Suggs acuses Goodell of Superbowl Blackout.

[Fixit]

I'm bookmarking this thread. From now on, if my wife accuses me of taking football too seriously or being an over-the-top fan, I'll point to this thread and just wait for the apology. And maybe some sex. But probably not that second part.

 

[Fixit]

OT, what what's not to like about this chick?

 

[jmt57]

Regarding more lower seeds winning the Super Bowl in recent years, my guess is that could be attributed to the NFL instituting free agency and a hard salary cap in the mid-90s. There is less of a delta between the top team and others, even other playoff teams, now than there was in the 70s.

 

[Efstratios]

Sounds like Suggs was interviewed on ESPN tonight and of course the interviewer asked about Brady (Lord knows what he had to do with this). Of course Thuggs took the bait.




Terrell, don't be a douche. Oops, too late.

Is Suggs in love with Tom? Even after knocking the Pats off in the AFCCG of last year, he's STILL going on about him. I despise the Giants, but I don't see Justin Tuck complaining about the Pats incessantly.

 

[Uncle Rico]

Is Suggs in love with Tom? Even after knocking the Pats off in the AFCCG of last year, he's STILL going on about him. I despise the Giants, but I don't see Justin Tuck complaining about the Pats incessantly.

Yeah, bit obsessed. Also not sure why the interviewer felt the need to bring Brady into things — other than everyone knows it sets Suggs off and "Suggs hates Brady" is always good for views/clicks. Another example of why I haven't watched that network in years.

 

[SB39]

1.5%! And it just so happens immediately within the first decade of the new division format being introduced. Factor that in as well. And also factor everything else into it as well. Because ALL of those other things happened within the same time span, including another #1 vs #1 match up in the middle of all this craziness. How lovely.

You're doing something called "calculating probability after the fact." It is easy to look at past events and find something improbable that happened.

True story: Right now I am going to roll a die 15 times and post the results in order here. I got:

6-4-1-2-4-3-4-3-5-1-6-5-4-2-1

Do you know what the odds were that I got that exact combination?!? The odds of getting that exact combination are literally 470 billion to 1 against. So the die must be rigged!

There's also a stretch that went 4-3-4-3. Rigged!

The 2 appeared 2 times and the 4 appeared 4 times. Are you kidding me?!?!?!? That's statistically impossible!

And, the most damning proof of all, look at the very end. It went 6-5-4-2-1. If that doesn't prove to you that my die is rigged, then I don't know what does.

I have 4 spreadsheet documents but here's a recap of the most obvious difference, and a fact that Roger Goodell loves to talk about...the time when the NFL reached its amazing parity.

I honestly don't know what your thesis is. There's no doubt whatsoever that the NFL is formatted in such a way to increase parity. Salary caps, the draft, strength of schedules all play into this.

Even more impressive is the bad beats the top seeds repeatedly takes in big games, which as I said is roughly an 80% favorite to LOSE.

I really would like to respond to this 80% point you've stated twice now but I honestly cannot figure out what the heck you are trying to say. I honestly do not know what "the bad beats the top seeds repeatedly takes in big games, which as I said is roughly an 80% favorite to LOSE" means.

PS: That 1.5%, as if it wasn't enough to give you a red flag, is also only if you give each seed exact parity with each other. Meaning there is never any difference in the chance of winning a Superbowl between a top seed and a lower seed. And even if you assume that all seeds are equal in terms of team strength, the numbers still are not equal because the #1 and #2 seed have a bye week which gives them a serious advantage in terms of probabilities. Let alone homefield advantage. It's actually quite a bit lower than 1.5%. More in the 0.0...% range for this pattern to emerge. And for it to emerge so suddently in a time span of less than 15 years, drops that probability to as I said -nearly - impossible. At the very least, extremely unlikely. Yet the extremely unlikely happens so frequent in the NFL. As if with inexplicable regularity.

This is an excellent point and that actually occurred to me but the problem is you're now introducing facts that cannot be computed using random number theory. For example, I would say the odds of a #5 seed beating a #4 seed are pretty good because, even though the #4 seed has HFA, I'd say the best WC team is probably more often than not better than the worst division winner.

 

[PatriotSeven]

Regarding more lower seeds winning the Super Bowl in recent years, my guess is that could be attributed to the NFL instituting free agency and a hard salary cap in the mid-90s. There is less of a delta between the top team and others, even other playoff teams, now than there was in the 70s.

Too out of wack for my tastes. It's not just that they're winning, but the fact they never seem to lose. It's just completely turned upside down.

Not just Superbowls either, but the Championship games as well.

And the patterns that are showing up, like 6 seeds in 6 years as Superbowl winners, despite the bye week and homefield advantage......too much for me to explain away as a sheer 1 in a million chance and coincidence.

And then when you start looking at what took place in those games...perfect season stopped by ****ty team, Manning and the Colts, Pittsburgh against Seattle, Saints and Katrina, Harbowl blackout.....that's just a lot of craziness on top of something that's already nuts.

And then there's the money. And the spread. And the gambling.

And then there's the actual refereeing we can see with our own eyes.

And prior documented history of FBI raids and corruption. Players speaking out.

People can believe what they want to believe, but for me, if it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, and even the numbers point to it as a highly, highly probability that it's a duck....then it's a damn duck.

It happens.

 

[SB39]

And then when you start looking at what took place in those games...perfect season stopped by ****ty team, Manning and the Colts, Pittsburgh against Seattle, Saints and Katrina, Harbowl blackout.....that's just a lot of craziness on top of something that's already nuts.

You forgot the Patriots winning in the wake of 9/11

And then there's the money. And the spread. And the gambling.

Biggest myth of all: Vegas cares who wins.

And then there's the actual refereeing we can see with our own eyes.

Bad refereeing is a reality of every single sport and simply can never be fully removed from the equation.

And prior documented history of FBI raids and corruption.

Um, this is something I like to hear more of. What the heck FBI raids are you talking about?!?

People can believe what they want to believe, but for me, if it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, and even the numbers point to it as a highly, highly probability that it's a duck....then it's a damn duck.

And now for the question you still haven't answered:

If you believe all your own nonsense, why do you follow the game??!?

 

[AQPE]

This is all I need to know about Terrell "Bleach Boy" Suggs:

According to the domestic complaint obtained Friday by The Baltimore Sun, Suggs' longtime girlfriend, Candace Williams, claimed the All-Pro punched her in the neck and dragged her alongside a speeding car with their two children in the vehicle. The woman said she suffered "severe road rash" as a result of the incident.​

In December 2009, Williams alleged Suggs held her down on the floor, poured bleach on her and their son and kicked her in the face, breaking her nose, according to The Sun. Williams also claimed physical abuse dating to the start of their relationship in 2007.​

Terrell Suggs' girlfriend claims he punched her in neck - NFL.com

Took about 5 seconds of Googling to find this. Yes, I saw the word "alleged," just like I understand the concept of "battered wife syndrome." Evidently ESPN doesn't know how to use this technology since Suggs is a frequent guest on their network. Of course, proper treatment of women is not always a priority in Bristol, Connecticut ...

It's a compliment to Brady that this POS has as much trash to spew about him as he does. The homoerotic undertones are certainly hard to ignore here. Good thing Brady has Solder covering ... well, you know.

 

[PatriotSeven]

You're doing something called "calculating probability after the fact." It is easy to look at past events and find something improbable that happened.

True story: Right now I am going to roll a die 15 times and post the results in order here. I got:

6-4-1-2-4-3-4-3-5-1-6-5-4-2-1

Do you know what the odds were that I got that exact combination?!? The odds of getting that exact combination are literally 470 billion to 1 against. So the die must be rigged!

There's also a stretch that went 4-3-4-3. Rigged!

The 2 appeared 2 times and the 4 appeared 4 times. Are you kidding me?!?!?!? That's statistically impossible!

And, the most damning proof of all, look at the very end. It went 6-5-4-2-1. If that doesn't prove to you that my die is rigged, then I don't know what does.
I honestly don't know what your thesis is. There's no doubt whatsoever that the NFL is formatted in such a way to increase parity. Salary caps, the draft, strength of schedules all play into this.
I really would like to respond to this 80% point you've stated twice now but I honestly cannot figure out what the heck you are trying to say. I honestly do not know what "the bad beats the top seeds repeatedly takes in big games, which as I said is roughly an 80% favorite to LOSE" means.
This is an excellent point and that actually occurred to me but the problem is you're now introducing facts that cannot be computed using random number theory. For example, I would say the odds of a #5 seed beating a #4 seed are pretty good because, even though the #4 seed has HFA, I'd say the best WC team is probably more often than not better than the worst division winner.

Uhm....the tournament format doesn't work like rolling a dice. Each tournament format has associated probabilities with the outcome and advancement of each seed, and each teams are in their positions they are due to actual strength.

The fact is, the top seeds should first of all appear and win a lot more Superbowls than the 3-6 seeds. Not just based on strength(which can be argued) but based on the bye week they earn.

It means the #1 seed, or the higher seed lost 80% of the time or more. Whereas previously it was a more expected, and accepted 55%. Even if you assume parity, they should shouldn't be losing 80% of the time!

Despite the fact they appear in Superbowls at a percentage rate far higher than any other seed, they have been losing Superbowls recently with the only exception being when it was facing another #1 seed.

Numbers like this are simply NOT what the tournament format is meant to produce. And it also goes completely against there being any sort of advantage in either strength, or bye week or winning percentage.

It just doesn't add up.

 

[PatriotSeven]

You forgot the Patriots winning in the wake of 9/11
Biggest myth of all: Vegas cares who wins.
Bad refereeing is a reality of every single sport and simply can never be fully removed from the equation.
Um, this is something I like to hear more of. What the heck FBI raids are you talking about?!?
And now for the question you still haven't answered:

If you believe all your own nonsense, why do you follow the game??!?

Vegas sure as **** cared when they lost all that money that they had to pay up when the Giants beat us, didn't they?

Look up the investigations that were taking up in the 60's.

I have already answered it 3 pages ago. In short, I love PRO football and pro sports in general. It's a fact of life and all we got at the moment. This is a part of the game just as much as anything else. It's entertaining.

 

[YearbookCurfew]

OT, what what's not to like about this chick?

Jennifer Lawrence is never OT! She's funny, cool, and hot as hell!

 

[Hardboiled]

It's when the lights get turned on that I lose my momentum.

 

[SB39]

Uhm....the tournament format doesn't work like rolling a dice. Each tournament format has associated probabilities with the outcome and advancement of each seed, and each teams are in their positions they are due to actual strength.

The fact is, the top seeds should first of all appear and win a lot more Superbowls than the 3-6 seeds. Not just based on strength(which can be argued) but based on the bye week they earn.

It means the #1 seed, or the higher seed lost 80% of the time or more. Whereas previously it was a more expected, and accepted 55%. Even if you assume parity, they should shouldn't be losing 80% of the time!

Why not? By the time you get to the Super Bowl, seeding gets thrown out the window. There's no home field advantage and each team is well rested. In such a small sample set, extreme results are perfectly normal.

There's no doubt that in the modern era, the difference between a #1 seed and a #4, 5, or 6 seed in miniscule compared to the way it used to be. That's the way the system is designed. Why you have a problem with this is beyond me.

The system is designed for parity, and the results show that which the system is designed to produce. The days of 55-10 and 52-17 Super Bowls are over.

It's idiotic to talk about #6 seeds never winning in the 60's 70's or 80's because there were no #6 seeds back then. What is it that you're expecting to see that just isn't there?

 

[SB39]

Vegas sure as **** cared when they lost all that money that they had to pay up when the Giants beat us, didn't they?

Well now I'm confused. You say the games are fixed because of gambling, but then you say Vegas lost a lot of money on the Giants. What you're saying makes no sense.

Look up the investigations that were taking up in the 60's.

In other words: You got nothing.

I have already answered it 3 pages ago. In short, I love PRO football and pro sports in general. It's a fact of life and all we got at the moment. This is a part of the game just as much as anything else. It's entertaining.

But why do you LOVE something you're dead set convinced is fixed? I'd feel like the biggest idiot in the world If I spent so much time following something that was lying to my face about being a legitimate competition.

Was the Patriots win in SB36 rigged? They were a #2 seed that beat a #1 seed in the AFCCG and then a #1 seed in the Super Bowl. They stayed alive after an extremely controversial - but correct - call in the divisional round. Or is it only rigged when teams you don't like win?

 

[QuantumMechanic]

Was the Patriots win in SB36 rigged? They were a #2 seed that beat a #1 seed in the AFCCG and then a #1 seed in the Super Bowl. They stayed alive after an extremely controversial - but correct - call in the divisional round. Or is it only rigged when teams you don't like win?

And after 9/11, at that!

 

[SB39]

And after 9/11, at that!

Absoultely. I mentioned that part earlier in the thread. We've all heard the Raiders and Steelers whiners about how the league fixed it because they didn't want a team named "Patriots" to lose. How else could a team go from 5-13 to with a rookie QB 14-3? The unconscious fumble recovery, the tuck rule, etc

 

[robbomango]

That wouldn't mean they're not interested in ratings that blowouts don't produce.

That streak of luck that struck Atlanta against us certainly made the game more interesting to the end and kept a few more people watching TV.

Replay booth malfunction for exactly 1 coache's challenge! Then it works fine. Ooops.

Apparently it was 2 coaches challenges, BB said in his EEI interview earlier he was going to challenge a pass by Ryan(BB thought his knee was down) and officials told him replay still wasn't working.

 

[Koma]

Absoultely. I mentioned that part earlier in the thread. We've all heard the Raiders and Steelers whiners about how the league fixed it because they didn't want a team named "Patriots" to lose. How else could a team go from 5-13 to with a rookie QB 14-3? The unconscious fumble recovery, the tuck rule, etc

The people who believe that can never explain why the league didn't push "America's Team" that year for the same reason. Instead, they let Dallas languish at 5-11.

Or maybe that's how the league throws everyone off the trail, by burying one of the "patriotic" teams.

 

[Koma]

I know we do things differently here in New England...


But I don't blame Suggs at all. I hate Roger Goodell. As do most others. Suggs is just one of the few who have the cojones to speak up about it.


$10 million salary. For what?! The Lingerie Football League referees he found last year?

Laughing on the Broncos sideline with Elway before their playoff game last year... That's bull**** and Suggs has a right to be mad about that. Like Suggs said (and many here have mentioned with the Jests) Goodell has his "favorites".

I don't see Goodell talking with Elway as a problem. What's he supposed to do, ignore a hall of famer/team executive who is hosting a playoff game? Interestingly, here's a picture of Goodell yukking it up with the Ravens owner and coach before a playoff game in 2012. Was Goodell trying to help the Ravens beat the Texans?