Quick Hit 7/31: Read This Deadspin Piece

Basically exposes a line of thinking almost all-too-familiar and likely with the NFL:  Ray Rice's wife deserved the whole thing, and the two games is only to placate...


Chris Mortensen actually states :


"We [being his NFL sources] saw the TMZ video of what happened outside—when he was dragging her out unconscious—but inside, I'm told from those who have seen the video, it wasn't pretty. In fact, she attacks him—we don't know the reason why—and he strikes her, strikes her hard. And her head—according to the sources I've spoken to—struck the rail inside the elevator and she was unconscious."


Welcome to the NFL, people.


Deadspin:  Does the NFL Think Ray Rice's Wife Deserved It?


Answer:  YES

Quick Hits 7/29: Smith Suspended, And Other Absurdities

In about what is as big of a joke as the piddly Ray Rice suspension, ESPN has banned Stephen A. Smith for a week from the network for his rant.

Anybody want to make a guess he serves the suspension and then walks to Mad Dog on Sirius XM?

And, once again, the news coverage -- the embarrassment -- got the suspension, not the act itself:

From an ESPN memo leaked to the Yahoo! post above:

"As many of you know, there has been substantial news coverage in the past few days related to comments Stephen A. made last Friday in the wake of the NFL's decision to suspend Baltimore Ravens running back Ray Rice for two games following charges of assaulting his then fiancée, now wife, a few months ago. 

We've said publicly and in this space that those remarks did not reflect our company's point of view, or our values. They certainly don't reflect my personal beliefs."

THEN SHOW IT, ESPN!!  Stop giving these motherfuckers and this sport, which is ENTIRELY misogynistic, a free pass...

(I state this as an "absurdity" because he should be fired, but readers of the blog have already told me that, given the Sirius deal, that may have been the idea behind all this.)

--

Well, Catheter Guy is in trouble.

For his YouTube rant, where he pulled out his catheter and pissed all over the grave of former Browns/Ravens owner Art Modell, he faces a felony charge of "Disorderly Conduct in a Cemetery", which can gain two years in prison and a $500 fine.

--

The death of Buffalo Bills owner Ralph Wilson has led to a bidding war for the team.

Donald Trump is involved, and, although the homophobic piece of shit would probably fit in well with the likes of Tony Dungy and the Goodell NFL, he has no illusions he believes he will win (Why?  Because you don't think the team is worth anything?  Because you'd move them somewhere like...  Las Vegas??)

(Actually, judging by the linked article, it sounds like the value is not there for the POS.)

But it's the proposed bid by a Canadian-led group fronted by rocker Jon Bon Jovi that has gotten the most heat -- because it's almost certain that, should they win, the only question is how quickly can the Bills burn their lease and do the long-rumored move to Toronto, Canada?  (Hint:  He's already scouting venues there.)

(Timetable for the sale appears to be league meetings this October, so the Bills get at least this season in Buffalo...)

Let me be blunt:  Buffalo is one of at least three cities I can name off the top of my head (Jacksonville and Oakland are the other two -- the latter's lease on their stadium expires after this year and Roger Goodell has openly proposed sharing, at least temporarily, the new 49ers stadium in Santa Clara.) who must lose their franchises for them to be ever relevant again.

But Buffalo is PISSED.  Over 200 Buffalo-area establishments (see above-linked article) have banned Bon Jovi's music.

New Hall of Famer Andre Reed has many less-than-complimentary words for Bon Jovi, according to Deadspin and New York magazine.

It's probably no mystery in saying the league is going to take a bit of time here in selling the Bills:  The Steve Ballmer purchase of the Clippers, finally slated to go through, will reset all sports franchise valuations, with the Bills, worth $870 million (third-least -- Jacksonville $850M and Oakland $825M, according to Forbes in 2013) pre-Ballmer, could the Bills now be worth at least $2,000,000,000 or more, simply for the fact that they are an NFL team?

There's now serious consideration that the price of a franchise in LA just went to $4,000,000,000 or so -- that might be the one thing keeping the NFL out of LA.

Quick Hits 7/28 #2: Sterling Loses, and the Fines List is out for the NFL

Well, it appears over in Los Angeles:  Donald Sterling has been, effectively, officially ruled insane and the sale of the Clippers is going forward, according to multiple media sources.

I say this openly:  Since Rochelle Sterling has been ruled to have the authority, the next thing she needs to get the authority to do is to find a nice, comfortable place for Donald Sterling to disappear to for the rest of his days before he does something even more stupid.

There's only one fly in this ointment:  Rochelle does believe that the life ban against Donald will be lifted someday.

---

And, in other news revolving around stupidity, it sounds as if the new fine list is out for the NFL, and the increases appear to be about 10%-ish, but they will make it pretty much impossible for the normal person to keep up.

All part of the plan... Right, Roger

(Source: Deadspin, through Ben Volin of the Boston Globe.  Second offense doubles the fine.)

$5,000 fines from last year are now $5,512

• Entering a fight to involve oneself therein -- probably not to the level of joining the fight.
• (Entering a fight with no such involvement is still subject to a fine of half that amount.)
• Throwing the Football Into The Stands
• Personal Messages
• Other undefined Uniform Violations

$7,500 fines from last year are now $8,268

• Strike/Kick/Knee
• Face Mask
• Late Hit
• Low or Chop Block
• Taunting
• Illegal Substance on Uniform
• Chin Strap Violation

The $10,000 for unsportsmanlike conduct (other than taunting, etc.) is now $11,025.

$15,000 fines from last year are now $16,537

• Horse-Collar
• Leg Whip
• Roughing the Passer

$20,000 fines from last year are now $22,050.

• Blindside Block
  
• Anything involving the Defenseless Player Rule
• Spearing
• Launching
• Verbal abuse or non-violent abuse toward the official above the level of straight unsportsmanlike conduct.
• Anything with the helmet, including the rule from last year.

Striking an official or fighting, $25,000 minimums, are now $27,562.

Obviously, these are all minimums, and they've officially made gang signs a violation of the Personal Conduct Policy.


This probably will increase the Level 2 price to approximately $115,500 or so, and Level 3 to about $180,000 or so.  Barring any revelation, I'll use these figures.

Quick Hit 7/28 #1: Continuing Insanity of the War On Women in the Sports Front

So Stephen A. Smith tried to apologize today.

Not sure how much it helps.

Why?

It's not the Sirius gig, it's not that he probably still doesn't realize he's doubling down...

It's the lack of real enforcement, again, especially in the sports world.

How do I say this?

Let's just go down to Deadspin, and look at articles from the last 24-ish hours:

• About 5:20 PM today:  "Alleged Victim of OU Player Says Fan Backlash Is Her 'Big Fear'"

Female OU student (20) gets decked by a five-star recruit, who then runs from the scene.  Student now fears for her safety with Oklahoma fans.

• About 2:35 today:  Ray Rice and the wife he knocked out had a secret meeting with Roger Goodell on June 16.

Damage Control on Line One...

• About 12:30 today:  NFL executive tries to defend 2-game suspension for Ray Rice.

It ends BADLY.

• This ended up higher, and I thought it was today, but it was Thursday.:  Two (ex-)Texas football players are charged with sexually assaulting a woman in their dorm over the summer.

Just read how what apparently did start consensual went bad in a hurry.

But they feel they have the right, right?  Football players...  Texas...  What could go wrong?

And this is one site, a quick perusal, and the animals are out in full display.

AGAIN.

Quick Hit 7/27: And the idiots with domestic violence aren't limited to football...

Domestic Violence in Sports Idiot #2 of the Week:

Chuck Knoblauch.

For the second time in four years, Blauch-Head decided to assault his ex-wife -- a DIFFERENT ex-wife than the one he served probation for four years ago when he thought it right to beat her up.

After the arrest, the Minnesota Twins, who were about to induct Knoblauch into their Hall of Fame, have permanently cancelled the induction.

--

Stephen A. Smith and ESPN plan to address the firestorm surrounding Smith's comments on Monday's "First Take".

After learning of his new Sirius XM gig, I have to think it might be Smith's last day with the Four-Letter Network -- by his own design.

--

Non-sports here for a second, just to show you how bad things are getting against women:

This weekend was the annual pop-culture geek-fest, the San Diego Comic-Con.

There has been so much sexual harassment and assault at the event that 2,600 women signed a petition demanding SDCC toughen it's stance against such action.

Among the situations women have routinely had to put up with:

• Groping
• Cat-Calls
• Having pictures taken non-consensually while bent over

and other incidents...

Women are going to have to do a lot more than talk. They're going to have to do.

That means police, pepper-spray, whatever becomes necessary... Because there's no action they can take that won't provoke somebody...

Isn't that right, Stephen A. Smith?

Quick Hit 7/26: Sounds Like That Was Stephen A. Smith's Swan-Song

Deadspin and the New York Post report today that the misogynistic illogic of Stephen A. Smith from yesterday's "First Take" debacle may well have been Smith's swan-song with the network.

And I'm not talking getting fired -- it sounds like he's leaving of his own accord, and has the new gig already planned out.

His radio gig with ESPN Radio is ending (date unknown), and he's going to Sirius XM, with Mad Dog Radio, to be the Black voice that former WFAN host Chris "Mad Dog" Russo said he couldn't find 2-3 months ago.

Oh gee, maybe defending Ray Rice sealed the deal on that one?

--

Erin Gloria Ryan on Deadspin's women's sister-site Jezebel, with her take on the insanity.

"Misogyny isn't only endemic to a certain subset of NFL players and owners singled out by McManus and Doyal et al; it's something exhibited by a disturbing number of football media folk and fans as well."

The entire sport, and it's entire presentation, is misogyny.

From the power-over on the field (and Heaven-help-you if you aren't a God-fearing straight man in most parts of Football Nation America) to the blatant burlesque shows on the sidelines and halftime shows from high-school middle-America to the professional ranks to the advertisements for beer and erectile-dysfunction drugs, etc.

This is why Keith Olbermann exposing Damon Bruce's KNBR misogynistic rant was a very important moment in showing the reality of sports -- it is, to these people, a world fit only for those with a dick between their legs and enough power in society to put that dick wherever the fuck they want it.

Quick Hit 7/25: ESPN Shows True Colors

And just when you thought the Ray Rice story couldn't get any worse, ESPN, once again, shows how The Shield, The Almighty NFL, can reduce  ...


ESPN's male contingent (or at least some of it's loudest) have come down solidly on the side that they think it's a joke Rice was suspended at all.


The most prominent incident was today on First Take, ESPN's rant-filled attempt to get their talents in each other's grills and have the audience at home yell at their TV's to take sides.

Stephen A. Smith and Skip Bayless talked today about Ray Rice, and Smith, well, stepped in it...  HARD.


Transcript from Deadspin with my thoughts as they come up:


"It's not about him, then. It's about you, and here's what I mean by that. We keep talking about the guys. We know you have no business putting your hands on a woman. I don't know how many times I got to reiterate that."


Stephen A., the reason that you have to keep reiterating that is that there is no longer a Steve Wilkos or an angry mob around every corner designed to kick the living fucking shit out of anybody who puts their hands on a woman.


We no longer live in that culture, Stephen A., and you don't get that, by that comment or any other you make here.  Certain men not only are given every business putting their hands on a woman, but it's the expectation which comes along with the circumstances, and that's why you're getting your ass reamed so hard.


The fact is that, in many walks of manhood, your Sacred Cow of a Shield chief among them, this kind of animalistic non-human behavior is part and parcel of the experience, up to and including the price of admission for any woman who chooses to involve herself therein.


So you are not only guilty of misogyny, but also of complete lack of logic, because you don't even realize half of what you are saying, or why we're so pissed about it.


"But as a man who was raised by women, see I know what I'm going to do if somebody touches a female member of my family. I know what I'm going to do, I know what my boys are going to do."


Then we need to see it.  Lots, long, and hard.  We need to see what you are going to do.  (Basically take the guy, beat him within about 1/8" of his life, and, if he ever shows his face in public again, come back for the other 1/8".)


I think a lot of us who were so raised do not realize what women now are dealing with -- and when some of us think they do, we're immediately read as "She wore the short skirt...".  In reality, the only way to avoid many of these situations, because of society making this shit acceptable, is not to take part in the first damned place.


"I know what, I'm going to have to remind myself that I work for the Worldwide Leader, I'm going to have to get law enforcement officials involved because of what I'm going to be tempted to do."


Fuck that.  If you're going to have to do it, then do it.


If you believe in something enough, you have to be prepared to pay any price or penalty to get the job done, should it become necessary to do so.

Again, this comment tells me that you don't get what has become acceptable in our culture, especially for men given power through football in communities across our nation, to one extent (Ray Rice, for example) or another (uncountable high schools).


"But what I've tried to employ the female members of my family, some of who you all met and talked to and what have you, is that again, and this what, I've done this all my life, let's make sure we don't do anything to provoke wrong actions, because if I come, or somebody else come, whether it's law enforcement officials, your brother or the fellas that you know, if we come after somebody has put their hands on you, it doesn't negate the fact that they already put their hands on you."


And there's where you go completely off the rails.

The last thing in this section is correct:  Nothing which is done in retribution, revenge, etc. stops that this happened in the first place.


But the man is still responsible for his conduct.  And until that responsibility is stated AND ENFORCED on an a priori basis, we can forget about getting through to many men, especially those of any athletic power in our communities.


It isn't:  "She wore a short skirt..."


It IS:  "We now live in a culture where (at least certain) men are completely acceptable raping, pillaging, and plundering everything in their path, especially if she doesn't have a dick between her legs."


Women CANNOT expect appropriate conduct from a man anymore.  They really never could.


I said this as part of something which got me in a lot of trouble sixteen years ago, but the fact is that there is NOTHING THE WOMAN CAN DO SHORT OF VIOLENCE to be assured of appropriate conduct, because of the fact that we now live in a culture where the phrase "legitimate rape" can be uttered by no less than a fucking Congresscritter and he not get run out of town on a rail for it.


(And for those who utter "Violence begets violence.":  To me, the violence is already begotten.  Period.)


"So let's try to make sure that we can do our part in making sure that that doesn't happen. Now you got some dudes that are just horrible and they're going to do it anyway, and there's never an excuse to put your hands on a woman."


I think you sorely underestimate that number.


"But domestic violence or whatever the case may be, with men putting their hands on women, is obviously a very real, real issue in our society. And I think that just talking about what guys shouldn't do, we got to also make sure that you can do your part to do whatever you can do to make, to try to make sure it doesn't happen. We know they're wrong. We know they're criminals. We know they probably deserve to be in jail. In Ray Rice's case, he probably deserves more than a 2-game suspension which we both acknowledged. But at the same time, we also have to make sure that we learn as much as we can about elements of provocation."


And here's the "Fuck You"...


Both from Stephen A. Smith to female America, and from me to Stephen A. Smith.


You CANNOT participate in society as a woman and not "provoke" somebody.


You cannot have any sense of fashion, you cannot perform any vocation of work, you cannot have a meaningful conversation about anything, you cannot exert your power as a woman.  NOTHING.


The fact is that we need to have a serious and VIOLENT reset of gender relations in this country -- to ENFORCE equality, by blood if necessary.


Otherwise, there's nothing that can be done.  To think that there are even a remote number of men who aren't criminals in this regard overestimates the intelligence and dignity of male society in this country to a massive degree.


There are many people who, because of my background and criminal history, believe I have no respect for women.  For whatever amount (even zero) you believe my respect of women to be, I respect men even LESS.


As I've said about numerous subjects:  It all comes down to enforcement. 


In a day of leggy-stripper cheerleaders from the high school fields of middle America to the professional gridirons of The Almighty Shield...


In a day where every game is a rape-level power-over where any play...  any practice...  can kill somebody...


In a day where we give these football players carte blanche on all other students (and most other people) until the day they embarrass that which they are to represent (if it stops even then!!)...


You expect women to be able to participate in society at any level by saying the following in closing...


"Not that there's real provocation, but the elements of provocation, you got to make sure that you address them, because we've got to do is do what we can to try to prevent the situation from happening in any way. And I don't think that's broached enough, is all I'm saying. No point of blame."


You cannot expect appropriate conduct from an American man if you are a woman in the 21st Century.  And until we ENFORCE otherwise (with blood, as necessary), this isn't changing.

And you're enabling it by reversing the situation.  If anything, we need to tell women that they need to be on guard at all times, knowing that they can "provoke" someone at any time doing almost anything.


Have you learned one fucking thing from the story of Stubenville, OH, Stephen A. Smith?


NO.


--


And that wasn't the only misogyny thrown around by The Four-Letter Network in the last 36 hours or so.


Later on, Stephen A. Smith took to Twitter, and, as Deadspin noted, doubled down!


Combining some tweets:


"Upon hearing what I had to say, although admitting I could've been more articulate on the matter, let me be clear: I don't understand how on earth someone could interpret that I somehow was saying women are to blame for domestic violence."


"Elements of provocation", and I've been down that road and gotten in a lot of trouble for that very same argument.


The problem is that, by giving men the "provoked" out, you sanction their behavior -- you encourage it.


Our culture, frankly, is a petri-dish for abuse, misogyny, rape, homophobia and God only knows what else in these regards.  And it's that "provoked" out which gives men the (perceived -- and that's all they need here!) right to continue to do it, and to make that part of the rite of passage of being a Man in our society.


THAT'S how we interpret it, because you completely misunderstand the complete acceptability we have given (as a culture and nation) this kind of conduct -- as long as it's the "right Man" that does it.


They don't care that "it's unacceptable to put your hands on a woman".


Until someone FUCKS THEM UP FOR IT, what the fuck are you going to do about it?

We can SAY it's unacceptable, and you can do it 1,000 times.  PROVE IT.


It's "Only Words" otherwise...


You talk about "the other side".  The only way you can have "the other side" dealt with is to either make the woman a non-participant or to basically say that just about anything she does is going to "provoke" somebody.


Then what?


You don't get it:  This shithead is a football player.  That makes him Boss, IF NOT GOD, in many circles of our culture.  And we have parts of our culture in which not only violence upon women is acceptable, but rape is part of the price of admission.


Again, it all comes down to enforcement, which is why you don't realize how misogynistic and illogical your stands are.  You're so ready to defend Ray Rice, you probably don't even realize you're doing so.


This is why I can't say I was 100% sad to see someone, after a controversial event, have to take on an armed guard for the next month or two, saying so in an interview a few days into the experience.  Unfortunately, it came to that point, but, fortunately, she was smart enough to be proactive about understanding the level to which men are allowed unacceptable conduct in our society.


Until that changes (and it will take the complete condemnation of comments like Smith's and a violent re-write of gender relations in this country), nothing's going to get done.


--


Michelle Beadle went NUCLEAR:


"So I was just forced to watch this morning's First Take. A) I'll never feel clean again B) I'm now aware that I can provoke my own beating."


"I'm thinking about wearing a miniskirt this weekend...I'd hate to think what I'd be asking for by doing so @stephenasmith. #dontprovoke"


"I was in an abusive relationship once. I'm aware that men & women can both be the abuser. To spread a message that we not 'provoke' is wrong"


The problem, Michelle, is I don't know what to say to it.  We live in a rape culture today.  We live in a culture where women are expected to be presented in a "certain way" (and don't tell me your Four-Letter Employer hasn't asked for a mini, if not a micro, to put it forward) to be relevant... 


You have a colleague at ESPN who said to Connie Chung in 1988: "I think that if rape is inevitable, relax and enjoy it."


In ESPN's haste to defend The Almighty Shield, they have sacrificed all logic and debased themselves to the misogyny evident in the NFL and it's ENTIRE PRESENTATION:  From the game to the sidelines to the cheerleaders to the ED ads to the beer ads, etc. and so forth and on and On and ON...


--


At least one male ESPN talent rises above the misogyny and illogic of ESPN's defense of women getting beaten/raped by The Shield:


Keith Olbermann, once again, is tempting fate with his employer with this gem, which I will leave you with in closing:


"The message to the women who the league claims constitute 50 percent of its fan base: The NFL wants your money. It will do nothing else for you. It will tolerate those who abuse you verbally and those who abuse you physically."


"And another generation of athletes and fans begins to view the women in sports as just a little less human."


(Only dispute:  A LITTLE less human?  Of course, one has to wonder how human the athletes are anymore, with all the drugs and treatments they're on these days...)

Fine/Suspension Blotter as of July 24, just to start the farce....

Just to start the Dog and Pony Show against the NFL and expose their fraud for what it is, let's use our friends at Spotrac to chronicle the following fines and suspensions, so far, in the 2014 off-season:


Quickie reminder:  A second suspension costs the team 25% of lost salary up to $200,000.  A third tacks on 33% of the third player's lost salary to $350,000 for the third one.  A fourth is half the fourth player's loss up to $500,000.  Any repeat-offender status doubles the payment, up to the capped number for that tier.

• Arizona Cardinals:  Daryl Washington, BANNED for a season, 2nd offense of drug policy.
• Baltimore Ravens:  Ray Rice, suspended two games and fined a 3rd game check based on 2013 salary, domestic violence.  Have to check to see if $50,000 (against that game check) counts against the Ravens' number -- I believe the game check does.
• Carolina Panthers:  Frank Alexander, 4 games, 1st offense of drug policy.
• Indianapolis Colts:  Robert Mathis, 4 games, 1st offense of drug policy, PEDs.
• Indianapolis Colts:  LaVon Brazill, BANNED at least for a season, 2nd offense of drug policy.
• Indianapolis Colts:  Under NFL rules, fined $200,000 for Brazill's suspension, for being the second such suspension.  Brazill's fine to the league is doubled under the repeat-offender situation, but still capped at $200,000.
• Jacksonville Jaguars:  Ace Sanders, 4 games, 1st offense of drug policy.
• Jacksonville Jaguars: Since Justin Blackmon is suspended after strike three on the drug policy (and appears on his way to his fourth offense, which should end his career after a recent arrest with marijuana in the car), 25% of Sanders' salary has to be paid:  $29,117.50
• Kansas City Chiefs:  Rokevious Watkins, 4 games, 1st offense of drug policy.
• Miami Dolphins:  Dion Jordan, 4 games, 1st offense of drug policy, stimulants/PEDs.
• Minnesota Vikings:  Spencer Nealy, 4 games, 1st offense of drug policy.
• New York Giants:  Will Hill, 6 games, drug policy.  He has since been terminated from the team.  (Yes, they say "waived" -- he was terminated.)
• New York Giants:  Jayron Hosley, less than a week after the Hill suspension, 4 games, 1st offense of drug policy.
• New York Giants:  Yes, Hill's suspension counts, so they are fined 25% of Hosley's lost salary (Fine is $33,529.75.)
• Philadelphia Eagles:  Jake Knott, 4 games, 1st offense drug policy, PEDs.
• Philadelphia Eagles:  Lane Johnson, 4 games, 1st offense drug policy, PEDs.
• Philadelphia Eagles:  Fined 25% of Johnson's lost salary ($45,047).
• St. Louis Rams:  Stedman Bailey, 4 games, 1st offense drug policy, PEDs.
• Washington Redskins:  Fred Davis, suspended indefinitely in February for strike two on the drug policy -- and now wanted for domestic violence in DC...
• Washington Redskins:  Brandon Moore (undrafted FA), 4 games, 1st offense drug policy (April).
• Washington Redskins:  Tanard Jackson, BANNED FROM THE LEAGUE, FOURTH OFFENSE drug policy.  (It, in fact, was his second indefinite suspension -- he'd actually already served his strike-three and won reinstatement after 18 months.  That didn't last long.  Reinstated May 5, banned again July 9)
• Washington Redskins:  That's $350,000 for Jackson and another $100,500 for Moore ($450,500 total) (and I'd hope a fair bit more) forfeited to the league.

So that's, what:  20 players, and team fines totaling over $700,000.

Quick Hit 7/24: Another Day, Another Domestic-Violence Suspension -- and Other NFL Jokes

... and another pathetic slap on the wrist by an NFL which knows it's game represents rapists and domestic abusers everywhere.


Today, the Baltimore Ratbirds' Ray Rice (who's jersey was being worn by Catheter Man from yesterday's Quick Hit -- coincidence?  I think not!) was suspended two games for knocking out his then-fiancé.


He was also fined a third game check by the NFL, some of which will be applied against Baltimore's number for player conduct this season.  (I believe it's $50,000 can be applied to the number.)  That fine appears to be slightly less than $60,000, based on his 2013 salary, since the incident happened then.


OK, let's get real here.  As I said a couple of days ago, football, as a non-consensual power-over, is a great allegory (symbolism) for the rape culture which exists in our country.  It's on the field, it's on the exhibitionists cheerleaders on the sidelines, it's basically in every ad one way or the other -- football is about being a MAN...


(Oh, you really thought it was an accident that Smiling Bob was on the game pushing the latest ED drug?)


It's time for women just to get violent on the institution of football.  Whether it's a walkout, a disruptive protest, or what-have-you, something (and something REAL) needs to be done.


--


And I caught this little ditty about my Fine Blotters...


Apparently, the NFL was lying to us about a lot of the fines, or quietly dropped a shit-ton of them while I wasn't looking.


According to a May, 2014 NFL report, the number of teams which actually had to submit money to the NFL for fines was actually only FOUR.


The league said the average per-team amount for fines for player safety dropped 30% year-over-year to about $60,000 per team.


(That would've been about $1.92 million for the season.  Now, yes, this was for player-safety fouls, and did not include uniform violations or other fines.)


This blog detailed FOUR POINT SEVEN MILLION DOLLARS IN FINES (including team remittances -- I counted FIVE just in the last four weeks of the season...).


Well, barring any computer disasters, this blog will, once again, expose the fraud that is the player safety and club remittance policies by exposing the truth that the NFL and the media don't want you to know.

Fuck you, Roger Goodell.
The NFL didn't release the four teams, but Detroit and Tampa were

Quick Hits 7/23: Anti-Gambling Ad Screws Up, Some Idiot Takes the Piss, Sidney Rice Retires, and Could California Be First Toward Banning Football?

At least four for you today.

(Blogger's note:  Some semi-hiatus, eh?  Well, just don't have the computer to go in-depth until almost football season, but still here anyway.)

First, a follow-up on that anti-gambling ad from the World Cup:

A note for the National Council of Problem Gambling:

The point is correct, and the fact of what went down doesn't change it (in fact, it's often the worst thing which can happen to a problem gambler -- to win big!!!).

But you'd probably have been better to have "Andy's" dad (the father who was the problem gambler portrayed in the ad -- where "Andy" could not have been excited about the World Cup because his father gambled Andy's life savings on Germany to win the World Cup) bet on the United States or some team that was NOT going to win...

(And, apparently, an anti-gambling ad from Singapore had the same team getting the bet from the life savings of the kid.)

Second, and thanks to my anonymous contributor for this one:

Look, we get it, people...

Art Modell fucked over the people of Cleveland by sending his team to Baltimore and the like.

And I know people will say, "I'll piss on that man's grave when he dies!!!"

It doesn't mean you have to be like one idiot and ACTUALLY DO IT.

Put the whole mess on YouTube too.  Came to the cemetery in an Ed Reed jersey, took it off to show a Lyle Alzado Browns jersey -- pulls out a catheter, and pisses on Modell's grave.

Then, he comments (quoting from the linked ESPN article):

""You know, Art, when you ... tried to kill the Cleveland Brownie, you didn't do so good, the Browns fans wouldn't let you, you piece of s---," he says. "I'm in rat land, and I'm going to use the words you used a few years ago.""

That important to you, eh?

Might make me wonder what you'd think of the other two stories I have today, sir...

The third of the four stories of today:  Sidney Rice has retired due to health concerns, according to Yahoo! Sports.

Knee injury prevented Rice from playing in the Super Bowl and post-season for the 'Hags, then he was released in a salary-cap move and re-signed by the team.

It was during his release period that he rethought football and decided to go into his post-football career.  Rice is a franchisee of Wingstop in Tacoma, and may open more locations.

Of course, if that's not enough for Catheter Guy, a new California law might send him over the side.

I may be over-stating in the headline here, especially for those with wishful thinking, but California, yesterday, passed into law (signed by Governor Jerry Brown) the toughest anti-football law in the nation.

AB-2127 basically overhauls football in the state of California.  And, if it stands -- and this will be a BIG "IF" -- could result in the end of high-school and middle-school football in California in 2-3 years.

Effective January 1, 2015 (so they do get one more season under present rules):

First, it overhauls the concussion procedure and codifies it into state law.

Any athlete diagnosed with a concussion cannot return to game or practice that day, under any circumstances.  Moreover, the athlete cannot return to even practice until a licensed professional in the field gives written clearance.  It also requires, as a part of the new state law, that any prospective player (and parent) sign off on an information sheet regarding head injuries, concussions, and the new AB-2127 protocol as part of their required Athletic Code.

Of course, there's an immediate corollary here:  This is going to require an eventual amendment that's going to require every sporting event held subject to this law to have a NEUTRAL doctor present to handle diagnoses in this regard.

Otherwise, and this is one of the reasons you're going to see this revisited to the level of the possible banishment of football at the CIF (California's high-school sports federation) level:  They'll just stop diagnosing concussions completely.

Also, the law forces a complete re-write of practice procedures:

For a period 30 days from the start of the season until the end of the post-season for a school, a team may only have two full-contact 90-minute practices a week.

Outside that period, full-contact practices (including "camps", spring football, etc.) are BANNED.

If anyone doesn't think this is the largest step yet toward a state banning tackle football for minors, I'd like to see a bigger step -- and in a state like California, no less!!!

From the articles, I've read, it's coming pretty clear at the coaching level that these steps go in, or the game goes out.

I think we're about three years, now, from a state being forced to consider outright banishment of the sport of tackle football (at least at the school level).

Quick Hit 7/22: Someone Needs To Tell Tony Dungy, The Homophobic Pig, To Shut The Fuck Up

Look, we get it, Tony Dungy.

You wouldn't draft Michael Sam, as you told the Tampa Tribune.

Leave your Old Testament Bible-Thumping out of the NFL.  Period.

EDIT TO ADD: Deadspin, through Rams beat-writer Nick Wagoner, got these comments from Michael Sam:

"Sam on Dungy's comments: "Thank God he wasn't the St. Louis Rams coach. (laughs) I have a lot of respect for Coach Dungy." (1 of 2)" and ""And like everyone in America, everyone is entitled to their own opinions." (2 of 2)"

Mr. Sam, for your own good, you maybe shouldn't be so nice about it. I'm beginning to read tea leaves that NFL shills media sources are already trying to plant the seeds for your demise.

Quick Hit 7/21: The End of Small-Conference Football/Sports, The End of the NCAA, or BOTH?

Saw something interesting over the weekend that will probably soon be necessitated by the O'Bannon decision, even in the years before the appeals, etc., are worked out.

And if I'm right on the latter concept, that little thing you all call March Madness is DONE.


Why do I say this?


ESPN had a quirky little report over the weekend that at least one small-conference (non Big-5) commissioner has rejected what, at first glance, is the most arrogant, conceited, and misplaced proposals in the history of sports.


The problem is that the NCAA is about to (be forced to) grant new "autonomy" to the money Big-5 conferences (the ACC, SEC, Big XII, Big Ten, and Pac-12), largely as a result of what happens with the O'Bannon ruling.


Of course, today, the commissioner of the Big XII basically ended all remaining pretense by slapping down the NCAA, saying the two words that any sane sports fan who has followed collegiate sports for five nanoseconds knows:  "Cheating pays."


Bob Bowlsby has revealed, as one of a number of comments, that the Infractions Committee of the NCAA hasn't met on an FBS school in a year.


But back to the report over the weekend.


As of Sunday night, three conferences not in the Big-5 have had their commissioners shoot down one of the first proposals which appears as if it's going to be made public once the Big-5 conferences get their autonomy.


I've always said that the main reason for the BCS was to exclude the non-Big-5 conferences and schools from the football national title.


Now, it appears as if the proposal will be made to exclude them completely!  The Big-5 conferences are floating a proposal to ask/force the other conferences (as a matter of economic competition and congestion in the marketplace where every dollar may count in a world where the players get paid and can be compensated) to play in the Spring, so as not to pollute/dilute the Big-5 product in the Fall.


On surface, it might be the most asinine, arrogant, and conceited argument I've ever heard.

Sadly, it might be the first plank in what will eventually be a complete separation as the NCAA fades into absolute irrelevance and the need arises for a pro-league-led minor-league system.


It might be the first step in finally jettisoning many of these schools from the NCAA, and college sports, entirely.

Quick Hits 7/19: Homophobia and the "Only Place For Women" In the Bastion of Manhood Which is Football

Two semi-intertwined stories to quick-hit on today:


First, in the "What the Hell Took You So Long, Chris Kluwe?" Department, Chris Kluwe is finally suing the Minnesota Vikings for his homophobic termination on the basis of his beliefs for GLBT equality, as well as for harassment under the law with respect to homophobic slurs fired by his coordinator, Mike Priefer.


Priefer was suspended for three games, when Kluwe demanded, as a condition of not suing, at least a 4-8 game ban.


From the ESPN article:


"[Clayton] Halunen [Kluwe's attorney] said the punter could expect to receive up to $10 million in damages for religious and human rights discrimination, defamation, tortious interference with contractual relations and emotional stress damages, since, he said, Kluwe's punting career was likely over. "The scope of things now has changed," Halunen said."


But how does one expect this to get anywhere in a culture such as another ESPN article from late this week exposed...


Ashley Fox of ESPN has written a commentary demanding a four-game suspension for Carolina defensive end Greg Hardy.


Hardy was convicted by a judge of a May 13 incident where he committed domestic violence in the manner of:


"Hardy beat Nicole Holder in his Charlotte apartment and then called 911 in an attempt to cover up what he had done. Holder testified that Hardy threw her in a bathtub, dragged her around his apartment by her hair, ripped off a necklace she was wearing and tossed her onto a futon that was covered with rifles, the Charlotte Observer reported. Hardy said Holder threw herself in the bathtub and threatened to kill herself, and he denied hurting her."


... according to the article.


The point I'm making comes down to the comments section, where we get a perfect example of the mentality of football fans, especially male ones.


Ryan Kitts:


"How is this woman still employed by ESPN? Hey Ashley, we get it. You hate men. Can you actually earn your paycheck and write something about sports? Let Cosack and Munson take care of the legal side of sports. This ESPNw type stuff needs no place on the ESPN homepage."


It would be hard-pressed for me to understand how a woman could not hate men in a football-led society.


You know why, Ryan?


Let's take a look at football for what it really is:


1) Football is an allegory for rape.


Football (taken as a large-scale exercise) exists as one team exerting it's power, non-consensually, on the other team.  Football's mere existence acts as an effort to power-over and even injure the other team in the name of gaining victory, no more or less different than domestic violence and rape.


Not coincidentally:


2) The only two places for women in that kind of a construct are either as exhibitionists or those who are inflicted violence on by and in the name of football.


Oh, you thought those hot-legged cheerleaders existed to actually...  lead cheers and bolster school/team spirit?


How about the known correlation between losing teams and their fans beating the shit out of their wives, etc.?


3) Football hates anything but real men who are willing to be violent in the name of manhood.


Just ask Chris Kluwe.  Just ask any woman within about a 20-mile radius of "Big Red" in Stubenville, Ohio.  Etc.


You know, maybe it's time for us to realize that, if people like you, Mr. Kitts, are allowed to shoot your mouth off, then women cannot, in any measure, expect appropriate treatment from men, especially in a culture where a solid allegory for rape is The National Religion.

Quick Hit 7/17: Aw Shit, ESPN and the Golf Corporates Got Their Way

May have more in the time I have on the Net today, but I have one for sure:


The Golf Corporates and ESPN, who've wanted to shove Tiger Woods down our throats for how many centuries, finally have seemed to get their way.


Hat-tip to my usual anonymous contributor:  ESPN3 is doing a Tiger-Only Feed.  One of the video feeds for the British Open is, quite literally, All Tiger, All the Time.


Pardon me while I puke.


(Scores were generous today, but it sounds like the puking will continue for four days.  He's only three out after the first round.)

Semi-hiatus until football season.

My laptop went "SNAP!", literally, last night.


So my Internet time will be far more limited than it was to that point.


So the SuperFraud blog is going on some level of hiatus, though not complete, until I get a replacement somewhere around the end of the month of August.


Now, as access allows and circumstances warrant, I may have some quick shots.  For example:

• I had planned to have an article in disagreement with Declan Hill's contentions that Brazil's World Cup woes were not so historic that they had to be some sort of rig-job or dive.  (He, surprisingly, does not believe 1-7 and 0-3 to be fixed.)
• Word from Adam Silver that, due to the court cases, Donald Sterling may not have his expulsion from the league completed by the time next season starts.  Possibility of "HELLO, PLAYERS STRIKE!!"?
• Mike Pouncey is at it again.  Lawsuit for beating up a guy in a club.
• No word yet on the O'Bannon lawsuit decision.  Testimony wrapped up during the World Cup.  Written closing statements were submitted July 10.

So, for now, I'll have to go into the background a bit more than off-NFL-season usual.


But trust me, I'll be back with more, as access permits.

You really think it's not possible Brazil threw the Germany match?

I just saw something scarily interesting on Deadspin...

(Actually, it's on Deadspin's sister soccer/World Cup site, Screamer.)

The article itself is about an anti-gambling advertisement which has been circulating (also circulating in poster form) during this World Cup.

Several youths are chit-chatting about the Cup, and who they think will win.

Brazil and Argentina (Messi specifically, in the latter case) are gleefully touted...

Then the action turns to a kid named "Andy", who wants no part of the discussion.

Finally pressed, he says he hopes Germany wins the Cup, because his gambling-addicted father took all of Andy's savings and bet them on the Germans.

(The article basically makes note of the irony:  Now, Germany have to be considered massive favorites to win the Cup on Sunday over Argentina.)

But that PSA, though valid and wonderful, is not the reason I'm pointing in that direction.

I can make little cause as to the veracity of the photo I am about to present.

If true, it all but confirms the suspicion I've had that the match was thrown.

How do I say that?

It's a $20 bet.  $20 US, made by somebody (purportedly) on an international online sportsbook.

The bet was as follows:

NOT ONLY was Germany to win the match by exactly seven goals to one, but Sami Khedira of Germany was to score at least once during the match.




The odds given this gambler for that action were TWO THOUSAND THREE HUNDRED AND NINETEEN TO ONE.

He just won over $46,000 -- on $20.

--

Now, if this is real (and, as of the moment, I have no veracity on it), imagine the trillion-dollar underground industry in Asia...

Yeah...

To put it kindly, I think we witnessed The Unthinkable yesterday...

I will forgive anybody who thinks I've gone completely nuts about something today.

There's a reason for this.

I am glad I took yesterday off from my normal routine and, instead, went to a local sports bar and watched Brazil and Germany in the first World Cup semifinal.

I guess the best way to blog it is just to say it:  I believe there are members of the Brazilian national team who conspired to throw the World Cup Brazil thought to be it's birthright away, for some reason I cannot comprehend.

I believe the match was fixed, by entities getting in with some of the players.

This, by most accounts, would be the most ridiculous claim I've probably ever seen, much less made.

I guess the next question would be a very simple:  HOW IN THE FUCKING HELL DO I COME UP WITH THAT?

To that, I take you to the highlights of the match, if I can find a legally-embed-able set of them which FIFA won't take down (their official YouTube channel is a joke in this regard -- the only "highlights" the channel has are the International Sign Language translations of the match reports, and they're so religious in taking down match highlights that most people are actually resorting to faking match highlight videos and showing FIFA '14 video game play instead!).

It sounds like the best I can do is put up a link to the ESPNFC highlights, which are probably the official highlights from the World Feed of FIFA, since ESPN is the official USA broadcast partner.

(And I believe the link only works if you're in the USA...  Don't blame me, I didn't make the rules...)

But you need to see these highlights if you're going to make sense of the claims I'm making here.

(0:10):  First goal, 11th minute, Germany 1-0.

Germany gets a corner after a spirited first ten minutes.

The cross comes in to a COMPLETELY UNMARKED Thomas Mueller -- a guy who, through his career, is averaging just about a goal a World Cup match -- SEVEN YARDS FROM GOAL.

The conversion is trivial, 1-0 Germany.

The match would still retain spirit for about ten more minutes.

Then, ALL HELL BREAKS LOOSE.

(0:40):  Second goal, 22nd minute, Germany 2-0.  (22:10 elapsed)

The record-breaker for Miroslav Klose, who, with this goal, became the highest goal-scorer in the history of the World Cup.

More than Pele.  More than Maradona.  More than Ronaldo.

Pass comes off the side, and, after a Brazilian misses it, comes to Kloos, center of the pitch, 22 yards from goal.

Miroslav Klose breaks in from the right corner of the penalty area, and gets the ball, largely uncontested and barely-marked, on the penalty spot, ten yards from goal.

He shakes the defender, takes one saved shot, gets the rebound uncontested, and slots the record-breaker in.

Klose was unchallenged for the entire relevant play.

That was bad enough.  2-0 would be a large hill to climb, in any case.

It was the start of a historic six minutes which shattered a nation.

(1:27)  Third goal, 24th minute, Germany 3-0. (23:57 elapsed)

The ESPN announcer is YELLING, "LOOK AT THE SPACE!  LOOK AT THE SPACE!!"

Any of THREE unmarked Germans, two of which were Mueller and the eventual goalscorer Toni Kroos, could've taken it.

The crossing pass literally could've had it's choice of German goal-scorer, as Brazil made no effort, with three German players, fifteen yards, IF THAT, from goal, to close anything down, and the match is over at this point.

Only a minute and 47 seconds had elapsed between goals 2 and 3 -- including the goal celebration for the former.

If you're already getting where I'm going, good.  IT GETS WORSE.

(2:08)  Fourth goal, 25th minute, Germany 4-0.

Yes, the next minute of play.  The last clip of the (first) Toni Kroos goal ended at 24:52 elapsed.  The clip begins with Kroos being featured as the goalscorer at 25:00 elapsed.

Germany literally get the ball off the ensuing kickoff, take it down, and Kroos rams it down the throat.

Kroos robs the Brazilian defender blind, passes to a completely unmarked Khedira, who passes back to a completely unmarked Kroos, and Kroos slots it at 25:07.  (Technically the 26th minute.)

Elapsed time for goal 3 to goal 4, one minute, ten seconds.

Elapsed time from kickoff to goal 4, MAYBE TEN SECONDS.

By now, it should be obvious this game is fixed, because this is purportedly a power national team made to look like a bunch of amateurs.

IT GETS STILL WORSE.

(2:56)  Fifth goal, 29th minute, Germany 5-0.

At least the ball had been back in play a minute and a half or two minutes before Germany just waltzed in for number five.

Ball played through the midfield to Khedira, passed through on a sliding pass, clean to the near side, and, for at least the second time, THREE UNMARKED GERMANS, two of them nine yards from goal, the third (Khedira) scores it from about twelve yards, completely unchallenged.

Time of the goal:  28:50.

This basically means that, counting three goal celebrations, Germany has scored four goals in just six minutes and forty seconds.  The 28:50 is the fastest five-goal outburst from a World Cup game start -- EVER.  Group phase or knockout phase.

None of those goals were meaningfully challenged by any Brazilian on the pitch.  The poor goalkeeper was competely hung out to dry on every one of those efforts.

The half ends 5-0.  It appears, for the most of the remainder of the half, that the referee is even trying to save Brazil further humiliation, calling a pair of phantom fouls when it appeared Germany was about to burst through AGAIN later in the half.

The second half dissolves into a farce straight out of the Twilight Zone.  It almost appears, for about ten minutes, that Germany want to give Brazil between one and three goals, just to salve matters a bit for a crowd that is somewhere between depressed and despondent.

That fails, largely because no Brazil player can be arsed to make a simple effort by this point, and Germany now have to resort to openly bungling several breakthroughs to prevent the embarrassment from getting worse.

Finally, Schurrle has had enough of that, and...

(3:40)  Sixth goal, 69th minute, Germany 6-0.

Lahm to Khedira in the corner, back to Lahm in the penalty area with all kinds of space, 15 yards from goal, centering pass to Schurrle.

NONE OF THIS IS CHALLENGED.  Schurrle is EIGHT YARDS FROM THE CENTER OF THE NET.  And, if not him, the #13 was right there to take it and score it.

There are FOUR Brazilian purported-defenseman, all standing there with the proverbial thumb up the ass, not knowing what to do in any measure of the argument, and Schurrle adds to the total.

I am going to ask one simple question by this point:  Is there any explanation, other than a complete rig-job, other than someone like a Raj Perumal or Dan Tan getting to a number of the Brazilian team and offering them a ridiculous sum to throw the game, that explains THIS...

And six-nil, to this point, is KIND.  Germany, by the end of the game, gave up, willingly, about five further breakthroughs because they wanted to hold the score to some level.

But not even that attempt could stop the disgrace from going on and on and...

(4:26)  Seventh goal, 79th minute, Germany 7-0.

Yeah, you read it right.  SEVEN-NIL.

Pass to the corner, to Schurrle in the top corner of the box, NO ONE between him and the keeper, bonks it off the bar and seventh heaven for the Germans.

----

Brazil got nothing more than a ceremonial goal in the 90th minute to lose by 7-1.

The seven goals scored by Germany are a world record for a World Cup semifinal.

And on NONE of the goals was ANY REMOTE ATTEMPT AT A CHALLENGE MADE to a single German in the play of ANY of them.

Not ONE.

Ladies and gentlemen, that was a fixed match.

I do not know (and I'm not sure I care) what would motivate a Brazilian national team member to do this.

I just know when I see it that something has occurred.

If someone wants to explain to me that this game was not fixed by a party with a lot of money to buy off the Brazilian defense, someone please explain to me how this can occur to a team with an ounce of pride, integrity, or talent...

Please, I want to hear this one.

As the World Cup bandwagon gets lighter in the USA, Perumal raises his ugly mug again...

After a literal replay of Germany-Algeria in Belgium's (undeservedly close) 2-1 win over the USA, what do my wandering eyes see in the news, but Wilson Raj Perumal again!!

He's basically the other big kingpin of Southeast Asian match-fixing, the one Declan Hill spoke of when he did his "Football 4 U" exposition for the New York Times just before the tournament began.

Well, it now appears we have a match in which Der Spiegel, the German newspaper, claims (CBC report on it's website here) that, by Perumal correctly predicting the 4-0 Croatia win and that a Cameroonian player would get sent off in the first half, that Perumal has, in fact, succeeded in rigging a 2014 World Cup tournament match.

The Cameroon soccer federation has stepped in to investigate.  One of the most interesting things about it is that it is claimed Perumal claimed that there were "seven bad apples" on the Cameroon team, indicating, to most, that he had compromised about a third of the 23-man World Cup squad for the African nation.

Let's see:

• Threaten to strike?  Check.
• Bonus payment dispute?  Check.
• Wilson Raj Perumal?  Check...

HMMMMM.....