Strong it is entertainment meant to put asses in seats and put a watchable team on the field.
I’ve always questioned why The Lions never had good, solid OC’s, GM’s, HC’s, DC’s that COULD get the team to win more often than not…WHY did it seem that THE FORDS didn’t care if we lost, didn’t change anything but faces, and saw fit to let person’s with NO experience be HC or OC or GM or something like their team didn’t mean a damn except that it still brought in money for them. AND after years of losing, why not fix that/stop that and make a damn difference to turn that around !? but NOOoooooo not once, they get Stafford here in 09, but don’t make any repairs, fixes, hey don’t change anything about their broken team. Matt couldn’t fix it -or overcome it. He had issues in his game, they surfaced at times, we noticed, we kept floundering, a few highs and plenty lows. finally Matt saw it wasn’t ever going to change, and he was getting heat from his own fans and the fans of the team, Matt had enough and wanted out…BAM he’s gone to LA…we got their castoff , could be a great QB, but we don’t know bc, this team was ripped apart by Patricia & Quinn , until the team was virtually dead. BAM MPBQ GONE…here ya go guys take what’s left. they tried to rebuild, but so much damage was left to mend and HEY The season is here. WELLok, let’s put something out there to play…shrug. and we got our asses kicked.
But why not attribute that to ownership vs conspiracy ?
It seems to me good owners who are smart and care about winning tend to be these teams thst are favored.
It’s also one of those too big to keel secret type conspiracies too then add gambling and if they ever know …
On Lions I gotta agree their lack of participating in important league matters , and the choices the team makes like hiring marinelli or asking for money back from Barry and Calvin seem to show me
In regards to conspiracies and lions
I’d lean toward the conspiracy the ownership is only trying to look like they’re winning or trying
When they quite possibly really haven’t been.
I don’t believe it’s rigged.
BUT…
I completely understand those that bring this up every year. The Lions are the most inept franchise in sports, and I think we all agree. But even then, there should be just a speck of good luck. I mean, it took the Texans what? 8 season to have more playoff wins then us?
We got our luck in 2011 and 2014, but the Flynn and PI gate games reminded us.
Not expecting to Luck into a SB. But the Jets, Cards and Jags all have multiple playoff wins I’ve the last 20-30 years.
So… I understand the compliant.
I liked the “soft rigged” theory. I don’t think anything is stopping an owner from forming a winning team. I do think the league makes it harder on some teams until they bust through the wall.
This isn’t unique to football either. I remember watching a documentary about baseball and legendary Philadelphia As manager of the 20s Connie Mack once said about his stint as a part-owner something like (paraphrase) “I always wanted to compete for most of the year, then finish about 4th. That way the stands would be full, but at the end of the year I wouldn’t have to pay the players for winning.” I’ve always suspected a little of that going on with the Fords, at least with old man Ford.
Gambling was also extremely common in early baseball, and not just Shoeless Joe - that was just the culmination on long standing fixing going on. Or players with side hustles for dropping fly balls.
But really, I do think it comes down to the owners. There are (at least) 32 owners who make up the league. To believe a conspiracy exists you’d have to believe that all 32 owners have one goal: make as much money as possible. And while I do think some owners are perhaps like that, I also think that some owners didn’t buy the team to maximize profits. They moreso bought the team to win. Most of these people are already billionaires. Take a guy like Jerry Jones. I think that dude wants to win more than he wants to make money. He isn’t very good at winning. But that is his motivation IMO.
I don’t think the winners and losers are fixed per say. But…
The NFL and all the owners want close games to keep ratings high. It’s all about making money. Have you ever noticed the announcers bragging about how many games came down to the last possession or last minute of the game. They talk about that quite often. That’s exactly what the NFL wants and the refs do everything they can to ensure that happens.
That’s why a team with a 14 point lead starts getting flagged for holding or roughing the passer or taunting, it’s very predictable, so the other team has a shot to come back. The NFL does not want blowouts because people turn the game off. It doesn’t always work because some teams are too good and overcome the penalties. But, I truly believe the refs are doing everything they can to keep the games close. At the end of the day, it’s sports entertainment, they don’t want boring games.
This is a great post and I you really nailed what I’ve been trying to get at.
Gambling has always been apart of sports and still is. The “soft” rigged theory I agree with too, but is it rigging or just favoritism, or does favoritism lead to some rigging?
Anyway great post again and had never heard the story about the Philadelphia manager. Thanks for sharing!
So as opposed to a “rigging” it’s a manipulation? I would agree with that, good distinction made, because I think it’s pretty obvious that happens a lot as you described.
Manipulation to keep viewership high is a great way to describe it. Same thing in the NBA, the one team gets a double digit lead, and here come all the fouls on them to get the other team back in the game. You can literally predict it from your couch, lol.
I coached high school basketball for a decade, it happens there too, often with the home team getting the calls. Opposing coaches and I would talk about this on a regular basis. What is an offensive charge on the road, becomes a blocking foul at home. Happens all the time if you’re paying attention.
I don’t believe its fixed, there’s too many people involved to keep a lid on that. However, I do believe in this, absolutely. I think the refs are under a mandate to help keep the games close as much as possible. This drives viewership, which in turn drives advertising dollars, which in turn drives ridiculous TV contracts. The more people who stay tuned to Cincinnati vs Jacksonville in the 4th quarter, the more valuable that advertising slot becomes.
Ding ding ding, follow the money! Ideally every game would come down to a last second game winning kick attempt, whether the kicker misses it or hits it is irrelevant. The league gets rich either way.
The refs definitely are effected by the league’s wishes. I agree there.
Take our Lions in 2014. The refs might not have wanted to screw the Lions. But I have to believe that the reversed penalty had something to do with not wanting to piss off the league, which most definitely wanted a Cowboys/Packers matchup. And what I mean is they didn’t want to face the league ire if they gave the game to Detroit. They didn’t care if they gave it to Dallas because that is what the league wanted.
Pete Carroll is spot on about needing to change the refs: its an embarrassment worthy of a Congressional Investigation to not have professional full time refs in the NFL.
The Detroit/Dallas Wildcard game of 2014 had the 2nd highest ratings of any wildcard game in history. at least last time I checked. In fact, the viewership was just shy of the Green Bay/Dallas matchup the next week. It had more viewers than any AFC matchup, including the AFC championship. I would like to believe Detroit was compelling to watch that year, but I don’t know. It could be that the Cowboys were in the playoffs for the first time in a while too.
Sometimes TV Ratings are about more than big markets.
