Soft penalties man. Aikman’s mad because he played in a punishing era and he sees how soft this league is now. I’m all for protecting players but only on flagrant, egregious hits. These glancing blows are incidental and quite frankly, to throw flags is a joke.

[JohnnyHatesJazz]

Originally Posted by Above the Rim

Lots of different opinions here. You can always believe what you want to believe.

You win some you lose some. Perhaps Bills/Chiefs was simply one of the worst called lopsided games in recent memory for no apparent reason other than "randomness" and the refs were just simply "off". Statistically that will happen every once in a blue moon. Or not.

When it becomes a trend, that’s when people perk up, just like those casino security people when a guy gets constantly “lucky”.

[TSonn]

Originally Posted by Fenway55

Nor should they have

They can still disagree with the call but when the video showed helmet contact they should've probably updated their initial assessment which was questioning if there even was helmet to helmet contact into a confirmation that, yes, there was helmet to helmet contact.

[TSonn]

Originally Posted by JohnnyHatesJazz

Soft penalties man. Aikman’s mad because he played in a punishing era and he sees how soft this league is now. I’m all for protecting players but only on flagrant, egregious hits. These glancing blows are incidental and quite frankly, to throw flags is a joke.

Maybe!

Aikman is also mad that Mahomes has eclipsed his own legacy and potentially the only way for Aikman to feel he has something on Mahomes is to complain about the calls.

[TSonn]

Originally Posted by Above the Rim

Lots of different opinions here. You can always believe what you want to believe.

You win some you lose some. Perhaps Bills/Chiefs was simply one of the worst called lopsided games in recent memory for no apparent reason other than "randomness" and the refs were just simply "off". Statistically that will happen every once in a blue moon. Or not.

If the calls in the KC/Buf game were completely reversed, Bills fans (maybe moreso anti-KC fans) would be complaining about a missed facemask and calling offsides on Buf when it was a false start on KC.

[dbpsooner]

Originally Posted by TSonn

If the calls in the KC/Buf game were completely reversed, Bills fans (maybe moreso anti-KC fans) would be complaining about a missed facemask and calling offsides on Buf when it was a false start on KC.

People only want to acknowledge bad calls when they favor the winning team. They don't want to acknowledge the bad calls against the winning team. Those calls don't fit their narrative.

[Noles939913]

Originally Posted by TSonn

Maybe!

Aikman is also mad that Mahomes has eclipsed his own legacy and potentially the only way for Aikman to feel he has something on Mahomes is to complain about the calls.

How could you possibly know that? No one has Aikman in the Top 5 or anything so why would he be mad that one player eclipsed his legacy? Very bizarre take.

[Scottish Punk]

Originally Posted by TSonn

They can still disagree with the call but when the video showed helmet contact they should've probably updated their initial assessment which was questioning if there even was helmet to helmet contact into a confirmation that, yes, there was helmet to helmet contact.

I just watched the video, the only time it looked like Mahomes might have made contact with Anderson is when Mahomes' helmet came down when his head came down. This is after initial hit from Anderson. More of the whiplash from the hit than anything else. Anderson's hit did not strike helmet to helmet. Should have been a firm no call. I believe replay would have reversed if it was an option. Doesn't really matter anymore though.

[TSonn]

Originally Posted by Noles939913

How could you possibly know that? No one has Aikman in the Top 5 or anything so why would he be mad that one player eclipsed his legacy? Very bizarre take.

https://www.reddit.com/r/nfl/comment...ed_this_about/

[Noles939913]

Originally Posted by TSonn

https://www.reddit.com/r/nfl/comment...ed_this_about/

Just because he tweeted something 5 years ago doesn’t make it still true. Mahomes flops around like a fish and gets weak penalties that go his way. QBs in Aikman’s day got brutalized. Those are just facts.

[Fenway55]

Originally Posted by TSonn

They can still disagree with the call but when the video showed helmet contact they should've probably updated their initial assessment which was questioning if there even was helmet to helmet contact into a confirmation that, yes, there was helmet to helmet contact.

I don't see anyone disputing that there was helmet to helmet contact. Unfortunately, the rules call for "forcible contact" not "well if you look at the play in super slo-mo you can see the one helmet barely graze the other."

So the disgust at the bad call holds true before, during and after any viewing of the replay.

[Bosoxfan5990]

No, but the NBA might be

[TSonn]

Originally Posted by Noles939913

Just because he tweeted something 5 years ago doesn’t make it still true. Mahomes flops around like a fish and gets weak penalties that go his way. QBs in Aikman’s day got brutalized. Those are just facts.

That's fair, but will you acknowledge it's not a "bizarre take" lol? You were coming in hot saying there was zero evidence and I provided some evidence.

[altaeria]

I'm at the point where I wish all non-WRs were required to wear mittens,
(similar to baserunning gloves in MLB)
so the players can't pull and grab their opponent on every play... which they ALL do.


It's not so much that the games are rigged, but that the refs are just way too involved.
And the players really give them no choice.


Defensive Backs ON EVERY TEAM literally grab and pull at WRs ON EVERY PLAY.


Or just allow holding altogether.
I'm so sick of being conditioned to wait for a yellow flag after EVERY GODDAMN PLAY.

[bmf]

Originally Posted by Bosoxfan5990

No, but the NBA might be

Wherever there is big money, there will be corruption. NBA is not immune for sure. But I'll tell you what, if the NBA is rigged, the league is not very bright. Raptors, Bucks and Nuggets have all won championships in the last six years.