tuttleberry

Also wanted to mentioned how Gammons said on the air that when you look at the replay, it's impossible to look at the footage and rule "double", so the only thing left to discuss is Hernandez's motive for intentionally getting the call wrong, not that he innocently mad a mistake!

All I can say is "Wow!" and it's about time the guys in the media come clean and entertain foul play. It's insulting for people to tell us this instance is simply a "bad call"

Gammons was interviewed recently and has commented that nobody could look at that replay and rule "double", so the question is , what is his motive, and Gammons proposes something to the extent of "spite", as in, Hernandez is fighting the whole concept of replay by intentionally botching the call with the aid of replay.

Whatever the reason, it's refreshing to see people in the media cry conspiracy first, and now let's find out why.

Looking back at this game : total was 8.5. Final was 4-3. The wrong call cost the over. Didn't know that the total was in the balance 2 days ago.

MLB has stated that Angel Hernandez had the benefit of seeing home and away feeds, so he had the right look and the benefit of super slo-mo.

Not saying Hernandez was bought, but the fact that money was in the balance on the call makes it even higher profile than you would think.

SwishSwish - yeah, you're right. I'm one of those guys. 9/11 is ancient history, though. No use wasting energy on it anymore when there's so much going on in the world in the present.

I will continue to point to San Diego @ Pittsburgh 2008 as the benchmark for fixed games. Won't mention the details. Everyone knows what happened that day.

Well, thank you dgnowsf. You're right. There's a DB playing deep on the offensive-left side of the field on the last play. I didn't see him in the shot you posted when I originally looked at it myself. I guess I might have thought he was part of the guys standing on the sideline.

Forget everything I posted. There is now enough evidence to say that a DB was there on the deep offensive-left side of the field for 2 of the 3 plays, which means he clearly could have been there on all 3 plays.

I feel kind of stupid. Sorry about raising a false alarm.

However, I must maintain I didn't bet on the game and I'm not a Denver fan. I'm a Giants fan and I can't afford to gamble (bills and kids). I'm a sports fan and a conspiracy guy (obviously).

After I watched that 70-yd TD play, I thought, "That was more ridiculous than amazing." With 40+ seconds left in the game and Balt needing a TD, they somehow managed to hit a play where Jones gets BEHIND the deep coverage. How? The answer: Denver had only 10 men on the field on that play. Question: Why are none of the sports shows (ESPN,NFLN), showing us this?

Also, very puzzling, it's possible that Denver had only 10 men on the field for MORE than one of the plays on that drive.

WATCH THAT DRIVE ON YOUTUBE - SEARCH ON "JOE FLACCO" AND THEN SORT BY DATE-TODAY.

1st-and-10 (1:09) : Denver lines up in a formation that's basically 6-in-the-box and 4 DB's in an umbrella coverage. That's 10 guys. Maybe there's another DB playing very-deep centerfield, but that's debateable. After the snap, some of the front 6 guys drop into coverage. Result : pass incomplete.

2nd-and-10 (1:05) : Denver lines up in a formation that's basically 3 guys rushing, 4 guys dropped covering the middle of the field, and 3 DB's on the outside and deep. YOU WILL NOTICE that Bailey-24 is concerned about someone VERY DEEP DOWNFIELD. He's obviously yelling something because there's frosty air / breath shooting out of his helmet. So maybe there's an unseen 11th player on the field here. Result: The ball is snapped, Flacco instantly sees something, and he scrambles for a 7-yard gain instead of trying to throw a pass.

3rd-and-3 (:43) : Camera zooms out a little for a wider view. You can see 20-yds downfield now. Denver's playing 3 down, 5 guys in medium coverage, and 2 guys deep, 15-yds back. Again, clearly only 10 guys. This time, Bailey does not turn to see if or where there's a Denver DB positioned deep downfield. Result: 70-yd TD to Jones.

ON REPLAY DURING THE GAME, THE BROADCAST SHOWS THE PLAY FROM FLACCO'S VIEW, AND THERE IS NO DB DEEP DOWNFIELD. THE BRONCOS CLEARLY ONLY HAD 10 MEN ON THE FIELD ON THAT PLAY FOR THE TD.

This is ridiculous, and I don't think it was a mistake. I question whether Denver had more than 10 men on the field for that whole drive. The only evidence of an 11th man/DB was Bailey turning and yelling, so maybe someone was there. MAYBE.

I'm calling fix. Yes - FIX.

Hahahaha - what a great thread!

Just want to put in my 2 cents here:

I'm one of the guys that does believe in NFL fixes. However - we will never have the pure 100% provable fix to point at. The closest we can come to pure fix is San Diego / Pittsburgh '08. The only defense in that game for the non-believers was to say the refs decided that they didn't get the call right after initially making the right call. Despicable, if that's the case. Also, so negligent that those refs should have been fired. Of course, I choose to believe they were told what call to make by the booth.

In this case, it doesn't add up. I don't know what the "Chop Block Rule" is, but that Seattle O-Lineman was above the waist on that doubleteam block. I thought the rule was that you couldn't block LOW on a D-Lineman who is engaged. If someone can clarify this rule, that would help.

So, here's my point. If Harbaugh had accepted the penalty, we would be dissecting that supposed chop block over and over, which imo was WAY more fishy than the act of declining the penalty. So, to me, the CONVERSE PLAY, which in fact did not happen, is what would have screamed fix. Because the converse play did not happen - Harbaugh declined, I'm comfortable that this wasn't a fix.

It does help that there was a valid reason to decline, but I really think the "converse play" situation is something to consider here.

It was a hail mary. There were multiple Packer defenders in that end zone defending a pure jump ball. Nicks even got hit in his head the instant before the catch. Actually should have been pass interference / declined. Come to think of it, another ref decision / non-decision which did not go the Giant's way yesterday.

Toss in the bad spot that took away the 1st down on Ware's run. That call killed an NYG drive.

Like other people have already said in this thread, without the horrible fumble non-reversal and the roughing flag on Osi, the final score could easily have been 40-6 , not 37-20. Think again about the idea that GB gave the game away.

Amen.

Thanks bm3

Thanks everyone.

I am in the process of testing a new system. The SC562 ATS System here just hit a really bad streak, and I feel bad about anyone who was tailing me over the past week. I've been huge fade material, except for last night, thanks to Dwight Howard hitting 2-2 free throws with about 1 second on the game clock. I'm thinking that this SC562 System is just a plain-old 55% system that anyone could think up if they dedicated themselves just a little. I'm especially thinking this because of how ordinary it did in 2007-08. So, I'm probably going to stop posting the plays for this one soon. Let's see how the testing on the new ATS system goes.

Thanks to everyone who follows these 2 systems and I hope the new totals system can keep hitting, as it's been very good this year so far.

NBA SC562 ATS System
2007-2008                     99-85
2010-2011 YTD              49-36
Last 5 Days Played        1-8

Today's Plays:
-


NBA RB53 Totals System
2010-2011 YTD               83-49
Last Days Played            0-1
Today's Plays:
atl/mia ovr 190.5


GL all.

NBA SC562 ATS System
2007-2008                     99-85
2010-2011 YTD              48-36
Last 5 Days Played        1-11   ( I'm the fade of the year ! )

Today's Plays:
orl +3.5


NBA RB53 Totals System
2010-2011 YTD       83-46
Last 2 Days Played      4-0 ( much better ! )

Today's Plays:
sac/atl ovr 201


GL all.

NBA SC562 ATS System
2007-2008                     99-85
2010-2011 YTD              48-35
Last 4 Days Played        1-10   ( fade me ! )

Today's Plays:
lal -5.5


NBA RB53 Totals System
2010-2011 YTD       82-46
Last Day Played      3-0

Today's Plays:
den/sas und 209.5


GL all.

Obviously, as far as public view is concerned, there is no reason for an NFL player to get involved with people external to the NFL, at least as far as fixing games is concerned. The players do make enough money so that outside influences are, or should be, negated.

I'm insinuating that the fix comes from the NFL offices themselves, and I'm assuming there is a relationship between the NFL and the large sports books. I don't think I'm the only Covers member who's been hinting at this connection. I might be the only one to just come out and say it, though.

The NFL doesn't make the following idea public, but it's a fact that the NFL as a whole, which is the entity that calls itself the NFL and then all of the teams, share about 50% of their revenue, and that 50% comes from the television contracts. The NFL is also pushing for merchandise licensing to be under the umbrella of the NFL itself, and not the individual teams, so that the NFL can monopolize the market on licensing of all of the team's merchandising. This was an issue last year when small companies decided to create and sell various "Who dat?" shirts, with the Saints logo on it. Lastly, the NFL views itself as a business unit that functions within the entertainment industry, and not the sports industry, much like the professional wrestling companies view themselves. The NFL has used this angle as a defense and and offense in past legal proceedings. Obviously, I know the difference between pro wrestling and pro football, but it is very interesting that NFL execs and lawyers have taken this stance over the years.

The point is, the outsider's view of the business side of the NFL as a bunch of teams and a league office on the side, is inaccurate. The real view is the NFL is one unit from the league offices down, with the teams being the individual products. Yeah, the games are the real product, but the point is that the teams are not the individual business units. The league itself is.

With that in mind as the real business structure, which is known to all execs involved, whether you work for a team orginization or the league itself, it is much easier to believe the idea that the league sends down orders to fix a game in a certain direction, whether it's a regular season game or a playoff game. The only final piece is to put in place a business connection between some sports books and the NFL offices. Of course, here in the new millenium, the only success an investigative reporter is allowed to have in the sports world is pinning gift-taking on college athletes. Small time, imo. Also serves as misdirection because we question the athletes more, and the league entities less.

I always get the Occam's Razor comment thrown my way for saying the things I do. That's the equivalent of dismissing me, and saying "argument over". That's the way it always goes for me. I write a borderline novel with arguments and motives, and get a few sentences in return with an Occam's Razor thrown in.

First let me say I had no money on this game. I lost a pool championship last weekend when I went 0-4 and my NFL betting is done.

Second, I will now name 3 very prominent investigative reporters in the last 50 years off the top of my head, so you know I'm at least a conspiracy buff, and not a crybaby gambler. Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, the 2 reporters who connected the Watergate break-ins to Nixon. Dan Moldea, a very celebrated IR who linked the mafia to the NFL in the 1970's. Lately, Brian Tuohy has done a good job of exposing the NFL for fixing games. It's all circumstantial evidence, but that's what we get these days. We never get proof. We know that now.

This weekend, Balt +3 and especially Balt +3.5 was the lone 60%+ public team out of the 4 games. Last week, imo, there was New Orleans, Indy, and Baltimore. The public went 1-2 last week, but lost the New Orleans game to some very high-profile breakdowns in the New Orleans secondary, and it was capped off by the Lynch run. By the way, if you looked on the Covers boards last Saturday and Sunday, every teaser had New Orleans minus single digits in it. So .... the games the books would want to take this week were narrowed down to one game, and that is result = pitt -3.5

The Ben sack-and-fumble and the Mendenhall fumble were forced turnovers. Suggs got his hand on the ball when Ben didn't see him. Mendenhall had the ball in towards his body but got stripped in a crowd. Ben and Mendenhall did not just give the ball away. Bad ref's calls in the first half didn't stick with me too well, but I don't think it matters, because in the end, my story starts with:

Balt 21 Pitt 7

Setup - All Balt has to do is lose by 3 to get a push for most of the public. Millions of dollars are riding on Balt getting a push due to the unbalanced betting, imo.

1 - Rice fumbles for the first time this year, while holding the ball away from his body. Pitt scores a TD.
2 - Flacco airmails a bomb with the safety within jogging distance. Pitt drives and scores another TD.
3 - Flacco botches a snap and is not able to fall on it. Another turnover. Pitt FG. 3-point deficit.
4 - Boldin fails to catch a TD pass in his chest which would have given Balt a 4-pt lead. I won't cry about the punt-return TD getting taken away. That did seem to be a clear hold.
4 - Balt ties the game on a FG.
5 - Nakamura suspicously plays like a lazy piece of shxt on the Rothlis completed bomb.
6 - Refs call defensive holding during a running play on the 3 or 4 yard line after Pitt looks like they might not punch the ball into the end zone for the TD and the cover.
7 - Pitt gets the TD and not a FG. 60%+ public bet fails to cover.

For what I said to be a conspiracy, at least Flacco, Rice, Nakamura, and a ref or two had to be in on it. Didn't need more than that, but probably had more than that.

Let me just close by saying Pitt is a great team with great players and coaches, and is capable of winning the SB with a great QB like Rothlis and a defensive-MVP-guy like Polamalu making great plays. I do think this game was fixed, but I also respect Pittsburgh and think they can legitimately win games going forward.

Btw, if someone does not agree with my assessment of Balt +3 being the lone public game, I'm open to arguments.

Hunter Smith was cut by Washington one day after botching the snap on the extra point that sealed the TB/Wash game at 17-16, and actually lost the game for many TB -1.5 bettors, which I'm sure there were plenty of (closing line was TB -1, so late bettors pushed). I'm very confident his botch was intentional, as he didn't even rise off of his knee to try to catch the high snap. When he was let go, possibly for "cosmetic" reasons, he wasn't interviewed, or at least there was no Associated Press article on Smith made known nationally.

If the NFL wants to pay off these guys on their exit, I'm sure it can be done. Just like I'm sure they can threaten the lives or livelihoods of the players as well. Just because a player has a marginal job in the NFL doesn't mean he can't be a contributor to a fix.