"The Fix is In" and the Professional Football Researchers Association, Part Two

Continuing a look at a seven-page thread in which Brian's book, The Fix Is In, is discussed by professional football researchers of a very high level.

Starting page three, Brian had levelled several explosive allegations just previously.  (Read the previous post for my comments.)

1) Rupert Patrick, with a very good question:  "Why didn't MLB protect Pete Rose, and shut down the investigation against him that sullied the legacy of one of it's greatest stars? But Sports Illustrated got a hold of the story and published it, and I doubt the writer who broke the story was blackballed from ever working a baseball beat again."

Because MLB wasn't involved in fixing the games Rose was betting on.  And that's pretty much it.  If MLB had been tampering with games like the NBA has been and the NFL almost surely has been, I don't think Rose gets the life ban.  He might well be suspended to make it look good and then "retire", but he's in the Hall of Fame.

2) Several references are made in the third page about the Steelers and their Super Bowls with the Seahawks (win), Cardinals (win), and Packers (loss).

Those were three of the most blatantly rigged Super Bowls (and by the league) which did not involve the Patriots.

In both the cases of the Seahawks and the Cardinals, it's simple money.  Pile up all the cash for Seattle Seahawk/Arizona Cardinal Super Bowl Champion memorabilia.  Now pile up all the cash from Pittsburgh Steeler Super Bowl Champion memorabilia.  It's not close -- I'd even assert you could combine the piles for Seattle and Arizona.

You then also add in that Jerome Bettis, home in Detroit, gets his ring before retirement, and you understand why the Seahawk/Steeler Super Bowl was one of the worst-officiated sporting events in memory.

And there are at least two videos addressing the Cardinals getting jobbed on Tuohy's video library.

As for the Packers?  That's easy.  Rothlesberger had to be bailed out of rape accusations at least twice by now, and the Steeler defense was seen as the dirtiest in the league.  There was NO WAY that Rothlesberger was going to be given a third ring (and, effectively as such, that place on the NFL's Mount Rushmore) as a result.

3) "SixtiesFan", in questioning the whole process, asks a question a lot of people, especially if they read this blog, could ask:

"Then why didn't the NFL fix it so Tebow would make it to the Super Bowl?"

Because they had strained all sense of believability to get Tebow and the Broncos where they did.

Plans do change.  I do believe, at one point, that the Broncos could well have been the scripted team to emerge from a debacle of an AFC so that the fans can all go on one knee to pray to their Lord and Saviour. (Roger Goodell)

But it was obvious if you watched the games (and I saw the relevant parts of a number of them!) that this team STANK ON ICE.  This was a 4-12 (at best!) team without the push.  One of the least-efficient offenses of all time -- until it was Tebow Time at the end.

For all the reasons people pooh-pooh fixing allegations (in that the league would lose all credibility, blah blah blah...), it comes down to believability.  Can you fool the unwashed enough to silence or ostracize people like myself and Brian?

"Why didn't the NFL fix it so Vick could play in a Super Bowl?"

This one is a personal opinion of mine.  I believe there are members of the Philadelphia Eagles last year who want no part of being associated with Michael Vick, and threw games because they DID NOT want to go to the Super Bowl with him as the quarterback.

I don't know if I can find a clip, but the most flagrant allegations I can make are from a game with (I believe) the Washington Redskins, where it appears as if an Eagle ball-carrier deliberately fumbles the ball to the Redskins at about the 1 or 2 yard line.

I believe the NFL DOES want Mike Vick as a Super Bowl Champion Quarterback.

In response to Brian saying:


"Why hasn't someone come forward to say "I fixed this" or "the NFL made me rig that?" As I posted before - you'd have to have 100% iron-clad proof of it, and that sort of evidence does not exist. Even if some past player from the 1960s came out and admitted it, would he have more to gain from that admission - with the added bonus of being forever labeled as a game-fixer and perhaps stripped of his HoF status - or will he profit greater from maintaining that secret which no one is asking about while reliving the glory days and charging people $50 an autograph at card shows nationwide? You tell me what someone would do in such a situation."




"SixtiesFan" responds:

"You tell me what someone would do in such a situation?"

At least one individual would grab the money a book and movie deal would bring through exposing a fix. Yes, the NFL is full of not very bright and sometimes unsavory people. What makes you think this cast of characters could pull it off for decades without a hitch" 

Brian addresses it before.  How many people actually bought Canseco's two books?

One of my gravest fears about all the concussion lawsuits, etc., is that the NFL (especially) and football in general will be declared totally above the law in all respects -- there'd be too much damage to the social fabric of this country if the law were enforced.  And, at that, you are supposed to, if you are a good 'Mer-Kan, sacrifice your boys to the altar of The National Religion.

THAT is why you won't see the book and movie deals -- no one wants to expose the truth for the damage it would do to our country.

Another "SixtiesFan" response basically blows his ideas wide open:

"First, I don't like the people who run the NFL (they don't give a flying you-know-what about the fans) and don't have any illusions about the players either. You can trust the NFL to do what they think is in their best financial interest. This means having an "honest" game. The risk is to great and the rewards wouldn't be all that much to fix the Super Bowl and who makes the playoffs."

False.  Utterly and completely false!!

And I have two specific instances in which it can be financially demonstrated that your statement is false, and they are two of the worst-officiated Super Bowls of all time.  I already mentioned them:  Steelers/Seahawks and Steelers/Cardinals.

4) "rhickok1109" responds to Brian with one of the common ways that sports conspiracy theory is considered "debunked" by the general public, and which "SixtiesFan" bases a lot of his beliefs on the subject:

"Yes, I basically trust the NFL for a very simple reason. Fixing of the sort you allege cannot possibly go on for very long without being exposed, and the people who run the NFL, whatever else they may be, are intelligent people who are fully aware of that. A serious, well-documented exposure of manipulating outcomes would kill the golden goose. It would destroy the NFL's credibility (which is why Rozelle acted so quickly in the 1962 Hornung/Karras/Lions scandal), it would turn fans away, and it would cost the league millions and perhaps billions of dollars in the long run. It would kill the proverbial golden goose."

Would it kill the golden goose?

To do so, you'd have to make two assumptions of the American public:

First, that they are intelligent enough to "get it".

Second, that they even care.

I don't believe you can go broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.  And as for the second part:  TV Guide, just before the 1999 advent of the Million-Dollar Game/Reality Show Era, had a poll asking the people whether they would care about a re-do of the game show scandals of the 1950's.

Fully two out of five said they would not care if the games were rigged.

What makes sports any different?  Especially given the allegations and proven accusations and injuries we've learned about in the NFL just in this off-season, how much of "Just entertain me!!" has to be in the blood of the people of this culture to not look seriously at what's really been going on, over and above game-fixing and the like!

5) Brian, again:

"I don't believe the NFL says, "this is team X's year, here's what we do to get them a title." I think most of what occurs is legitimate. But if an opportunity arises where the league can make something beneficial happen with one team winning when perhaps they shouldn't, then it will take advantage of the controls they have in place. With the Browns, they haven't had a thing to promote. No stars, no draft picks of significance to promote, no story. Without that appearing, they will falter naturally and it would take an extraordinary amount of fixing to make a team like that champions. That would stand out. Giving a 9-6 team a 10th win to get them in the playoffs draws no attention. But making a 2-14 team into a 14-2 team might if far too many breaks are going their way."

Again, this is where Brian and I part company.

I DO believe the NFL says this, but can only carry it out within certain parameters.

I DO believe the NFL made a 2-14 to 4-12 team into a division champion and playoff team LAST YEAR -- Tim Tebow and the Denver Broncos.  But the believability factor comes into play -- you can't fool the rubes if it becomes completely obvious at some point.

I do, also and however, believe the NFL can change the script at it's election.  Two of the most famous cases I can give you of this could come from last year's NBA playoffs (and we know the NFL can work the same way):  Kobe Bryant's homophobic slur against the official and Joachim Noah's against the opposing fans.  The NBA is very anti-homophobic slur (and has active campaigns against the derogatory usage of the word "gay"), and that probably cost both the Lakers and the Bulls a shot at going further.

6) Several posters on the fifth page question why Tuohy has not been sued for libel:

That's an easy one.  I use the Rafael Palmeiro Test:  If they aren't going to sue, they are all but admitting it's true.

If Rafael Palmeiro had the cojones to lie to Congress, and wag his finger at them, regarding steroids and Jose Canseco's claims, where was the freaking lawsuit against Canseco to shut him up?

There was none.  Canseco was true.  Same thing here.