Posted: 10/29/2012 12:51:01 AM
Originally Posted by Hockeyjock
I would like to know who in here believes that the NFL is fixed or at least some games are fixed? If so, who fixes them and how do they do it? I would love to hear all of the theories that people have.
I'd imagine there are lots of ways games could be slanted. I don't know the exact process of how the officials prepare for games but I would not be surprised if they watched each of the teams games in the week prior. If that happens the NFL would make calls saying watch such and such play where this guy held, they were getting away with that a lot last game, we want you to watch for that.
Alternately they might send them game tape showing various plays over the season with the same intent: we want you to emphasize this, it's been a problem. On the same line of process, they might release weekly grades for the officials, we think this crew did well, we think this was an exemplary game.
I believe there is a league official with communication to the field in every game and they could likely serve many of the same functions afore mentioned by noting calls that may have been missed or were perhaps questionable in the minds of those reviewing.
Finally after games there is likely a review/feedback process where officials would get feedback and in doing so could determine whether they were interpreting signals correctly.
Broadly I think the biases that occur are competition/entertainment bias.
In other words if there is a 50/50 call going for a small market team that is 3-2 they are (all other factors negated) far less likely to get that call than a 2-3 big market team.
Officials also let things roll when momentum swings, they are far less likely to call a fair call against a team that is just starting to get their offense together and perhaps comeback vs. a team that is way in front and threatening to make the game boring.
They are far less likely to make a fair call negating momentum after the momentum has (recently) shifted as they are less likely to make a fair call helping when the momentum is newly against. This is basically an entertainment bias.
Along the same line of entertainment bias all things equal a big market team (in total fans) is more likely to get calls against a small market team.
Part of the entertainment bias encouraging momentum is propensity to reward success. All things equal a team with a winning record is more likely to get calls vs. a losing team; except in cases where such team threatens perineal dominance and therefore threatens the parity/enthusiasm of rival markets.
On that point, (all things being equal) it is much harder to advance or win a second or third championship vs. a first championship; that is even if your team is equal and the competition is equal, the road will be tougher if your doing it for a second time.
All thing being equal the team with the history of sustained success (lacking playoff accolades) will have an easier time advancing deep in the playoffs than a first season surprise.
If there is capacity to accentuate parity this is also encouraged as it is advantageous to have as many teams competitive late as possible.
All things being equal the team that threatens to pull away in a game or division race will have a harder time doing so than the team threatening to draw close. Same thing of course, entertainment bias.
An example would be a 50/50 call leading to a likely touchdown in a game that is 17-3, I imagine people have noticed (other factors excluded) one is more likely to get the call if you are the team with three points vs. the team with seventeen. That is an entertainment/competition bias.
Same thing applies in division races, (always other factors negated) a team is much more likely to get a game shifting call if it makes things interesting as opposed to a call that leads to a late season race being all but decided.
Summed up their is favoritism/accentuation promoting; momentum, parity, big markets, and teams able to make story-lines interesting.
Obviously factors such as parity and big markets are countervailing but situation and weight would dictate course.
Why do I watch if I believe the games are fixed; no game is truly fixed (that would require a majority of participants when of course there are not), it's I think the fair odds shift.
In other words any team can win any game, it's just from one game to the next the odds might get a lot harder.