Mike Pereira, 8 year Ref Supervisor, says Goodell is Preparing to fix Playoffs.

[cavtroop]

Glad I started implementing my exit strategy early. Have watched literally about 10% of the amount of football I usually do so far this year.

I let my convictions steer my life more than some (can point to tangible examples of this), but others will follow.

I used to watch every NFL game on TV - thursday night games, games on Sunday when the Pats weren't on, Sunday, Monday night games. Now I only watch the Pats play. Earlier this season, I kept RedZone on in the background, but I don't even do that anymore. NFL is losing me, and fast.

 

[Galeb]

The tuck rule tho. It has always bothered me. Did the refs know about this rule or was it communicated to them? At the time, the league was hell bent on screwing with Big Al.
So don't be surprise if a clear fumble or play in our favor is called otherwise. All it takes is just one big moment to change momentum. At times people say you don't lose a game on one play. I will beg to differ with so many exhibits of single moments...

If something like the "tuck rule" bothered you so much, why didn't you do even a little research to try to get to the bottom of it? As has been said by others, the call was right and had been called several times that season, including on a Pats opponent. Perhaps you are sincere, but it certainly doesn't appear that way.

 

[Triumph]

Of course the refs knew the Tuck rule.
They had called it several times that season including against the Pats in Game 2 vs the Jets.

Walt Coleman called the exact same play on MNF.

IIRC, Tampa and the St Louis was the game.

 

[ChessToCheckers]

Good comment from idpfantasyfootball on the PFT article:

"How about transparency? Televise the audio of the conversation so the fans know what is being reviewed, discussed, and the thought process behind the ruling."

In other words, show us what's behind the curtain. Didn't our boy, Roger, promise more transparency?

Fat chance! It would be more like lifting up a rock and seeing what's under it! NFL* ===> WWE ???

 

[Triumph]

Pats are going to have to be leading by 2 or more scores in the closing minutes of the game for me to feel comfortable....I don't trust goodell at all.

A non call is as good as a bogus call as everyone saw in the NE vs Carolina game last season.

 

[Jackson 2]

Someone in the national media who is credible (I know, a small pool), perhaps Schefter, needs to very publicly ask Goodell or the league office to respond to this piece, in general, and to Pereira's comments, in particular.

 

[Triumph]

Boy, once Kraft reads this and realizes that Goodel's plan to screw the Pats and Tom Brady, whom he loves like a son, he'll go ballistic and kick some serious league ass!

Hope he doesn't unleash Jonathan.

 

[Triumph]

The tuck rule tho. It has always bothered me. Did the refs know about this rule or was it communicated to them? At the time, the league was hell bent on screwing with Big Al.
So don't be surprise if a clear fumble or play in our favor is called otherwise. All it takes is just one big moment to change momentum. At times people say you don't lose a game on one play. I will beg to differ with so many exhibits of single moments...

Why the confusion when the criteria was simple?

If the passers arm is moving forward there can only be 3 outcomes. 1 completion, 2 incompletion, 3 interception. Bradys arm was clearly moving forward when the ball comes out.

 

[Big-T]

The game can be rigged.

The Stealers vs Seahawks SB proved that without a doubt.

Referee was Bill Leavy.

As in the same Bill Leavy who inflated the Patriots Footballs to 16PSI against the Jets and conveniently "retired" and got a desk job with the league when the Wells/Pash report was due.

Hardly a coincidence the same names always show up when it comes to "controversial" calls...almost like they're instructed.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Referee was Bill Leavy.

As in the same Bill Leavy who inflated the Patriots Footballs to 16PSI against the Jets and conveniently "retired" and got a desk job with the league when the Wells/Pash report was due.

Hardly a coincidence the same names always show up when it comes to "controversial" calls...almost like they're instructed.

I'm convinced Leavy is a puppet.

Controversy and scandels are good for ratings and creating a buzz but bad for integrity.

 

[turkeyneck]

Good comment from idpfantasyfootball on the PFT article:

"How about transparency? Televise the audio of the conversation so the fans know what is being reviewed, discussed, and the thought process behind the ruling."

In other words, show us what's behind the curtain. Didn't our boy, Roger, promise more transparency?

Fat chance! It would be more like lifting up a rock and seeing what's under it! NFL* ===> WWE ???

That's exactly what I said in the Blandino thread. If this 'review' is done without the opportunity for public oversight there is no way it can be considered to be on the up and up. All review by Blindino's Bandits needs to be recorded, both the feeds they are looking at as well as their interactions in analysis, all of it archived and made available to the public.

 

[Betterthanmost]

If something like the "tuck rule" bothered you so much, why didn't you do even a little research to try to get to the bottom of it? As has been said by others, the call was right and had been called several times that season, including on a Pats opponent. Perhaps you are sincere, but it certainly doesn't appear that way.

I have done all the research, I have seen all the examples given. It just looks like a clear fumble to me. This we can be debated all day, but I will probably be among a few who thinks we got away with one there. If that happened against my Patriots, it will be forks and torches affair.

 

[turkeyneck]

Organized crime is gonna love this setup. Huge sums of money swayed by decisions made in a back room by a few ethically and intellectually challenged meatheads. This is just the perfect kind of scenario for them to leverage their 'influence'.

 

[sambam94]

any ref can swing a close game so easily..a hold on 1st down making it 1st and 20 or illegal contact on a crucial 3rd down. However, a game would have to be close. It would be much harder to fix a game obviously if one team is playing much better than the other...would take multiple calls and could look fishy.
I just don't get why the league would do this..so much at stake...just let the best team win every year.
Someone explain the motivation..I'm sure $$$ must be involved

 

[Betterthanmost]

any ref can swing a close game so easily..a hold on 1st down making it 1st and 20 or illegal contact on a crucial 3rd down. However, a game would have to be close. It would be much harder to fix a game obviously if one team is playing much better than the other...would take multiple calls and could look fishy.
I just don't get why the league would do this..so much at stake...just let the best team win every year.
Someone explain the motivation..I'm sure $$$ must be involved

In the NFL, my worry is not actually with organized corruption, it is with the individuals who can sway a game based on their bias. A defensive PI is the most susceptible ruling for greatest outside interference.
Because of deflategate, the public trust is lost and yet it seems to be lost on Dean and Rodger.

 

[XLIX]

any ref can swing a close game so easily..a hold on 1st down making it 1st and 20 or illegal contact on a crucial 3rd down. However, a game would have to be close. It would be much harder to fix a game obviously if one team is playing much better than the other...would take multiple calls and could look fishy.
I just don't get why the league would do this..so much at stake...just let the best team win every year.
Someone explain the motivation..I'm sure $$$ must be involved

While I believe parties in the league office are biased against NE, and that was certainly a factor in the deflategate nonsense, I do not for a single second believe the games and outcomes are fixed.

Sometimes bad officiating is just bad officiating - and the NFL has plenty of that.

 

[IcyPatriot]

Welcome to the NFL version of the NBA ... versions of the WWE / WWF.

 

[Galeb]

I have done all the research, I have seen all the examples given. It just looks like a clear fumble to me. This we can be debated all day, but I will probably be among a few who thinks we got away with one there. If that happened against my Patriots, it will be forks and torches affair.

So you read the actual "tuck rule"? It was surely a stupid rule, but without question, the call was 100% right. Unless there is some sort of weird suppression going on, I am forced to conclude a lack of sincerity.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

The tuck rule tho. It has always bothered me. Did the refs know about this rule or was it communicated to them? At the time, the league was hell bent on screwing with Big Al.
So don't be surprise if a clear fumble or play in our favor is called otherwise. All it takes is just one big moment to change momentum. At times people say you don't lose a game on one play. I will beg to differ with so many exhibits of single moments...

A tuck rule call earlier that same season hurt NE (may have cost them the game -- can't remember) when NE sacked the other QB and he fumbled, but the tuck rule turned it into an incomplete pass.

 

[Betterthanmost]

A tuck rule call earlier that same season hurt NE (may have cost them the game -- can't remember) when NE sacked the other QB and he fumbled, but the tuck rule turned it into an incomplete pass.

I remember Seymour recovering it, thinking we were going to extend our 3-0 lead. Only for the Jets to get the ball back and tie with a FG before the half.
I was pissed, but there was not a clear angle like the Raiders game. I have it on video somewhere , I will post shortly on vimeo.