If this were more public, I'd probably take some heat for my last post.
I was shocked the Packers won, but now have a feeling they're going to get the preferred calls.
You really are at a crossroads for the league after Sunday.
1) They are all but certain to lose at least the 2011 season to a lockout -- a lockout preordained by the last TV contracts (which, oh by the way, the players lost the ability to block the owners from getting their payoff, even if the season is not played!).
2) Which way does the league want to be portrayed? As a bunch of brash and violent loudmouths, or where some smokescreen of civility still reigns?
3) Consider Rothlesberger and the Steelers' mouthing off to the league in the light of this quote by Brian Tuohy on his website:
One way a league could fix its own games is by blackmailing its players to comply with their wishes. The easiest players to blackmail? Those that break the law or league rules. Most players may have gone to college, but most never graduate and need their salary to survive, not knowing much beyond their sport. Banishment from the league means facing reality, and after being coddled for years, that won't seem like the best proposition. So why not take a dive in a game if it means your career continues?
This is the first Super Bowl in years that there isn't really an obvious rig-job (with the exception of Rothlesberger and the Steelers vs. NFL angles).
But then you add the Brett Favre angle. Favre has done more to disgrace the NFL than any player outside of actual criminal conduct in the last 1-5 years.
What better way to rip his legacy apart than to have his successor, in the ESPN "Year of the Quarterback", win the title?
If the Steelers win, then it probably is because the league wants the Rapist-burgers and Rex Ryans of the world to run the circus.
But I seriously doubt it.
No comments:
Post a Comment