Packers Conspiracy, with Plank and Rich

[o-pus #40 in B major]

Ignore it all you like, the evidence is plentiful. This is just in the last several weeks.

https://bearswire.usatoday.com/lists/be ... -reaction/

https://www.si.com/nfl/browns/.amp/game ... -green-bay

“ The Cleveland Browns put together an inspiring performance on defense and with their running game, giving them a chance to defeat the Green Bay Packers on the road. Unfortunately, officiating took center stage in this game and cheapened the entire affair.”

https://www.baltimoreravens.com/news/re ... urt-ravens

Read through all the Twitter takes on this one, national impartial observers.

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/326 ... ay-packers

Refs are directly blamed for 4 Packer wins SINCE OCT 17. But sure, it’s all Bears fan hysteria.

I gotta agree with your position, plank.

[Burl]

Ignore it all you like, the evidence is plentiful. This is just in the last several weeks.

https://bearswire.usatoday.com/lists/be ... -reaction/

https://www.si.com/nfl/browns/.amp/game ... -green-bay

“ The Cleveland Browns put together an inspiring performance on defense and with their running game, giving them a chance to defeat the Green Bay Packers on the road. Unfortunately, officiating took center stage in this game and cheapened the entire affair.”

https://www.baltimoreravens.com/news/re ... urt-ravens

Read through all the Twitter takes on this one, national impartial observers.

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/326 ... ay-packers

Refs are directly blamed for 4 Packer wins SINCE OCT 17. But sure, it’s all Bears fan hysteria.

Loser teams blaming the refs isn't exactly evidence Dplank.
Come on, you're smarter than to consider these sorts of takes as "evidence". The plural of anecdote is not data.

You can go look in just about every Game Balls/Horns thread and find somebody on this board blaming the refs. Is that evidence that the refs have specifically have it out for the Bears?

No, it just proves that loser teams look for excuses, and blaming the refs is just easier than admitting your team sucks.


Again, the "Jordan rules" thing, sure, I get that Rodgers or Brady are going to get some calls that others might not here and there.
But a specific, league mandated bent toward ensuring Packer success? Makes no sense. Why specifically the Packers for all the reasons Rich already pointed out?

It sucks that the Bears are bad and can't beat the Packers. I hate it more than anyone. But resorting to a league wide conspiracy to try and explain it rather than just accepting that the Bears commit dumb penalties and aren't good enough to win is a much simpler explanation that makes plenty of sense.

[BearsFanInMN]

Good teams get the benefit of calls. But to say clearly calling it wrong is just whining by bad teams isn’t a good argument.

Refs don’t lose games, but they can swing momentum or in a game of inches be the difference since a lot of games come down to one play. You kick the crap out of a team you win. You play hard in an evenly contested contest any little thing can make a difference. Plank has a valid argument with actual evidence.

Packer fans complain about Fail Mary 6 years ago, but fail to acknowledge the score that gave the Packers the lead prior to that was aided by a pass interference against Seattle that none of the 12 cameras in the stadium picked up so no replay shown on TV.

Refs can affect games history is full of evidence. System isn’t perfect. Certain teams get benefit of the doubt. Rest is just barstool arguments.

[The Marshall Plan]

Ignore it all you like, the evidence is plentiful. This is just in the last several weeks.

https://bearswire.usatoday.com/lists/be ... -reaction/

https://www.si.com/nfl/browns/.amp/game ... -green-bay

“ The Cleveland Browns put together an inspiring performance on defense and with their running game, giving them a chance to defeat the Green Bay Packers on the road. Unfortunately, officiating took center stage in this game and cheapened the entire affair.”

https://www.baltimoreravens.com/news/re ... urt-ravens

Read through all the Twitter takes on this one, national impartial observers.

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/326 ... ay-packers

Refs are directly blamed for 4 Packer wins SINCE OCT 17. But sure, it’s all Bears fan hysteria.

And it isn't even like it's just drunk fans bitching.

You've got head coaches shaking their heads at this.

The fix is in for Green Bay. There is ample evidence for it.

The league structure is setup for it. The numbers clearly show there's a bias. There's video evidence.

If it went to court, there would be a conviction without question.

[dplank]

Ignore it all you like, the evidence is plentiful. This is just in the last several weeks.

https://bearswire.usatoday.com/lists/be ... -reaction/

https://www.si.com/nfl/browns/.amp/game ... -green-bay

“ The Cleveland Browns put together an inspiring performance on defense and with their running game, giving them a chance to defeat the Green Bay Packers on the road. Unfortunately, officiating took center stage in this game and cheapened the entire affair.”

https://www.baltimoreravens.com/news/re ... urt-ravens

Read through all the Twitter takes on this one, national impartial observers.

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/326 ... ay-packers

Refs are directly blamed for 4 Packer wins SINCE OCT 17. But sure, it’s all Bears fan hysteria.

Loser teams blaming the refs isn't exactly evidence Dplank.
Come on, you're smarter than to consider these sorts of takes as "evidence". The plural of anecdote is not data.

You can go look in just about every Game Balls/Horns thread and find somebody on this board blaming the refs. Is that evidence that the refs have specifically have it out for the Bears?

No, it just proves that loser teams look for excuses, and blaming the refs is just easier than admitting your team sucks.


Again, the "Jordan rules" thing, sure, I get that Rodgers or Brady are going to get some calls that others might not here and there.
But a specific, league mandated bent toward ensuring Packer success? Makes no sense. Why specifically the Packers for all the reasons Rich already pointed out?

It sucks that the Bears are bad and can't beat the Packers. I hate it more than anyone. But resorting to a league wide conspiracy to try and explain it rather than just accepting that the Bears commit dumb penalties and aren't good enough to win is a much simpler explanation that makes plenty of sense.

I dont care how you want to label what’s going on. I hate conspiracies too and laugh at people who believe in them. I have no explanation for it. But it’s more than Rodgers getting calls, most of the examples have nothing to do with Rodgers. Yet year after year the key calls seems to favor GB, you can set your watch to it. So that’s f the whole league conspiracy thing bothers you, I get it. But that doesn’t change the facts on the ground, that just leaves us without an explanation. Ultimately all I want is it to be fixed. If you read those links you’d see they weren’t just fans whining (just the bears one I think), the rest were coaches and national reporters telling people to pay attention to this because it’s happening and it’s changing the outcome of games every week. Choose whatever explanation you want for why that favors the Packers week after week, let’s just fix it.

[Bears Whiskey Nut]

This thread is like McDonalds for the brain. But I get it.

I don't want to think that the NFL is a half a step away from the WWE, but with some of these calls that the Packers get for them, and not called against them, goes beyond egregious. It really does make you wonder if the NFL has decided that the Packers NEED to stay relevant in order for the league to have an identity. I can't explain it any other way. The graphs that were shown earlier in this thread bare out the idea that the fix is in, and as a Bears fan its infuriating.

I mean if you have national sports commentators that are speaking out in the middle of games, saying that they don't understand these calls. That's something the NFL should look into.

[dplank]

I mean if you have national sports commentators that are speaking out in the middle of games, saying that they don't understand these calls. That's something the NFL should look into.

YES. And when they don't, it creates the impression that they are fine with it and/or actually want this to happen. The points being made that push back on this being a conspiracy are very valid points, they just don't address the scope or duration of the problem nor do they in any way explain why the league allows it to continue. If they just addressed the glaring problem in the game right now, this would all go away. But instead, as fans we will continue to get subjected to BS roughing calls, BS interference calls, phantom holding calls, etc. It's gotten worse over time instead of better. Every game is a flag fest, and whichever team gets favorable calls has a massive advantage that week. We just see it week after week after week.

A salient moment for me came many years ago. I was in Sydney (met up with AussieBear for a beer!), and was in the hotel bar watching Rugby and asking some guys there about the rules of the game as I was pretty new to it. And one guy gave me this explanation: "Rugby is just like American Football, except there's 15 players per side, no forward passes allowed, and we don't throw a flag on every fucking play".

[PlumBear]

I tend to agree with Marshall. It is just a nudge. Seems to me it would be beneficial to nudge all of the smallest markets into a little easier path to winning. The big market teams bring the NFL money no matter what. Us idiots love our teams and buy their merch/fill the stadiums no matter what. If the smallest of markets suck all of the time, they wont bring in the revenue that they do as winners.
So no, I don't believe it is anything against the Bears, I think it is the NFL trying to equal out the league to bring in as much revenue as possible.
By the way, I love the title of the thread. Sounds like it should be a podcast!

[o-pus #40 in B major]

I tend to agree with Marshall. It is just a nudge. Seems to me it would be beneficial to nudge all of the smallest markets into a little easier path to winning. The big market teams bring the NFL money no matter what. Us idiots love our teams and buy their merch/fill the stadiums no matter what. If the smallest of markets suck all of the time, they wont bring in the revenue that they do as winners.
So no, I don't believe it is anything against the Bears, I think it is the NFL trying to equal out the league to bring in as much revenue as possible.
By the way, I love the title of the thread. Sounds like it should be a podcast!

Maybe its (an unspoken) part of the "parity" that the league has pursued?

[Burl]

Here's what y'all need to do to even BEGIN to have such claims taken seriously.

1. Open Microsoft Excel and click on "New Blank Spreadsheet'
2. Start sorting data. Teams, years, penalties offense, penalties defense, wins, losses, point spreads, penalties by quarter, etc. Do it over a significant span of time, not just a period to prove your POV.

If you can do that, I'll run some T tests on the data to determine any statistical significance, or maybe some regressions to determine the relative likelihood of a ref throwing a 4th qtr flag for a specific team.
And even then, even if you can determine some teams are significantly likely to get these calls, and that this specific team is the Packers, only then can you start to argument that it's a conspiracy.

As of now, it's just a few anecdotes. Gather the data I'll massage it best I can.

[The Marshall Plan]

Here's what y'all need to do to even BEGIN to have such claims taken seriously.

1. Open Microsoft Excel and click on "New Blank Spreadsheet'
2. Start sorting data. Teams, years, penalties offense, penalties defense, wins, losses, point spreads, penalties by quarter, etc. Do it over a significant span of time, not just a period to prove your POV.

If you can do that, I'll run some T tests on the data to determine any statistical significance, or maybe some regressions to determine the relative likelihood of a ref throwing a 4th qtr flag for a specific team.
And even then, even if you can determine some teams are significantly likely to get these calls, and that this specific team is the Packers, only then can you start to argument that it's a conspiracy.

As of now, it's just a few anecdotes. Gather the data I'll massage it best I can.

We'll get right on that. Thanks!

You know how to do t tests and regressions? Gee whiz.

[Burl]

Here's what y'all need to do to even BEGIN to have such claims taken seriously.

1. Open Microsoft Excel and click on "New Blank Spreadsheet'
2. Start sorting data. Teams, years, penalties offense, penalties defense, wins, losses, point spreads, penalties by quarter, etc. Do it over a significant span of time, not just a period to prove your POV.

If you can do that, I'll run some T tests on the data to determine any statistical significance, or maybe some regressions to determine the relative likelihood of a ref throwing a 4th qtr flag for a specific team.
And even then, even if you can determine some teams are significantly likely to get these calls, and that this specific team is the Packers, only then can you start to argument that it's a conspiracy.

As of now, it's just a few anecdotes. Gather the data I'll massage it best I can.

We'll get right on that. Thanks!

You know how to do t tests and regressions? Gee whiz.

Im not saying it's anything special, pretty easy to do, but if you're going to make the claim, you need to be willing to back it up.
I dont want to assume you guys have any background in stats so Im offering to look at it, but extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. So back it up.

[The Marshall Plan]

We'll get right on that. Thanks!

You know how to do t tests and regressions? Gee whiz.

Im not saying it's anything special, pretty easy to do, but if you're going to make the claim, you need to be willing to back it up.
I dont want to assume you guys have any background in stats so Im offering to look at it, but extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. So back it up.

There's about four pages worth of us backing it up. Why don't you try reading it?

Interspersed with that is useless drivel from you and Rich55.

What's this Excel program you speak of? Is that like an app or something?

[o-pus #40 in B major]

Like TMP just said, there is some statistical data already posted which you may find enlightening, Burl..

[Bears Whiskey Nut]

Here's what y'all need to do to even BEGIN to have such claims taken seriously.

1. Open Microsoft Excel and click on "New Blank Spreadsheet'
2. Start sorting data. Teams, years, penalties offense, penalties defense, wins, losses, point spreads, penalties by quarter, etc. Do it over a significant span of time, not just a period to prove your POV.

If you can do that, I'll run some T tests on the data to determine any statistical significance, or maybe some regressions to determine the relative likelihood of a ref throwing a 4th qtr flag for a specific team.
And even then, even if you can determine some teams are significantly likely to get these calls, and that this specific team is the Packers, only then can you start to argument that it's a conspiracy.

As of now, it's just a few anecdotes. Gather the data I'll massage it best I can.

We'll get right on that. Thanks!

You know how to do t tests and regressions? Gee whiz.

Yeah. I flunked that part of statistics.

[wab]

I'd prefer this thread not get needlessly aggressive.

[UOK]

I'd prefer this thread not get needlessly aggressive.

Seconded.



Let's all stay friendly.

[dplank]

Burly no one has time to do it properly, which is why it's gone on so long IMO. Because to capture what I believe is going on, you need a qualitative view of the data, it's not just about quantity (which does also happen to favor GB). You'd need to literally watch every single game and chart out not just what calls were made, but what calls weren't made and rate the impact of the calls and non calls every week.

For example, how do one account for a game where the refs call a Bears player for taking 3 steps out of bounds as a flag and overturning a muffed punt, then later in the game allow a Packers player to literally run down the entire Bears sideline about 40 yards, all out of bounds, and come back in and get no flag. Same game, refs called it two different ways. But how to you quantify it's impact? One cost us a momentum changing turnover in a close game. The other, no real impact on the game, it just highlighted the disparity in how the refs called it for one team vs the other. There's a lot of variables at play. Or in that Lions game that was posted earlier in the thread, two missed hands to the face calls that completely handed that game to GB - those shouldn't just count as two ticks on a spreadsheet, they literally took the game away from one team and handed it to another.

IMO it's a mistake to just brush this all off. Players and coaches are starting to speak out and the problems are worsening. I tend to agree that a league mandated conspiracy of sorts is just goofball thinking, but I'm at a loss for a better explanation.

Listen to Rich Eisen here, start at 4 minutes to save time. Listen to him screaming for refs to take HUMAN CONTEXT into their calls and not be robots, this is exactly what I was talking about in the rugby example...

[mmmc_35]

I'd prefer this thread not get needlessly aggressive.

Seconded.



Let's all stay friendly.

Fuck that football nerd statistics fight. Let's go... "Sunday Sunday Sunday, in the computer lab, Statistical analysis Fiiiighhhht." It will be more interesting then this season.

[RichH55]

Burly no one has time to do it properly,

A). This isn't true in the World - especially if you are - say another NFL team since a conspiracy to help the Packers is a Zero Sum game

(*) People bring up doping - which again, was caught- repeatedly - and people leaked etc- BUT that was all premised on EVERYONE WAS DOING IT. Here- if the Packers "do drugs" as it were - that literally costs the Bears their drugs!

B) Its true only as to message board warriors- And usually Conspiracy theories have people "doing their own research"

Got to admit I like the combo of - Well there's no evidence and lords knows I dont have the time - But its gospel truth nonetheless!!!

[RichH55]

IMO it's a mistake to just brush this all off. Players and coaches are starting to speak out and the problems are worsening. I tend to agree that a league mandated conspiracy of sorts is just goofball thinking, but I'm at a loss for a better explanation.

Being an NFL Referee is both incredibly hard and the rule changes are pushing the degree of subjectivity higher (which tends to result in either worse calls or at least worse perception)

That is inherently different than "Its a conspiracy"

Like - its super weird - to use data from games that DONT involve the Packers (Cowboys game recently, etc) and think - is this an issue with NFL Referee quality? OR does this somehow mean a conspiracy for teams NOT EVEN INVOLVED IN SAID GAME

The worst call in recent memory - was a non-Packers playoff game (And the Packers stuff never seems to involve the playoffs)

Your point could just be you think NFL Refs are so-so (You could be a bit fair to them and note how difficult a job it is)

But instead its conspiracy!!! The NFL wants the smallest market to do well for $$ reasons?!?? (Why? Who knows!)

[RichH55]

Im not saying it's anything special, pretty easy to do, but if you're going to make the claim, you need to be willing to back it up.
I dont want to assume you guys have any background in stats so Im offering to look at it, but extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. So back it up.

There's about four pages worth of us backing it up. Why don't you try reading it?

Interspersed with that is useless drivel from you and Rich55.

What's this Excel program you speak of? Is that like an app or something?

The evidence is always like "OF COURSE ITS A CONSPIRACY" or the like.

Which is- ummmm- Not evidence.

The 4 Page thing is technically accurate - so we are building!~

[RichH55]

None aggressive here -

Just it isn't a conspiracy

[RichH55]

BTW - the restraint I have to show - to not have this be 450 pages because someone is using twitters reactions - AS EVIDENCE - man

If you think pressers didn't matter - imagine what I think about a random sampling of Twitters users think

Sigh.

[The Marshall Plan]

This thread has laid dormant for far too long.

Bump.

[Ditka’s dictaphone]

I always find anecdotal evidence to be the most valuable. I used to love stats but years of looking at medical research has led me to the conclusion that stats can be just as misleading as anecdotal evidence.
No offence to any stattos out there