Food For Thought

AsylumGuido · 01-29-2019, 01:06 PM

Originally Posted by burningmetal

I respect your opinions, man, but I just can't get on board with this particular theory. I already stated the reason why, in the other thread where you mentioned this.

He had a three year stint in the Braves minor league system, and it was back in the 70's. He doesn't live there now, and he wasn't born there. He's from the same area where he currently resides. And it isn't Atlanta that the Saints were facing. It's just the city where the Super Bowl is played.

That's not nearly enough, in my opinion, for someone to go to such a drastic length to throw the game. I think it's far more likely that he either had money riding on the outcome from a bet, or the league wanted L.A. in the Super Bowl, because they put an awful lot of eggs in the L.A. market basket.

I look at it a different way. All four of these refs with ties to the greater L.A. area knew what a win by the Rams would mean to their community ... and I'm not talking about the same type of importance to fans as what Saints' success means to us as fans. I'm talking about marketing exposure. They have to all want this new resident of their area to be successful.

It isn't that they were avoiding a call that would have almost assuredly gave the Saints a win, it is that they didn't want to be known as that L.A. area resident that caused the Rams to lose. The community in which they live would never forgive them for making that call, whether it was valid or not. Their wives would be hassled at the gym. The children would be ridiculed at school.

I believe it was fear that kept that flag in their waistlines. It was a position in which they should have never been placed by the league. The league screwed the pooch on the naming of these officials to the game.

Now the question remains ... was this intentional or not?

01-29-2019, 01:06 PM	#5
AsylumGuido 10000 POST CLUB Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Bossier City, LA Posts: 26,622	Re: Food For Thought Originally Posted by burningmetal I respect your opinions, man, but I just can't get on board with this particular theory. I already stated the reason why, in the other thread where you mentioned this. He had a three year stint in the Braves minor league system, and it was back in the 70's. He doesn't live there now, and he wasn't born there. He's from the same area where he currently resides. And it isn't Atlanta that the Saints were facing. It's just the city where the Super Bowl is played. That's not nearly enough, in my opinion, for someone to go to such a drastic length to throw the game. I think it's far more likely that he either had money riding on the outcome from a bet, or the league wanted L.A. in the Super Bowl, because they put an awful lot of eggs in the L.A. market basket. I look at it a different way. All four of these refs with ties to the greater L.A. area knew what a win by the Rams would mean to their community ... and I'm not talking about the same type of importance to fans as what Saints' success means to us as fans. I'm talking about marketing exposure. They have to all want this new resident of their area to be successful. It isn't that they were avoiding a call that would have almost assuredly gave the Saints a win, it is that they didn't want to be known as that L.A. area resident that caused the Rams to lose. The community in which they live would never forgive them for making that call, whether it was valid or not. Their wives would be hassled at the gym. The children would be ridiculed at school. I believe it was fear that kept that flag in their waistlines. It was a position in which they should have never been placed by the league. The league screwed the pooch on the naming of these officials to the game. Now the question remains ... was this intentional or not? saintsfan1976, WW_Who_Dat, Srgt. Hulka and 3 others like this.
	“The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.” — Winston Churchill