Call me a conspiracist, but refs will NOT be in favor of us next week. NFL wants

[infantrycak]

Originally Posted by Dread-Head

You're NOT a conspiracy theorist...that's EXACTLY what the NFL wants.

What it wants and what they do are two different issues.

Originally Posted by Double Barrel

Saying the NFL is influencing games to benefit tv ratings is akin to saying that NASA never landed on the moon, IMO.

I don't think the NFL is manipulating games for TV ratings.

I think stars do get some special treatment.

I think some crews, Ed Hochuli's in particular and I have said this since before the Texans existed, tend to "when in doubt call it for the favored team."

Even on those issues I don't think the refs ever get together and decide to call it that way.

[Double Barrel]

Originally Posted by infantrycak

I think stars do get some special treatment.

I agree. It's the so-called Michael Jordan rule evident in all sports.

But, that road goes both way. I've seen Andre Johnson get the benefit of superstar treatment, as well. I wouldn't be surprised if JJ Watt gets the same as time goes on.

I just don't think these calls are making the difference in the outcomes of games.

[qqert]

Originally Posted by Double Barrel

I agree. It's the so-called Michael Jordan rule evident in all sports.

the mafia/mob part or the special treatment?

there is ALWAYS something fishy with business, we all know it.
they can never regulate themselves, look at enron, worldcom, goldman-sachs, etc.

it's a business, to say that the NFL is pure sport is to be naive!

[qqert]

btw, even the vatican is corrupt.

[infantrycak]

Originally Posted by Double Barrel

I agree. It's the so-called Michael Jordan rule evident in all sports.

But, that road goes both way. I've seen Andre Johnson get the benefit of superstar treatment, as well. I wouldn't be surprised if JJ Watt gets the same as time goes on.

Well you tend to find more stars on successful teams so maybe they get a few extra calls. I don't think it is because the NFL wants a Brady v. Manning matchup or anything like that. As I said, I don't think any of this gets discussed. I just think it is an unconscious tendency at times.

I just don't think these calls are making the difference in the outcomes of games.

As you said the road goes both ways so sometimes we benefit as in Detroit. I do think there are certain times bad officiating does make the difference in a game.

Heck there is a pretty good argument one SB was decided by bad officiating. In SB V the Cowboys clearly recovered a fumble on the Colts 1 yard line and inexplicably the referee comes running up and signals Colts ball as the same Cowboy everyone saw jump on the ball is standing there holding the ball. 3 pt game.

From the Texans - no conspiracy to it. 2003 we play the Patriots to overtime. 3rd down in OT Sharper gets called for a phantom PI call putting the Pats in field goal range and boom the game is over.

So I think poor officiating can affect the outcome of games. Generally it does not and I don't see a conspiracy. Now I have to go knock on wood nothing is called to make me scream about the officiating.

[handswarmer]

Originally Posted by qqert

btw, even the vatican is corrupt.

say it ain't so?

[TejasTom]

Originally Posted by qqert

btw, even the vatican is corrupt.

Look out for the black helicopters.

[ObsiWan]

Originally Posted by Pats

The ball was in a forward direction towards the line of scrimmage when it came out. Thats a fumble. Watch the video again.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHEQtASq9BI

Brady fumbled. Pure and simple.
There was no attempt to release the ball as if to pass. I assume you're familiar with the mechanics of throwing a pass. The release point is at the top of the throwing arc. The ball was well below that point, below his head, nearly at chest level. No one, especially a technically correct passer like Brady, would or could successfully throw a pass with the ball still in his hand at chest level.
So come off it.
He fumbled.
Under orders from Goodell or from just plain old ineptness, the refs blew that one.

[ObsiWan]

Originally Posted by infantrycak

As you said the road goes both ways so sometimes we benefit as in Detroit. I do think there are certain times bad officiating does make the difference in a game.

If you are referring to Forsett's TD that shouldn't have been a TD, that's not on the refs. That's totally on Jim Schwartz. He had the challenge flag thrown before Forsett got into the endzone. That took the call out of the refs' hands completely. He even said so himself during the post-game presser. His temper cost them that score. I won't say it cost them the game because nothing says we wouldn't have scored on that drive without his "help".

[b0ng]

Anybody from Houston who has rooted for the Oilers back in the day and witnessed things like the Mike Renfro "catch" or Don Beebee going out of bounds then coming back in have a predisposition to assume the Refs are going to screw them at some point. And handswarmer I'm just going to assume you've never been to a Raiders board and asked them about Refs.

[Arky]

Here's a bit of research I did a couple of years ago back when looking at "1st downs from penalty" in the Colts vs. Texans series back when Peyton was at the helm:

I've been looking at a few stats in the Texans vs. Colts series. The one I find most curious is "1st downs from penalty". The Texans don't really have a rep as a penalized team, in fact, they are usually in the upper half of the least penalized teams in recent years.

In the NFL, each game, teams normally get 0, 1 or 2 of these per game. 0, 1 and 2 are all common numbers for 1st downs from penalty/game.

In the Texans vs. Colts series (Texan win/loss in parentheses):

--------------
2009

Game 1 @ Indy (L): Texans 1, Colts 6
Game 2 @ Houston (L): Texans 0, Colts 4

Totals for 2009: Texans 1, Colts 10
--------------
2010

Game 1 @ Houston (W): Texans 1, Colts 2
Game 2 @ Indy (L): Texans 2, Colts 1

Totals for 2010: Texans 3, Colts 3 (a "normal" year)
---------------
2011

Game 1 @ Houston (W): Texans 1, Colts 1
Game 2 @ Indy (L): Texans 1, Colts 6

Totals for 2011: Texans 2, Colts 7
---------------

Grand totals last 3 years, first downs from penalty: Texans 6, Colts 20

This genuinely qualifies as lopsided.

Just thought I'd point this out since I wasted probably an hour of my time looking this stuff up.

Now that I look at it again a year or so later, the 2009 and 2011 games in Indy both had 6(!) first downs from penalty for the Colts..... *that* is a bunch. That can change a game.....but it is what it is...

Edit: Peyton didn't play in 2011 but it didn't seem to change things much. Also, no doubt there were different officiating crews involved in this data...

[b0ng]

Let's say you are an oddsmaker working for a casino in Vegas, and you were having to make the numbers up for some prop bets for the Texans/Patriots game coming up. What odds would you give for these scenarios:

Texans win outright
Patriots win outright
Patriots win via critical call by the Refs late in the game (something like the Justin Forsett TD on thanksgiving)
Texans win via same way.

[2012Champs]

Originally Posted by b0ng

Let's say you are an oddsmaker working for a casino in Vegas, and you were having to make the numbers up for some prop bets for the Texans/Patriots game coming up. What odds would you give for these scenarios:

Texans win outright
Patriots win outright
Patriots win via critical call by the Refs late in the game (something like the Justin Forsett TD on thanksgiving)
Texans win via same way.

Well the first two are already out there the moneyline for the texans is betting 100.00 to win 330-400 and the moneyline on the pats is betting 400-500 to win 100.00.


Interesting note the balt/denver game has a moneyline about the same. The nfc games are much tighter in the low-mid hundreds on both sides


The last two are highly unlikely so much so I dont any house would waste time putting odds on it

[Arky]

......
Interesting note the balt/denver game has a moneyline about the same. The nfc games are much tighter in the low-mid hundreds on both sides.....

That would be because the moneyline is more or less a ratio to the point spread. For example, Texans and Ravens are both about 9 pt dogs wereas the Packers and the Seahawks are (roughly) 3 pt dogs. The higher the point spread, the wider the gap in the favorite/underdog moneyline.


BALTIMORE +9, +355 (ml)
DENVER -9, -425 (ml)

GREEN BAY +3, +145 (ml)
SAN FRANCISCO -3, -165 (ml)

SEATTLE +2½, +125 (ml)
ATLANTA -2½, -145 (ml)

HOUSTON +9, +330 (ml)
NEW ENGLAND -9, -400 (ml)

Placing a bet on the Texan spread and winning would return most of your bet. Placing a bet on the Texans moneyline and winning would return your bet almost 3.3 times larger. The hard part is being correct....

bong: A prop bet involving the refs would probably be unlikely but you might be able to get/ask for one in Las Vegas.

Las Vegas, NFL, gambling go back a ways. IIRC, I believe it was Pete Rozell that had teams start issuing injury reports for the benefit of gamblers...

[ajohnson80]

over or under..Brady gets 2 pi calls

[El Tejano]

Originally Posted by handswarmer

I have never seen an opposing teams fanbase more paranoid about the referees and claiming unfair # of calls againt their team as this one.

Eageles, Chiefs, Steelers, Colts, Pats, Jet= i've posted on all their boards and never seen as much crying about officials as here.

This is shameful....

Because the NFL has screwed us more than all of them.

[Double Barrel]

Originally Posted by infantrycak

So I think poor officiating can affect the outcome of games. Generally it does not and I don't see a conspiracy. Now I have to go knock on wood nothing is called to make me scream about the officiating.

I agree completely. There are numerous examples in NFL history where human error led to blown calls that ultimately affected games. There is no doubt that officials are not perfect, and that human element can impact games.

But, that's a far cry from those asserting a back room cabal of NFL commish, league execs, and numerous referees conspiring to fulfill an agenda that panders to network ratings. The NFL is a cash cow already, so risking all of that continuous success by allowing some nefarious plan seems far fetched and ludicrous. Eventually, game film would prove a trend and coaches, GMs, and owners would be sure to make a big deal out of it. No way are any of these cats (coaches, GMs, owners) in on any kind of alleged conspiracy. It just does not make any logical sense at all.

[Dutchrudder]

Originally Posted by Double Barrel

I agree completely. There are numerous examples in NFL history where human error led to blown calls that ultimately affected games. There is no doubt that officials are not perfect, and that human element can impact games.

But, that's a far cry from those asserting a back room cabal of NFL commish, league execs, and numerous referees conspiring to fulfill an agenda that panders to network ratings. The NFL is a cash cow already, so risking all of that continuous success by allowing some nefarious plan seems far fetched and ludicrous. Eventually, game film would prove a trend and coaches, GMs, and owners would be sure to make a big deal out of it. No way are any of these cats (coaches, GMs, owners) in on any kind of alleged conspiracy. It just does not make any logical sense at all.

If they were, the Cowboys would not be missing the playoffs so often. Can't ask for a better team to go deep, people love to watch them win and love to watch them lose. The ratings would be huge if they made the NFCC or Super Bowl.

[Surreal McCoy]

Conspiracy Theorists, oh dear.

Conspiracy theorists are the people who believe there are little green men hidden somewhere in New Mexico by a government capable of the greatest cover up in the history of the entire planet, yet also believe that same government is incapable of running a school lunch programme.

[Modest]

This thread needs to be renamed 'Lets cry about The Tuck rule.'

Jesus, this is almost as bad as a Raiders forum.