Is the NFL rigged?

[Malfatron]

I would rather it be rigged than Riggled

[3rivers]

Just hope at least there is what many perceive as good officiating in the playoffs with no missed calls or wrong calls ruining games. I can accept some mistakes along the way, it happens. 

[nagahide13]

10 hours ago, lancerman said:

So on that particular play, the ref if he had that vantage point had enough  to determine that the hands were in the face and neck area (because they were and you cannot dispute that) and that you could make a reasonable judgment it was forcible. The worst thing you can say is that it was a soft flag. That does not make it an illegitimate flag. 

Learn the rules

What an absolute joke. A cropped still image of Flowers with a hand-full of hair. Nice.

 

Edited October 17, 2019 by nagahide13
not worth it

[jebrick]

People have been complaining about refs and rigged games for as long as i have watched the NFL (since the 70's).  Chuck Noll once said that that you just have to score enough points to not make the refs matter.

[ninjapirate]

I dont think the nfl is rigged I do think the nfl has put rules in place to make the game more offense friendly that makes the end product almost unwatchable at this point. 

 

Need to let the players play. 

[JonStark]

Not rigged. It's just become a soft league run by incompetent people. 

[TheVillain112]

10 hours ago, incognito_man said:

I really wish Rodgers was half as protected as fans think he is. Literally can't remember the last RTP call he received. He's probably bottom half of the league there.

What I notice most, at least with Dalton, is that he gets hit in the head A LOT by pass rushers when trying to pass (So not RTP).  Typically any contact to the head of a QB gets flagged, even for Rodgers (not talking about young Rodgers that got abused in that Cardinals playoff game).  For Dalton, it rarely gets called...

[childofpudding]

1 hour ago, ninjapirate said:

I dont think the nfl is rigged I do think the nfl has put rules in place to make the game more offense friendly that makes the end product almost unwatchable at this point. 

 

Need to let the players play. 

It has swung the other way in some instances this season. Offensive holding and OPI penalties are both up, for example, while DPI is down slightly.

[drew39k]

11 hours ago, lancerman said:

Every time the Patriots win it's rigged. When they lose though, all of a sudden it's not rigged (like when the refs refused to call any of the numerous holding calls they could have during the helmet catch). It's funny how when people don't get what they want, they have a golden carrot to point to. 

According to patriots fans anytime they win its pure skill and anytime they lose "the league is out to get them"... you cant have it both ways man.

[lancerman]

4 hours ago, nagahide13 said:

What an absolute joke. A cropped still image of Flowers with a hand-full of hair. Nice.

 

If you can’t be straight forward and acknowledge that his hand is in the neck area you are no longer discussing this in good faith. Even the NFL isn’t disputing this call while they already said the other was bad. Congrats on being dug in. You were never going to accept that you were wrong here and are denying a clear image. No reason to engage anymore 

[lancerman]

2 hours ago, drew39k said:

According to patriots fans anytime they win its pure skill and anytime they lose "the league is out to get them"... you cant have it both ways man.

Not really. We might ***** when Brady gets suspended for things that are easily explained by science, and we might ***** about a bad call. Haven’t seen a Pats fan say a game was rigged. 

If anything there is a false perception that has been demonstrably proven that the Patriots benefit more from bad calls then they actually do compared to other teams. 

Here’s the thing. The whole rigged argument is self serving. If you think it is when you lose, then it is when you win and you shouldn’t be infested either way 

[nagahide13]

19 minutes ago, lancerman said:

If you can’t be straight forward and acknowledge that his hand is in the neck area you are no longer discussing this in good faith. Even the NFL isn’t disputing this call while they already said the other was bad. Congrats on being dug in. You were never going to accept that you were wrong here and are denying a clear image. No reason to engage anymore 

Your clear image doesn't show what you seem to think it does, and even if it did, that wouldn't be the rule anyway since prolonged contact would be required, and that can't be shown in an edited (cropped) still image.

I mean seriously, you think a still image shows prolonged contact. You've already contradicted yourself several times, then questioned my knowledge of the rules. You're actually advocating for what are in YOUR words, "soft" calls.

I guess I'm almost as bad for even engaging. What a load of nonsense.

Edited October 17, 2019 by nagahide13

[lancerman]

1 hour ago, nagahide13 said:

Your clear image doesn't show what you seem to think it does, and even if it did, that wouldn't be the rule anyway since prolonged contact would be required, and that can't be shown in an edited (cropped) still image.

I mean seriously, you think a still image shows prolonged contact. You've already contradicted yourself several times, then questioned my knowledge of the rules. You're actually advocating for what are in YOUR words, "soft" calls.

I guess I'm almost as bad for even engaging. What a load of nonsense.

1. It does and the video evidence also shows his hand in the neck area. 

2. You don’t need prolonged contact. You need either forceful (description being having the head pinned back, look at the picture and look at his head) OR prolonged contact which is a judgment call the ref has complete discretion to make. And that clause is also specified in the rule (if you read it) to only be so they don’t call incidental contact. 

3. Learn the rule again because you are clearly mistaken 

This is why I didn’t want to engage. You were incapable of describing the rule correctly and hinged your explanation on an incorrect understanding of said rule. 

 

 

[RabidPanther89]

The reason its a sham is because they won't overturn the challenges. They refuse to try and make the game better because the refs are ignorant and spiteful and simply don't want to be told that they are wrong. Since the NFL shield backs them up, the refs take advantage of it. That's the elephant in the room.

 

 

[nagahide13]

6 hours ago, lancerman said:

1. It does and the video evidence also shows his hand in the neck area. 

2. You don’t need prolonged contact. You need either forceful (description being having the head pinned back, look at the picture and look at his head) OR prolonged contact which is a judgment call the ref has complete discretion to make. And that clause is also specified in the rule (if you read it) to only be so they don’t call incidental contact. 

3. Learn the rule again because you are clearly mistaken 

This is why I didn’t want to engage. You were incapable of describing the rule correctly and hinged your explanation on an incorrect understanding of said rule. 

 

 

1. It obviously does not.

2. You obviously cannot tell that either from a still image. Even if you could, it wouldn't be from that specific image. Which is, again, edited. Even if it weren't you wouldn't be able to establish either prolonged OR excessive contact. It's a still image. One that shows the defensive lineman with a handful of hair. One that you've cropped because the offensive lineman is actually committing the foul you're talking about.

3. What a joke.

4. If you continually don't want to engage, why are you? It's almost like your posturing.

5. Again, I'm just as much of a dope for even continuing to engage. Nothing you've said makes sense, from your arguments on topic to you mentioning that officiating in baseball isn't subjective.