The 2019 NFL Season...The Fix Is In Style
SUPER BOWL LIV

Surprise, surprise. The Chiefs won. What'd I predict before kickoff?
Pretty darn accurate, wasn't it? Off by just seven points on the SF side.

As for the game itself, the first half seemed pretty legit, even including this offensive pass interference call on SF tight-end George Kittle:
By the letter of the NFL law, yeah, that's OPI. In terms of consistency? Well, that tweet speaks volume.

So, yeah, the NFL was leaning a bit KC's way. Let's face it, they were the better story: Mahomes as "The Chosen One," Andy Reid "finally" getting his ring, and Lamar Hunt -- who kick started the AFL which became the AFC, coined the term "Super Bowl," and whose family still owns the franchise -- brings a title to Kansas City after a 50 year drought.

But there was no officiating moment a la last year's NFC Championship Game which made everyone's head spin. Instead, just a few little ref-aided tweaks gave KC the edge -- you know, like not calling them for offensive holding (again). With that help, the entire second half felt like a true NFL "presentation." Down 20-10, Mahomes orchestrated yet another comeback, as if it were in doubt, this time leading the Chiefs to 21 unanswered points to pull off the 31-20 victory.

What happened to the 49ers? Good question. How'd they let Tyreek Hill get wiiiiiiiiide open on a critical 3rd-and-15 play in the fourth quarter for a 40+ yard gain? Good question. Why did the running attack of the 49ers not grind out the rest of the game when up by 10? Good question. How did the 49ers head coach, "offensive genius" Kyle Shanahan, blow a 10 point lead, especially after being the offensive coordinator who helped the Falcons blow a 28-3 lead in a previous Super Bowl against the Patriots? Good question.

There's many questions that can be raised about the 49ers play calling and play in general. But if you're fulfilling the role of the heel in the wrestling match, does anyone care about the motive of the losing wrestler? Or do the fans just want to celebrate the hero's victory?

So, that's it. That's the NFL's 100th season. Entertained?

See you next season!
AFC & NFC CHAMPIONSHIPS

I'll start this off here: I think the better team won each game. If each game was played sans referees, I think both the 49ers and Chiefs beat the Packers and Titans respectively.

That said, the refs -- while not making a huge, obviously bad call as they did in last year's NFC Championship Game -- seemed to be leaning in each home team's favor. Remember earlier this season when everyone was complaining about the number of flags being thrown to the point that Tom Brady (of all people) chimed in on Twitter complaining about the penalties in a Thursday Night Jaguars v Titans game? It was bad. It was affecting the rate of play. It was driving fans crazy, no matter if the calls were justified or not.

In the Titans v Chiefs game, the Chiefs didn't get called for offensive holding. In the Packers v 49ers game, the 49ers didn't get called for offensive holding (amazing given they had 42 rushing attempts) or defensive pass interference. In fact, they had only two penalties for 10 yards.  It's rather amazing that both the Chiefs and 49ers offense played a relatively "perfect" game at the exact moment they needed to (which was what the Titans did the week before, but couldn't pull off in Kansas City).

Perhaps the most controversial officiating moment came on this 3rd-and-1 play in which the Titans were called for offensive holding, seemingly at the moment the ball was snapped:
Some on Twitter have suggested the quick flag was for an illegal formation on the offense. Perhaps, but considering the officials never announced that there were two flags on the play, both on the offense, one for illegal formation and another for holding, and just announced holding on the offense, what are fans supposed to assume but the worst? Especially when the subjective calls were all going KC's way.

There was this interesting coach to referee exchange as well in the Packers v 49ers game which makes you wonder who's running what down on the field:
I mean, Shanahan was correct it was a hold, but would it have been called if the ref wasn't alerted to it ahead of time?

But aside from the refs letting the Chiefs and 49ers have their way with things without anything being blatantly bad, both games were rather bland. Tannehill wasn't about the lead the Titans to the Super Bowl, and Rodgers looked uninterested in the game once the 49ers went up 17-0. In fact, I dare say Rodgers looked a little Jay Culter-esque in his apparent disregard for the 2nd half of the game.

But maybe even Rodgers was aware that no one wanted to see a Titans v Packers Super Bowl -- which we could've easily had if all things were equal. And a Chiefs v Packers rematch of Super Bowl I in the NFL's 100th season would've looked suspicious, especially if you throw in the fact that the teams' two QBs are the spokesmen for State Farm Insurance. Sponsor of the NFL or not, no way the league wanted #StateFarmBowl trending over #SuperBowlLIV.

So we're left with the Chiefs offense v the 49ers defense. That's easy enough to hype. And if -- a big IF given the two storylines remaining -- the NFL decides to tamper with the game in one team's favor, I'd suggest the NFL would help the Chiefs. Why? Because if Mahomes is the next Chosen One, he needs to win it all. Plus, the league could then reward both head coach Andy Reid (who may have 'helped' the league in the past) and the Hunt family which owns the Chiefs and helped start the AFL before it merged with the NFL to make the league what it is today. Is Jimmy Garoppolo really the next face of the NFL when he's tossing 8 passes a game?

And by the way, my preseason Super Bowl pick was Bears over Chiefs because it would make a good defense v offense battle. I was half right with a correct guess on what the hype machine would use. Not bad given some of the other guesses floating around the internet.
DIVISIONAL PLAYOFFS

Vikings v. 49ers: Honestly, I don't think the 49ers needed "help" to win, just to get healthy. The bye week did that for them, and then their defense did what they did earlier in the season and shut down Kirk Cousins and Co. without much trouble. That said, the refs didn't seem to want to participate in the game. Six total penalties, five on the 49ers, one on the Vikings. Not a holding call or a pass interference to be found. "Letting them play" took on a new meaning, and played right into the 49ers hands.

Titans v. Ravens: Do up and coming QBs like Lamar Jackson need to "pay their dues" before they get NFL assistance? Do they need to learn how the game is really played prior to achieving greatness? It's an interesting question to consider as once again in this game as in the MIN v. SF game, the refs were rather hands off. The Titans were flagged only five times, and not once for pass interference (despite Jackson having 59 passing attempts) or for holding (despite 37 rushing attempts). Think it's really possible the Titans played a "mistake free" game exactly when they needed to? I know Jackson has been the talk of the NFL for most of the season and one would think having them advance to the AFC Championship Game would make for better TV, but the Titans are now Cinderella. And Jackson just received a heaping dose of humility. It seems that some team at just the right time "figures out" how to contain the running QB. Cunningham, Vick, Kaepernick, they've all had success, but never won it all. Jackson fits into that category...for now.

Texans v. Chiefs: Once the Titans won, did you really think the AFC Championship Game was going to be TEN v. HOU? I mean, really? Titans against Texans? For the Super Bowl? It sounds more like a middling Thursday Night Football game. Plus, Patrick Mahomes can't be the NFL's next Chosen One if he can't handle a 24-0 deficit early in the first half.

This game played out like a professional wrestling match. The "heel" jumps out to an early lead, and just when you think he's going to put away the hero, lo and behold, the dramatic comeback in front of the audience salivating for just an outcome. The turning point just came a bit too early to really make it dramatic. But given how the football bounces sometimes, if you want to insure a certain outcome -- like, say, having the Chiefs win -- gotta put it away early to relieve any anxiety. So, here's the Texans running a fake punt from their own 31-yard line up 24-7 in the second quarter. Genius. From that point onward, the Texans couldn't catch, couldn't play defense, and just like the heel, ultimately turned a certain victory into a humiliating defeat.

Seahawks v. Packers: On the face of it, there really wasn't a reason for the Seahawks to win. A running team all season, they were down three offensive lineman and three starting RBs. Yet, the drama ensued down the two minute warning. Of all the games, I think this was the worse officiated of them all (that is, for the calls that were made). The Seahawks fumbled on their first play and it was recovered by the Packers. Only, it wasn't. There were :02, or at least :01, left on the clock after the Seahawks missed on their Hail Mary at the end of the first half. Only, there wasn't. Rodgers completed a third down pass to Graham which was just short of a game-clinching first down. Only, it wasn't. Even after some mysterious "further footage" was found after the play was reviewed and ruled upon -- something which I don't believe ever happened (or at least never announced). A fan could argue the officiating either way in this game, and really, for the NFL, I think a case could be made to have the 49ers play either team. So, why not have the Packers advance, especially given the Seahawks health?

Who wins next week's games? In the AFC, I'm still on my preseason prediction of the Chiefs. Cinderella is always a good story, but the NFL loves its QBs. Is Tannehill's return to Miami after losing his job with the Dolphins to become a mid-season replacement for Mariota a Super Bowl-level story? Over the Chosen One? Nah, especially when you throw in the Andy Reid angle.

In the NFC, either team would be fine for the league. The 49ers dominant defense versus Mahomes with the kicker of Jimmy G's emergence, or "old man" Aaron Rodgers bringing the Packers into a Super Bowl I rematch in the NFL's 100th season? Most of my readers seem to like the idea of a KC v. GB match-up, and normally I would as well. But I'd find it odd to have the two spokesmen for State Farm Insurance playing each other in the Super Bowl. It'd be great for State Farm, but it'd seem a bit shady to those on the outside looking in. I mean, how "coincidental" would that be? If Nike -- of all companies -- couldn't make LeBron play Kobe in the NBA Finals when it built an entire ad campaign around the Kobe and LeBron muppets a few years ago, how could State Farm pull this off?

So I guess it'll be TEN v. GB, right?
WILDCARD WEEKEND

Let's do this game by game, shall we?

Titans v. Patriots: I said way back in Week 7 (really, earlier if you count my  pre-season Super Bowl prediction) that the Patriots would flame out. Brady looked old, America was sick of all things "The Patriots' Way" related, and the NFL needed new blood. Tack on to that a new "Spygate" scandal and the dynasty was coming to an abrupt end.

What really sealed the deal was the TV broadcast. Despite the game being tight throughout, all game long the talk was, "What comes next for Brady? Will he retire? Will he be a Patriot? What will New England do next season?" These questions were being openly asked before halftime! Shouldn't they come up post-game, if the Patriots lost? Nope. Not on Saturday. So when the main talking point for the ga.me isn't the game in progress, but talk of next season, you know the refs aren't about to lend a hand to the team being questioned. And so, without too much fanfare, the Patriots were done. Did it really matter who took 'em out? I guess not as the story had be played out for nearly 20 years. Perhaps a bit anti-climatic, but what'd you want? Yet another Super Bowl appearance?

Seahawks v. Eagles: The Eagles were done no favors when QB Carson Wentz was knocked out of the game with a concussion in what's been deemed (but not flagged) as an illegal hit. But the 15-yard penalty wouldn't have changed the outcome of the game. Without Wentz, back-up QB Josh McCown wasn't about to be the Eagles next Nick Foles, and the Eagles were so injury-ridden, I'm surprised they were gifted the NFC East title in the first place over the Cowboys (but the Cowboys were so dysfunctional, they weren't headed anywhere of note, either. In fact, until Jerry Jones starts including himself in the NFL's revenue-sharing program, he's not going to sniff another Super Bowl no matter who the head coach is).

The Seahawks, on the other hand, have Russell Wilson, a returned "Beast Mode," and the love-em-or-hate-em Pete Carroll. Plus, having Seattle live on sets up (1) another Packers v. Seahawks match-up so TV can rehash the "Interceptouchdown" play and the Packers' choking away the Super Bowl to Seattle a few years back and (possibly, 2) a third 49ers v. Seahawks rematch in the NFC Championship Game (which, given how Seattle and Green Bay each played the 49ers, would be preferred).

Vikings v. Saints: Before we fully step away from the Seahawks v. Eagles game, this was ruled offensive pass interference:
The reason I bring up this play is because this wasn't ruled offensive pass interference (and note the fan in the corner of the screen instantly signaling a push off):
The non-call only cost the Saints the game. No big deal. And if you don't think this was pass interference (and given the current "who knows?" state of the NFL rule book, you can make an argument for it) here's some more "professional" input on the play:
So, once again the Saints were on the "wrong" side of NFL officiating in the playoff game. Look, that franchise sold its soul to the devil NFL 10 years ago when they were handed a Super Bowl title in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. Plus, Brees got his record book marks and special prime-time treatment twice now. I shed no tears for them. By the way they played plus a few other non-calls that went the Vikings way, it seemed as if this game was a "done deal" as much as the Patriots game was.

Bills v. Texans: This game was turned on one play -- the opening kick off of the second half. I could break it down for you, but someone beat me to the punch, and probably did a better job of it (with pictures!):
 There's two main takeaways from this nonsense ruling: (A) the head referee was the closest to the play and ruled it a touchdown as it happened, and (B) the NFL did not review the play as should have happened on an official scoring play. Perhaps the only acceptable ruling outside of a Bills' TD would've been to call it an illegal forward pass in the end zone which would've given the Bills a safety and the ball. So, it should've been either Bills 20-0 or Bills 15-0 with the ball.

To have the head referee suddenly determine the Texans player's "intent" was a touchback was ridiculous. "Intent" is not part of the NFL's rules, especially when in this case, the referee is admitting to mind-reading. Players make bone-headed plays all the time. Can a player who's running into the endzone and prematurely celebrates by dropping the ball short of the goal line now have that play ruled a TD instead of a fumble because he "intended" to score? The NFL rule book is willy-nilly enough, fans don't now need referees determining a player's "intent" to further confuse them.

But here we are.

Granted, the Bills kind of fell apart in the second half, but even with this one play aside, the refs were in the Texans favor. And let's face it, even though both Texans QB Deshaun Watson and Bills QB Josh Allen are up-and-comers, Watson is the more attractive option for the league. To have him face off with Chosen One Patrick Mahomes in the Divisional Round is a feather in the league's cap. Throw in the return of Texans DE JJ Watt, and the Bills goose was cooked.

Welcome to the NFL, where the winning team is often chosen to best set up the next round of the playoffs. If they can do it in the WWE, why don't you believe they do it in the NFL?
WEEK 16 & 17

I'll be honest. With the holidays and my own general laziness associated with them, I'm not going to go back and break down Week 16 (and unless something really weird happens, I'm not going to care much about Week 17, either). A couple of somewhat odd outcomes tricked me in Week 16 --  the Eagles beat the listless Cowboys and the Vikings tanked against the Packers. I assumed that the Cowboys would win because the NFL would prefer them in the playoffs for TV purposes, and the Vikings would win to make more Week 17 game be meaningful. Well, I guess that's what you get for assuming.

So Week 17 is only meaningful for a couple of teams (Cowboys, Eagles, Titans, Steelers and if really, really lucky, the Raiders), and no matter who gets in, none of those five teams are going anywhere. The rest is a bunch of "home field advantage" nonsense, but yet for fans, these games are "meaningful." So, for the NFL and its broadcast partners, these "let's sort out the playoff seedings" games are must-see TV. We'll see just how many teams show up for these games, most of which seem to be givens.
WEEK 15

Drew Brees? Amirite?

I tweeted this out in the middle of the NY Giants v Eagles Monday Night Football game:
What happens in that MNF game between Brees' Saints and the Colts? Let's have Drew himself tell you, courtesy of this ESPN article: "Listen, it was special, everything about the night," Brees said. "I don't know how they pick 'em. Monday Night Football, playing the Colts, the team that we won the Super Bowl against 10 years ago. So the whole Super Bowl XLIV team is back for the 10th anniversary. And, obviously, national television, big game, and now that record in the balance, as well. It just kind of makes you shake your head. 'Are you kidding me?'"

No, Drew, it's business as usual in the NFL. Because he did break Manning's record by throwing four TD passes (he needed only three to set the new mark), and on top of it, Brees was nearly perfect throwing passes going 29 for 30, setting a new record with a 96.7 accuracy for a single game.

I understand this came against the Colts, a 6-7 team in disarray. How could the Saints not win and Brees not get the record in the process? Everyone -- especially ESPN which began hyping this "possibility" a week ahead of time -- was cognizant of what could (or better yet, was) going to happen. The set-up was perfect: Brees himself said so. Last home game of the regular season. Super Bowl winning team back in the house. Current record holder Manning's old team as the foe (in both the Super Bowl and the present MNF). Prime time game. Stats and graphics all set in ESPN's bag of tricks. The only "set back" was that Brees broke the record right before halftime, but a flag was thrown for offensive pass interference, negating the play. I think this was intentional, not because the PI call was iffy at best, but because it prolonged the anticipation of "will he or won't he?" until the second half of a game that was a lopsided, Brees-love fest.

There was no doubt he would end the night atop the record book. None. Which makes this game more of a production than a honest-to-goodness football game. And that, my friends, is what I'm always writing about: what are fans watching? Athletes competing in a sport, or athletes performing in an entertainment spectacle disguised as a sport? Monday Night Football was clearly the latter.

Another case in point came in the Thursday Night game between the NY Jets and the Ravens. As Baltimore's QB Lamar Jackson becomes the new rage within the sports media world, it seems that the hype has infected the players as well. After the game, which wasn't even as close as the 42-21 score would indicate, this happened:
Jackson didn't just swap his jersey with another player as a sign of respect. No, he had a handful of his jerseys ready and waiting to hand out to Jets players which he then autographed for them after the game -- right there on the field. What the hell is that? Did Jets players contact him before the game, all asking Jackson to have jerseys ready? If so, were they really trying to beat a player they apparently hold in incredibly high regard? Or did Jackson just assume his opponents would be clamoring to get a piece of him after the game? Why would a second-year player who's won nothing as of yet believe members of the Jets would be surrounding him after the game like a bunch of star-struck schoolkids?

Again, was this a true competition? Or was this game just a showpiece for the NFL? A former NFL player has a few questions about the Ravens as well, tweeting:
Finally, here's a couple of "you gotta be kidding me" calls (well, one call and one non-call) for the week. Next week, we'll get into the playoff stuff.
WEEK 14

This week's post is all about everyone's favorite team: the New England Patriots! Call me crazy, but I think their reign of terror in the NFL is coming to an abrupt end this season.

They lost at home *gasp* to the Kansas City Chiefs. On top of that rare insult, Tom Brady and company were *double gasp* on the wrong end of some (typically) bad officiating calls. One such call was a clear fumble by Chiefs TE Travis Kelce which the Pats recovered and could've returned for a TD, but the Kelce was ruled down by contact. In a season where the refs have been letting those plays usually run their course, the quick whistle cost the Pats dearly as replay proved it was indeed a fumble. Tough break. Then, with this play, the refs ruled the Pats player was out of bounds at the 3-yard line. Oops:
Even though no NFL fan outside of the Boston-area is crying a single, solitary tear over this call, it is rather indicative of the overall sloppiness of NFL officiating that has plagued the league for some time now. After the game, the head official was asked about this exact call, and this was his rather strange response:
With the loss, brought about in part due to the calls going against New England, the Patriots lost their No. 1 seed in the playoffs and a close to losing a first round bye, their division, and home field advantage. Very un-Patriot-like.

Yet the bigger, more important story is the sudden emergence this week of SpyGate 2.5 (I write this because their was the original SpyGate, the oft-forgotten SpyGate 2 in which current Patriots offensive coordinator Josh McDaniels was head coach of the Denver Broncos and busted for illegally taping his opponents signals, and now this new allegation).

The story goes that the Patriots were filming a team-only video series titled "Do Your Job" with the newest installment set to be about scouting. The Pats' videographer was in the press box (dressed in Boston Bruins gear) for the Browns v. Bengals game, and was caught filming the Bengals sidelines for an extended period of time which, supposedly, was just for "B-roll" footage. It was not intended to capture the Bengals sidelines signals (wink, wink). Of course, the Bengals are the Patriots next opponents. Allegedly when caught, the videographer -- from which the team has already distanced itself  -- asked if he could just erase what he recorded and it could all just be forgotten. Not when your employers have a shady history as Belichick and company do, my friend.

As the NFL "investigates" this breaking story, the Patriots quickly released a "we-did-nothing-wrong" statement:
The Bengals are supposedly in possession of the recording, and the NFL is "investigating."

I think we all know this is going nowhere. First off, the argument has already begun over whether the Patriots really need to cheat to beat the 1-11 Bengals. They shouldn't need any help, but let's face it, these aren't the Pats of old and every little bit would help them as they fade down the stretch. A win -- even against Cincy -- is huge in keeping them from losing the bye and/or home field advantage where the calls often go their way (unlike this week). Secondly, though the Bengals have the right to be upset over this -- especially since it took place in their own press box -- is another franchise going to attempt to fully bring down a "rival" in this day and age of revenue sharing? Especially such a storied franchise with a legendary QB and HC? Would they, and by extension, the Commissioner's Office reduce the Patriots and their recent history to rubble? Do I really need to write out an answer for you?

This will be a forgotten story (by the media) by the time the playoffs kickoff in three weeks. But it's enough to add to the mounting evidence pile many fans have built up over the years against the Patriots to add to their impending demise. When that time finally fully arrives, most fans will happily say, "Good riddance!"

Here's a late update, the actual confrontation of the Patriots "employee" (with the heavy Boston accent) and a bit of the video he captured:
WEEK 13
I have no idea which game Bruschi was referring to with this tweet, but does it matter? It's yet another ex-NFL player openly questioning the legitimacy of the league. I hate to belabor the point, but what's it going to take for fans to wake up to the manipulation within the NFL? Raiders head coach Jon Gruden said in his post-game press conference that the team had an interception taken away by the Wizard of Oz. The imagery is very apropos. Fans should not look for "the man behind the curtain" because it will likely ruin the fairy tale. (And did Gruden really think the Raiders were destined to beat Mahomes and the Chiefs to control their playoff fate? Not this year. Wait until that move to Vegas happens, then the Raiders will be playoff bound)

The other fairy tale coming to an abrupt end is that of Bill Belichick and Tom Brady. Many "think pieces" have been written about the Patriots current demise (at 10-2, mind you), and whether or not fans should "worry" about this state of being. Look, their legendary run has to come to an end at some point, and since most of it was stitched together with smoke and mirrors, penalties can only cover up Brady's fading talent for so long. And his talent is fading. Fast. You can blame his receivers (although the Patriots never had great WRs outside of Moss), but the "genius" coach should be able to fix those issues.

But long story short: the Patriots run is over. I know this story may seem like a set-up for yet another New England flavored Super Bowl, but I don't think so. I think it's high time some younger blood steps up into that role.

Elsewhere, the Dolphins beat the Eagles in a game the Cowboys really needed since they -- and the other two home teams on Thanksgiving -- lost. Funny how the "tanking" Dolphins won a "meaningless" game (for them). And at the same time, the Bengals decided to reinstate QB Andy Dalton -- after benching him for the QB of the future --  and they, too, won a "meaningless" game over the Jets. Doesn't anyone want the No. 1 overall draft pick since Tua may have ended his career?
WEEK 12

There have been other instances where I've felt I could've stopped writing this website because of this quote or that admission, and this week brings us yet another such example. Currently suspended Oakland Raiders LB Vontaze Burfict told The Athletic, "I honestly think some of the games are rigged. The refs pick and choose when they want to throw their flags. There are flags on every play. The refs determine the outcomes of games, so I just chose not to watch it for the most part." (If you don't pay for The Athletic -- like myself -- you can get the gist of the full story here).

Can fans really dismiss what Burfict said? NFL defenders would quickly point out that Burfict is known as a "cheap shot artist," and has been suspended on more than one occasion. But so what? How would that make what he said untrue? Fans should actually listen very carefully to what he is saying because as he is under suspension (and possibly finished with his career given the whims of Commissioner Goodell and his cronies) he can speak freely. He has incentive to speak the truth about the game and league he knows all too well. In fact, who knows the inner workings of the NFL better? Burfict? Or some pundit like Skip Bayless or Stephen A. Smith? 

If Burfict thinks NFL games are rigged, how many other NFL players feel the same way? How many know this is more than a "theory?" How many go along with it because, let's face it, the money is pretty darned good?

Maybe the more important question to ask is how many are clueless as to how the NFL truly operates? Because as Burfict said, the refs do pick and choose when to throw flags?

Let's start with the most ironic penalty of the week from the 4th quarter of the Panthers v. Saints game:
Yes, that is correct. "Upon further review" NFL HQ determined that was pass interference on the Saints. This, I believe, was only the second time all season NFL HQ overruled the call on the field to label a play pass interference. It was also ruled against the Saints. In New Orleans. After the non-PI call on the Rams cost the Saints the chance to play in the Super Bowl last year. How's that sit with you, Saints fans? (Perhaps not so bad since the Saints squeaked out a win anyways).

Of course, the NFL doesn't need to review every play upon which it's called to do so. In the Thursday night affair between the Texans and Colts, it was apparent that as the Texans attempted to run out the clock at the end of the game, QB Deshaun Watson fumbled the ball on a run. The Colts claimed to have recovered the ball, giving them one last hope. Nope. The refs on the field ruled it no fumble because Watson was down by contact. One quick replay shown by FOX proved this wasn't true. Did the NFL actually review the play back at HQ in NYC? Maybe, but not officially, and not fully enough even though they were given extra time to look at the play thanks to a (ill-advised) Texans time out. Without the replay, without the (probable) turnover, the Colts were done. Texans win.

What about the calls made on Sunday that are overturned on Tuesday? Yes, this happens. It just happened to the Cowboys who lost a nailbiter (of sorts) to the Patriots. Twice, the Cowboys offensive line were flagged for tripping. As Joe Buck and Troy Aikman pointed out, tripping has been called four times all season -- and twice were in this Cowboys v. Patriots game. Here's one of the plays flagged:
Did the two tripping penalties alter the outcome of the game? Not specifically, but it didn't help the Cowboys much (and those weren't the only calls that were questionable in this game). Given that the Patriots are a ridiculous 99-1 when leading at halftime when playing at home -- which defies all logic and no one can really explain how this is possible -- it's calls like these that certainly help that record stay the way it is.

The tripping calls did raise more than a few eyebrows including:
Remarkably, the NFL looked at these calls and decided on Tuesday, "Oops, shouldn't have happened. Sorry."

How fans don't believe Burfict after such official NFL behavior is beyond me.
WEEK 11

Why is the truth open to interpretation? Is it because the truth is elusive? Or is it because to learn the truth today one must rely upon the media, and the media is now entrenched in the opinion business?

I ask because I'm intrigued by the NFL-sponsored Colin Kaepernick workout that took place this week. Let me make a couple of things clear first before I get labeled a this or that: 1) I don't care one way or another if Kaepernick plays in the NFL again. 2) I do believe the league blackballed him once the 49ers released him. 3) Both sides spun --  and continue to spin -- the entire drama for their own ends.

None of the pre-Week 11 workout made sense. Why now? Why did the NFL have to hold an open workout for every team? Why did 20+ teams agree to watch it, and why then did representatives from less than 10 attend when the venue changed? Why did Kaepernick's side prearrange a second location in the first place? Why did Kaepernick wear a "Kunta Kinte" shirt and put on a pair of new Kaepernick model Nike's (which are going to be released in December) for the event? Why was the NFL's pre-workout contract so one-sided in the league's favor? (Well, I know the answer to this last question -- it is the NFL after all).

Each side spun the results their own way. It was either:

The NFL tried to do him a favor, and he refused their terms. That's on him.

Or:

The NFL set Kaepernick up to fail, and he turned the tables on them. Just more of the same mistreatment from the league.

I think it's all of the above. When CBS has James Brown basically stop the program and make this statement, I tend to see this all as a NFL PR sham.
At the same time, Kaepernick seems disingenuous about his situation. Does he really want to play again in the NFL, or did he go through with this because either (a) he was forced to because of the lingering legal situation surrounding his previous settlement with the NFL or (b) was this just another way for him to say to the NFL, "F**k you?"

When you do charity work, but have to have a camera alongside to capture the charity, I believe you're doing it for the wrong reason. In many ways, Kaepernick's participation felt similar. It felt like a lot of "look at me." It's been nearly three years since he played in the NFL. He's on the wrong side of 30. He lost his job when he was on the 49ers. Why would someone with higher aspirations as he claims to have want back into a league that could potentially cripple you? The money? Where'd all that settlement money go? Donations? The lawyers? His bank account?

This remains a no-win situation for all involved. I understand why a team would avoid Kaepernick (blackballed or not). He may not be that good (and I'd say to those people stating, "he could still make all the throws" after seeing the workout video, I bet Mitchell Trubisky, Josh Rosen, and every other NFL QB could under those workout situations as well), and given the inherent distraction that would come with signing him, I doubt it'd be worth the trouble. But if signed, then what? Would the Kaepernick backers be satisfied? Or would he have to start? How much would have to be force fed to him for those backers to be happy? And what if he did play -- start even --  and look horrible? Then what? Would the NFL be blamed for keeping him out for nearly three years? Or would the proof be staring everyone in the face, and the "I-told-yous" coming raining down?

I have no answers to any of this. I'm not sure I should. Because (in my opinion) Kaepernick took the easy way out by settling his lawsuit against the league, we'll never know what really was going on with the entire situation. Instead of exposing the NFL and some of its internal workings, fans were left with a bunch of NDAs and puppet shows like this workout.

But it's been a helluva sideshow for the NFL.

Let me also take a moment to rant about Thursday Night Football. Not the Browns v. Steelers game and the helmet assault heard 'round the world. But the Thursday night games in general. They're terrible. You can tell from watching the players hate playing in them. It's forced upon fans, and unfortunately, they still lap it up like thirsty dogs no matter how bad the games are. I know the league has a season full of them because it's easy TV money, and the networks love having a ratings winner locked up for fall and part of winter, but seriously, these games need to die.  If the NFL is serious about pushing their season to 17 games as is being reported, the NFLPA should mandate Thursday games need to go (or at least have the bye weeks adjusted to give players involved in those games some relief).

Should we talk about the games this weekend? There was more of the usual "how can the referees make that call" moments such as:
Calls like these led to Texans head coach Bill O'Brien to lament that he didn't know what pass interference was anymore, and  caused 49ers DB Richard Sherman to wonder if the refs called penalties against him because of his association with the NFLPA. Can you argue with either one? There's certainly a method behind all of this league-sanctioned madness.

But what really is the truth? Is Ravens QB Lamar Jackson supplanting Chiefs QB Patrick Mahomes as the league's "Chosen One?" A lot of hype has been pinned on the rising star. But does it mean the Ravens are the team to beat in the AFC, or is it just a matter of time before the league "catches up" with what Jackson does (because it is reminiscent of vintage Michael Vick) and some unheralded defense bottles him up? Are the Vikings a legitimate team, or was that 4th quarter comeback against the Broncos a gift to them in order to keep the NFC playoff race interesting? Are the Rams and Cowboys really back in the mix, or did they just look good against bad teams? Are the Raiders really a playoff team, or are they winning because they are moving to Las Vegas, and as usual, teams like that always appear to succeed?

The truth about the NFL appears to remain quite elusive.
WEEK 10

Did you ever watch professional wrestling? Ever see a match where the referee was accidentally knocked out, and the wrestler who should've won ended up losing? If you spent enough time watching wrestling, you crossed paths with this common trope. Fans never seemed to tire of it, or of a manager distracting a referee while another wrestler cheated, or any of the other myriad of ways in which "poor officiating" altered the outcome of a match. It was just part of the entertainment. How many different ways can you end a wrestling match?

Why is it that I keep stumbling across pundits and articles which claim that the "poor officiating" is affecting the NFL's "product?" How can they even make such a claim when -- believe it or not -- the NFL's ratings are up? No matter the number of anti-officiating Twitter rants that make the rounds, poor officiating is not killing the NFL. Not at this point, at least. And this trope -- bad call = wrong victor -- isn't going away anytime soon. Not in the WWE, and not in the NFL.

It should matter. This shouldn't happen in "professional" football with "professional" referees:
And if the NFL were truly concerned about its reputation of fairness, stories like this shouldn't be seen on a weekly basis:
Yet, here we are. Again. Another week when "The Panthers got a BS  roughing the passer call against them, and it changed the course of the game, giving the Packers a win." Or "The refs were in the Seahawks' back pocket on Monday Night Football, and if it wasn't for them [and a botched field goal], the 49ers would still be undefeated." What other game do you want to include here? What else is worth bitching about?

This sounds like a broken record -- and NFL fans don't care. They do care, but not enough to have these constant gaffes ruin the fun. Not when the Saints unexpectedly lose to the Falcons. Or when the Titans dramatically beat the Chiefs in the "chosen one" Patrick Mahomes' return. Dolphins beat the Colts! Steelers top the Rams! Vikings eek it out over the Cowboys! All this drama! Why let a few "bad" calls get in the way of this never-ending soap opera called the NFL?

The fact remains the NFL will not clean up it officiating because it feels as if nothing is wrong. Fans are watching. People are talking about football. Playoff races are heating up. It's all going the league's way -- including the "bad" calls. Which means one of two things: either the league is incredibly lucky, or it is orchestrating it all. Which do you think is more likely given the NFL's (and its broadcast partners) multi-billion dollar status?
WEEK 9

This is the mid-way point of the NFL season, and it seemed clear who were the "haves" and the "have nots." Then, this week's games were played.

The Colts appeared to have a win over the Steelers -- which would've put Pittsburgh at 3-5 -- but, "whoops" future Hall of Fame kicker Adam Vinatieri shanked (and I mean shanked) the would-be game winning kick. Now, PIT is 4-4 and back in the hunt while the Colts remain in the playoff race at 5-3, a game back of the Texans.

The Packers seemed all set to go to 8-1 and challenge the undefeated 49ers for supremacy in the NFC as Green Bay took on the listless Chargers, but "say what?!" the Chargers clobbered the disinterested Packers 26-11. The Packers were never in this game, and didn't appear to care if that was a problem. Los Angeles's unlikely win, however, kept them alive and in the mix for a playoff spot.

The Panthers won (again) with their backup QB, the Bills took out a lame-duck Redskins team, Seattle needed OT to oust the Bucs, the Eagles dropped the Bears (perhaps for good), the Chiefs (also again) squeaked by the Vikings as "the chosen one" Patrick Mahomes nursed his dislocated kneecap, and Oakland moved to .500 by upending the Lions.

All of these results were very good for the NFL. They brought many of these franchises back to playoff life which, of course, the league needs to make those Week 15, 16 and 17 games meaningful. Gotta keep fans guessing, right?

Perhaps the two most interesting games were the prime-time affairs.

For all the hype surrounding the Patriots "record-setting" defense, the Ravens run-heavy offense just obliterated them. They looked bad. And you know who else looked not just bad, but old was the G.O.A.T. himself, Tom Brady. Brady was off target often (despite the heavy praise constant heaped upon him) and always, always, seemed to be begging the refs for help when a play went south. But for once, it wasn't the Patriots getting the favors. The Ravens had things go their way.  They rushed for 210 yards on 41 attempts, yet didn't have a single holding penalty against them. Just one or two could've altered the course of the game. Instead, the refs appeared to look the other way as the Pats' loss launch a thousand "think-pieces" with more certainly to come.

Different refs appeared to be doing much the same in the Monday Night Football match-up as Dallas got a "needed" win over the maybe-next-year Giants to stay entrenched in the NFC East race. This game was officiated so well it got both a former NFL player and a head coach to pipe up on Twitter about the calls:
Even Troy Aikman stepped into the fray to comment:
Interesting choice of words Aikman used there: "consumer confidence." Because as I've stated ad naseum here, this is, after all, merely entertainment. But perhaps I've been underselling that notion. FOX's owner Rupert Murdock apparently referred to sports as "the true religion of America." I don't think he's wrong, especially given how profitable selling that religion has become, but I really don't want to believe he's right, either.
WEEK 8

Bernie Parrish died this week. Who's he, you ask? He was an All-Pro DB for the Cleveland Browns, became the vice president of the NFLPA (the players' union), and perhaps most importantly, wrote this book:
They Call It A Game, published in 1971, is a direct influence on myself, my writing, and this website (the other key influence is Dan Moldea's book Interference). While it may feel dated as it's nearly 50 years old, Parrish's book is as relevant today as it was then. Why? Because Parrish claimed in the book that the NFL was fixing its own games!

Parrish felt that when the TV networks began investing in NFL football it was as if those corporations bought the sport. His argument was that as soon as that TV money poured into the owners coffers, they kowtowed to TV and did everything possible to appease their new paymasters. The NFL went from a sport to a TV show, and as far as I'm concerned, it's never gone back.

Interestingly, ProFootballTalk.com wrote a short piece about Parrish's passing. It even mentioned his "controversial" book. Yet, PFT had to add regarding the allegations of the NFL fixing its own games, the book "provided little hard evidence to support the claim." Never mind that Parrish played the game for nearly a decade and then was active with the players' union for even longer and knew exactly what he was writing about, there was no "hard" evidence to prove his thesis.

God speed, Bernie.

So, remember when offensive holding was a point of emphasis in the NFL earlier this season? What happened to all those holding calls that were bogging down games? Kind of went the way of all those bogus roughing the passer calls at the beginning of last season, didn't they? However, the offensive pass interference calls appear to still be a thing, except, you know, when it's not warranted. And it's also become clear that challenging a pass interference call -- either defensive or offensive -- is a pointless action despite the new rule that was put in place to overturn incorrect calls.

How'd you like not one, but two -- count 'em, two! -- undefeated teams in the Super Bowl? Think both the 49ers and the Patriots can keep that momentum rolling for a dozen more weeks? That's the talk right now which is odd because both teams are being touted because of their defensive prowess. I thought the NFL was all about offense and QBs. But imagine Brady playing former backup Jimmy Garoppolo! Oh, the drama!

Speaking of the G.O.A.T. (I hate that term), how come no one seemed to find it incredibly odd that Odell Beckham Jr. had a special pair of goat-haired shoes made to give to Brady after their game on Sunday?
I feel Baker Mayfield's expression in that photo. The Browns were soundly beaten 27-13, and immediately after the game, Beckham is bowing down to Brady. Respecting your opponent is one thing, but showering him with post-game gifts? Seriously? How much thought did OBJ put into those shoes versus his and the Browns' game plan? I can't imagine former Browns player Bernie Parrish (or Jim Brown or Ozzie Newsome or hundreds of other former Browns) even consider doing what OBJ did.

As Parrish questioned, how much of this sport is really a competition and how much of it is merely a show?
WEEK 7

I have no photos or tweets to share this week. Honestly, I don't have much to share this week. It was just another ho-hum week of NFL football. I mean, here it is just Week 7 and you can already check off which teams are playoff teams: Patriots (of course), Ravens, Colts, Texans, Cowboys, Packers, Saints, Seahawks and 49ers.

A couple of teams are bubble teams (Bears, Vikings, Bills, Panthers, Rams and Eagles), but do any of these teams -- as it stands here in Week 7 -- seem to be getting any love from the media? The Bills are 5-1 with their only loss coming via New England, and no one cares. Kirk Cousins and the Vikings? Yawn. The Bears defense appear (mostly) great, but Trubisky looks like hot garbage. We saw the Rams last year, now "young genius" Sean McVay isn't looking so smart. Eagles just got their title two years ago, and the Cam-less Panthers are booooriiiing.

One suddenly somewhat bubble team is the Chiefs. They would be a sure thing if not for Patrick Mahomes dislocating his kneecap (which I didn't even know was a thing). It doesn't hurt that their division mates are all bad: Raiders, Chargers and Broncos. But in this year of the back-up QB, it'll be interesting to see how the Chiefs do while lacking Mahomes' presence on the field. Do they lose their next two games to the Packers and surging Vikings while Mahomes sits? It'll be interesting to see what sort of "help" they get.

So, which teams are the story? In the NFC, the Saints have a great story with backup QB Teddy Bridgewater's return. (It also might not hurt that the Saints were "screwed" out of the Super Bowl last year, and they are the only team with actual gold in their team colors during the NFL's 100th "golden" season). The Packers and Aaron Rodgers are getting ALL the calls this year, and seem to be a league favorite due to this subtle push. Russell Wilson is already getting MVP votes, the 49ers are undefeated, and the Cowboys are the Cowboys, always a talking point. But myself, I'm feeling New Orleans at this point (and that might just be because I don't want to see Green Bay in the Super Bowl given my proximity to that city).

In the AFC, there's always the Patriots. I still think they flame out. How much is too much when it comes to America's feelings for Brady, Belichick and Co.? The Ravens have lightning rod QB Lamar Jackson, and the Colts are succeeding without Andrew Luck, but are either team that interesting? The Texans -- one of my two preseason choices for the AFC crown -- still have hope, but they just can't seem to string it together. This leaves the aforementioned Chiefs. As long as Mahomes can return to form, I think they are the team to beat (even lacking a defense).

But we shall see. These next few weeks are where the rubber meets the road, and where the NFL will start hand-selecting "their" teams while the media hype machine begins to crank up. Expect the "poor" officiating, which Clay Matthews willingly took to Twitter to mention (I do have a tweet to share, I forgot!), to keep doing its thing:
WEEK 6

It's kinda funny (well, actually, "funny" is probably not the best word to use here given the circumstances behind this), but I had no idea what to post for Week 6 because I spent the majority of my Sunday in the ER with my wife. Nothing like seven hours in the ER, I tell you. So, I only saw highlights of games (why is the default setting of every hospital TV HGTV?) and didn't really know who won what until much later. Some fans of this site told me about oddities in the Texans v. Chiefs game, others about the refs helping the Seahawks come back and beat the Browns. But I really didn't know how to frame any of it because I saw none of it.

Then came Monday Night Football.

This game, between the Lions and Packers, I saw all of. And, oh my, did the referees do a job on the Lions.

While I do have a post on this site about the Top 10 fixed games, this Monday Night Football game is perhaps the gold standard for what I write about and research. You really needed to see it to believe it, and to understand that the Lions won this game. Yes, I know the final score was Packers 23, Lions 22. The Lions kicked five field goals, a few of which probably should've been touchdowns which might have made all of what follows moot. But the fact is, the Lions didn't need to score those nonexistent TDs. The FGs were enough. That is, until the referees decided to not just let the Packers back into the game (played in Green Bay, FYI), but to literally hand them the victory.

So, where to begin? Unfortunately, I don't have video/photos of every play and call that the refs "botched" (and I apologize now that the ones I do have all come via Twitter). Looking the stat sheet, it would be easy for some apologists to say, "Penalties were even: the Lions got eight for 50 yards, the Packers six for 48 yards." True. But the Packers three most "meaningful" penalties were offensive holding calls, two of which came early in the second quarter in a drive that Packers still scored a TD on, and the third -- perhaps the most impactful -- came inside the red zone which may (or may not) have forced the Packers to kick a FG rather than score a TD. Either way, four of the Packers' six penalties came in the first half in which they went into the locker room down 13-10. The last two penalties, just for the record, came on a kickoff return and a false start.

Here's all that was called (or not called) against the Lions, the vast majority of which came in the 2nd half:

--While a 12-men on the field penalty by the Lions D turned a Packers FG into a TD (which was also aided by a phantom 3rd down defensive holding penalty on a drive-ending incomplete pass), a 13-men on the field penalty was not called on the Packers later in the game.

--Though not seemingly game changing, a Lions DB was flagged for a helmet-to-helmet hit despite not targeting the Packers WR, but actually making a play on the ball for a possible interception.

--On 3rd-and-2 play on the Packers 35-yard line, a pass to Lions RB Kerryon Johnson was caught then fumbled out of bounds which the Packers challenged as a catch. ESPN's "ref in the booth" Jon Perry, while watching the replay, repeatedly said he liked the call to stand as Johnson clearly caught the ball and took three steps prior to losing control. After the review, the refs ruled it incomplete. Perry instantly -- and I mean instantly -- said that was the correct ruling. Drive stopped, the Lions kicked their 5th FG to go up 22-13.

--In the next drive, the Lions sacked Aaron Rodgers on 3rd down (actually, Rodgers gave himself up without a fight) to force a punt, but an illegal hands-to-the-face penalty (the first of two) saved the Packers chances. This was the play:
It actually appears to have been the Packers O-lineman with the illegal hands to the face, not the other way around.

--Continuing the drive, the Packers scored on a 35-yard TD pass. Or did they? It looked as if the Packers WR was down on the 1-yard line. Play never seemed to be review, despite being a scoring play.
--On the ensuing Lions drive, a deep Stafford pass to Marvin Jones was incomplete. But there appeared to be clear defensive pass interference on the play as the Packers DB basically clothes-lined Jones. No flag. You might ask why didn't the Lions challenge? I know I did. But given that only one -- count 'em, one -- challenged PI call has been changed this season since the new rule was instituted, and given how the refs were favoring GB, not challenging to save the time out seemed prudent. Without the PI call, the Lions went from a possible 1st down deep in GB territory to punting.

--As the Packers drove to certain game-winning FG attempt, the second of the two "what are they thinking?" illegal hands to the face penalty occurred.

And that was that. Packers win. On a field goal as time expired. Made by a kicker, Mason Crosby, who's wife is suffering from cancer which ESPN instantly made a story. I bring it up because all game long, ESPN was talking about Lions QB Matthew Stafford's wife who was at the game having undergone brain surgery earlier in the year due to a cancerous growth. All of this while the NFL celebrates its "Cancer Awareness" month.

After the game, Aaron Rodgers literally said he didn't think the Packers won the game until the game was over. Rodgers knew it was a gift win, and couldn't really celebrate it. Meanwhile, Twitter exploded:
But perhaps the best comment came from none other than Cowboys owner Jerry Jones who was quoted as saying:
And that sums it up. As long as fans are talking about the NFL, all is well.

I mean, there's a lot of fake outrage among pundits over this game and its outcome, but a week from now, none of 'em will really care. The NFL goes on. Games keep being played. New "outrages" occur. More for them to talk about.

But fans? Fans should use what happened in this clearly fixed game and what Jerry Jones said about it as ammunition against the league. Because if you really do love football, this sort of behavior cannot be allowed to stand as is.

As for my readers, you should really just be getting a kick out of all of this. You know it's manipulated. You know it's just entertainment. And to see people losing their minds over it is all part of the show.
WEEK 5

So the week started off with this:
Well, it actually started with the Rams losing to the Seahawks by a point which might just signify the end of the Rams' successful run (until they move into their multi-billion dollar stadium next season (which they have to share with the Chargers for some unfathomable reason). But try and read between the lines in what Jerry Jones is saying in that video. As I mention in my tweet, the Cowboys success coincided with Jones bringing in FOX Sports to "change the way sports is consumed in America." The money Jones brought to his fellow owners with the FOX mega-deal might've just granted him an extra Super Bowl title (or two).

In the games themselves this week, we had more inconsistent consistency coming from the NFL's finest. Such as these two "roughing the passers" fouls:
Sure, technically these could be considered "roughing the passer" by the written letter of the NFL's law, and by the respective referee's view, these indeed were 15-yard penalties. Yet, also this week, Steelers QB Mason Rudolph was knocked cold by helmet-to-helmet hit (I won't show it here, but you can find it easily) which -- at first -- wasn't flagged. The flag, when it was finally thrown, came out very late given the play's result. 

The NFL is supposed to be protecting its players. It's supposed to be eliminating such helmet-to-helmet hits. And maybe because it has become such a point of emphasis throughout the sport, but it feels like these hits are occurring more often. It feels like obvious concussions are on the rise, and even significant injuries are getting worse. The numbers may not prove this to be true, but I've seen some ugly, ugly injuries already this season. Starting QBs are dropping like flies. No one appears immune. And I'm certain, sooner or later (hopefully, much, much later), a player is going to get killed out on the field.  I don't want to see it -- no one does -- but what's this league going to do or say when it happens? That it's always been concerned about player safety? Look at the officiating, and tell me that these "clearly defined rules" the league's officials are supposed to be enforcing are being consistently enforced. Because if players can't determine what they can and cannot do (and, to a degree, should be able to do), it's going to significantly endanger players. Not just their knees or shoulders or brains, but their very lives.

It's no surprise that the league's officiating is somewhat schizophrenic when the results of many of the games are equally as off-kilter. The Patriots are unbeaten (of course, they've yet to play a team anyone would call "good") and the 49ers are unbeaten. The 49ers? Yes. The 49ers. But are either of these teams really that good? Is any team in the NFL really feel like a contender this season? They all seem to have obvious weakness that a seemingly intelligent coach could exploit. Of course, this is the sort of parity the NFL has always sought so that the "any given Sunday" mantra can rule. No game can then be a true upset because every team is seemly equal (the Redskins excluded).

The one attempted fix that seemed to fall flat this weekend was in the Colts v Chiefs game. As Al and Cris slobbered over the new "Chosen One" in Patrick Mahomes, the Colts were taking it to the home squad and changing the narrative -- most likely against the NFL's and NBC's wishes. Mahomes ankle injury didn't help the cause, but that didn't prevent the refs from making moronic calls such as this "offensive pass interference" which always went against the Colts in an attempt to keep Mahomes and Co. in the game:
But try as they might, a gimpy Mahomes combined with the line play of the Colts gave the visitors a well-deserved 19-13 win. Have no fear though, NFL fans, Mahomes can already punch his ticket to the playoffs because who else can the NFL promote right now in the AFC not named Brady? Baker Mayfield? Joe Flacco? Jacoby Brissett? Yeah, the Chiefs don't have anything to worry about...as long as Mahomes doesn't get added to that injury list.
WEEK 4

So helmet-to-helmet hits, huh? I thought the NFL was going to come down on the players/offenders that participated in such reckless attacks on their fellow athletes. In the case of repeat offender Raiders LB Vontaze Burfict, the NFL did just that, suspending Burfict for the rest of the 2019 season for this hit:
I have no problem with this. Plus, it didn't help Burfict's case when he left the field afterwards smiling and blowing kisses to the fans.

But in two other games, similar nasty helmet-to-helmet hits took place:
As the tweet above mentioned, in the h2h hit on Rams DB Marcus Peters, no penalty was assessed on the play. In the case of the hit that knocked Bills QB Josh Allen out of the game and into concussion protocol, Patriots head coach Bill Belichick claimed that was the way the team coached players to tackle (I guess by not using your arms to wrap a player up?). And even Tom Brady weighed in to say running QBs need to be careful. You can reach your own conclusions on the league's double-standards.

As for the games themselves, Vegas certainly won big. You know who else won big? Backup QBs. No Drew Brees, no Big Ben, no Nick Foles, no Eli Manning, no Cam Newton and even no Mitch Trubisky? No problem. All these teams lacking their No. 1 QBs won, and some teams, like Carolina and New Orleans have won every game despite lacking their supposed leader on offense. Makes you wonder, no?

Perhaps the biggest ref-aided win of the week though came in the Chiefs v. Lions game which Kansas City won 34-30. The refs were clearly not on the Lions side in this one, and it's no wonder as the newly anointed savior of the NFL Patrick Mahomes plays for the Chiefs. The Lions were robbed out of a TD thanks to instant replay, and a fumble by RB Kerryon Johnson at the 1-yard line in the midst of a major pile up was returned 99 yards for a Chiefs TD. Now, in 99.99% of NFL games, Johnson would've been ruled down and the play blown dead long before the ball was picked up and returned by the Chiefs. But because this was the same crew that completely botched the (non) fumble in the Saints v. Rams game two weeks earlier, the refs kept their whistles in their pockets despite even the players looking as if this play was long dead before the TD return:
Consistency, thy name is NFL officiating.
WEEK 3

Aren't all football players coached from pee-wee football on up to play until you hear the whistle? Someone needed to remind the Eagles' offensive line about that during their loss to the Lions this week.
Speaking of effort, how did the NFL's refs do this week? Hmmm...
Looking good, fellas.

But it's not a easy job. Not just because of the speed of the game, but because of the instructions. Instructions? Yes. The NFL instructs its officials how to do their job (which is something disgraced NBA referee Tim Donaghy claimed the league used to do). 

One would think the only instruction should be, "Enforce the rules." You would think so, but the problem for the NFL appeared to be that its officials were doing that too well. In fact, there were complaints that referees were calling holding too often. Not calling the penalty incorrectly, but just doing it, I don't know, more than they should?

One conference call later (and after a pair of Tom Brady tweets during Thursday Night Football), and immediately the number of holding calls in games dropped. I guess the rules are the rules unless enforcing said rules affects the watch-ability of the game in which case then the rules don't need to be enforced, but still they should be subjectively enforced if play calls for it. Makes sense, right? I mean, the NFL is all about integrity you know.

This is why every game can be called into question because if the rules are only sometimes the rules, when and where they get enforced -- especially when it affects scoring plays and ultimately the outcome of a game -- makes it easy to ask, "Why now?" If a penalty was not called before, or if it was before and not now, why? Why do the rules seemingly shift? Does the rule book matter? And my answer is: no, the rules don't matter because legally the NFL is under no obligation to have its games follow the league's own rules. If you approach the NFL from this perspective, everything about the game makes more sense.

I suppose, then, I should mention a game or two played this week. The most interesting result was in a relatively meaningless -- and it's only Week 3 -- game: the Giants v. the Buccaneers. The Giants, led by rookie QB Daniel Jones who replaced Eli Manning as the starter, staged an 18-point comeback to win 32-31. This is by far the biggest NFL news in the city of New York, and likely will remain such for the rest of the season. Yet, the Giants victory almost didn't happen as the Bucs had a shot at a game-winning FG as time expired. The Bucs kicker Matt Gay missed it -- but only after his head coach Bruce Arians instructed his offense to take a delay of game penalty which pushed them back five yards, making the kick more difficult for his own kicker.

Elsewhere, the hype bandwagon has hitched itself to the 3-0 Cowboys, Patriots, Packers, Rams, Chiefs and...Bills? Yes, the Bills. And even the Lions are undefeated at 2-0-1 after beating the Eagles (in a game the refs seemingly controlled). But the NFL needs this because half the league looks like utter trash: the Jets, Dolphins, Redskins, Cardinals, Broncos, Bengals and Roethlisberger-less Steelers all appear in race for the #1 overall draft pick. You somehow have to make drama out of this mess, so it's myth-building time. As this season progresses, will see whom the media favors. Whichever team(s) that ends up being, that's who's going places.
WEEK 2

Oy. It's only Week 2, and I'm already sounding like a broken record. How many games can "poor" officiating influence? I'm thinking the NFL should be nicknamed the "Coulda/Woulda/Shoulda" league as often times the game comes down to, "The refs coulda ruled the play this way, it woulda changed the flow of the game that way, and ultimately, this other team shoulda won."

I understand the speed of the game can be mesmerizing. Huge bodies flying all around the field, sometimes just inches away from the officials tasked with monitoring the play could easily lead to improper rulings. But the NFL can fix this. They could very easily add a referee (or two) high above the field to help officiate the games. They could allow all penalties to be reviewed. They could do something, anything more than what currently takes place if they want to truly have a shred of integrity within their games.

Instead, you see this right in front of your face on Thursday Night Football (and I apologize ahead of time for all the tweets included here but its the best way to provide video of the plays I'm discussing):
This play wasn't reviewed. The refs didn't even measure the spot. The football was just placed -- poorly -- and away we went.

Elsewhere, the Vikings had to play both the Packers and the referees in Green Bay, ultimately losing 21-16. Part of the reason the Vikings lost was due to this play, which when you saw it live, was clearly a TD, not offensive pass interference (which, because the NFL now allows PI to be reviewable -- about the only penalty which is reviewable -- it can be looked at on scoring plays and turnovers, apparently), and when the officials reviewed the play and told the fans what happened, the refs never actually named Vikings RB Dalvin Cook as the guilty party, so everyone was left to wonder.
Did this one play cost the Vikings the game? Not exactly. But had the TD stood, and the rest of the game played out as it did in the second half, the score would've been 21-21 (or 21-20 if you want to keep the missed PAT involved) when Cousins made an incredibly foolish throw which turned into a INT with under five minutes to play. Methinks Cousins wouldn't have made that throw in that 21-20 situation when a FG would've put the Vikings in the lead. Instead, down by five without the overturned TD, Cousins threw the game away knowing they needed a TD in that situation.

Then, in the rematch of the controversial 2018 NFC Championship Game played between the Saints and the Rams, the refs again managed to do the Rams a favor when they decided to blow a quick whistle and kill this TD return by the Saints.
Despite the fact that NFL officials have been instructed not to blow close plays like this dead, and to instead figure it out later in replay, they didn't listen (and notice, too, that none of the players seen in the replay reacted as if the whistle had stopped play). It's almost comical that this play, after review, was indeed ruled a fumble and the Saints awarded the ball -- just not the six points that they should have had. Would it have mattered in the 27-9 loss since Drew Brees was injured? Who's to say? Momentum is a funny thing.

Elsewhere, the play on the left was not flagged as roughing the passer or a helmet-to-helmet hit as it clearly should have been, but the play on the left was indeed ruled roughing the passer.
Consistent, no? Oh yeah, the play ruled a penalty saved the Bears skins and helped boost them to the late, come-from-behind 16-14 win.

Other games, perhaps every game with the exception of the Patriots pummeling the already in tank-mode Dolphins, saw this sort of inconsistent officiating coupled with penalties that altered the outcome of games (perhaps no more than in the Chargers v Lions game in which repeated penalties killed the Chargers in their 13-10 loss in Detroit).

As if this isn't enough to make fans shake their heads, the kicker comes from Texans DE JJ Watt. In this article, Watt claims that the ref in his Texans v Jaguars game literally told him, "I saw him [the Jaguars O-lineman] hold you, but I didn't throw the flag."

Coulda, woulda, shoulda.
WEEK 1

Before we get into all the action from this week, let's start off the regular season by examining what former NFL wide-receiver-turned-broadcaster Cris Carter had to say about the reality of the NFL (thanks to Rodney for the tip):
Um, what was that, Cris? "We don't tell the public the truth, and this has help lead the NFL to being the most popular sport in the USA." What, exactly, has the league's coaches and organizations covered up? Cris leaves that up to interpretation, but I know that it's not that the NFL players are nice, happy and well-adjusted people.

As Carter's comments came on the heels of the Antonio Bryant situation, let's see what two other former NFL players had to say about it:
Hmmm. One, former Chiefs RB Larry Johnson, said Brown was acting the way he was to get out of Oakland because he was told to. The other, former Saints RB Reggie Bush, said if Brown ended up on the Patriots -- and he did -- the entire NFL is rigged.

I guess I can wrap up this website right here.

I suppose you The Fix Is In fans won't let me though. Sigh. Alright, let's do a quick review of Week 1: it sucked. That sum it up for you? No? Well, what game was worth watching? Thursday night's Packers v. Bears 10-3 slop-fest? The Sunday night Steelers v. Patriots snoozer? The Ravens thrashing of the Dolphins as they tank the season away? Ok, ok, the (first) Monday Night game between the Texans and Saints was entertaining, but go figure, it had (at least) one serious officiating gaffe (the official's clock management at the end of the first half, in case you cared to know that, which likely cost the Saints 3 points).

But the officiating doesn't really matter. I mean, I know that the Browns and the Jaguars were ridiculously penalized in their respective losses against the Titans and Chiefs. But the last of the four (!) lawsuits brought by Saints fans against the NFL over the officiating of the 2018 NFC Championship Game -- you know, the game the Rams won to advance to the Super Bowl thanks to the egregious non-pass interference call -- was tossed by the Louisiana Supreme Court. The other three were federal suits and quickly died. But this fourth one, a state case, jumped through several hurdles without restraint. But when the Saints -- you know, the team "robbed" by the non-call -- joined the suit on the NFL's side, well, that spelled the end of that. And indeed, just before Week 1 kicked off, the LA Supreme Court officially killed it. Which means, just so we're all clear, the NFL can officiate its game any way they want to, and if the rules aren't followed, boo hoo. And if this is news to you (and it shouldn't be for regular readers of this site), please check out this page which spells everything out for fans of all sports, not just the NFL.
PRESEASON

Here we go again. I said last year might be my final year covering the NFL. Well, I'm back, and ready to give 'er another go. Couple of things before we get into the nitty gritty.

First off, I always get asked, "Why, if this is all fixed, are the Patriots the chosen ones?" The answer, I believe, is spelled out pretty well in this Wall Street Journal article (if the link goes belly up, then the short answer is: power. Owner Robert Kraft wields a great deal of power in the league, and is rewarded for it).

Second, ESPN supposedly ran an in-depth simulation of the 2019 season. Their conclusion? The Saints will beat the Chargers in Super Bowl LIV. Myself, if I gotta make a prediction --  and I don't, but what the hell, every one else does -- I'm going with the Chicago Bears to win it all. Why? Because this is the NFL's 100th season -- trust me, you'll be reminded of it often --  and the Bears were one of the league's original teams. Their founding owner George Halas literally started the NFL (and helped protect it in its early years), and his daughter still owns the franchise. It'd be a nice piece of symmetry to have it all come back around to the Bears. As to whom they'd face in Super Bowl LIV, I dunno. There are no real legacy teams in the AFC because most of them came from the old AFL which started in the 1960s. So, I'll go with either the Kansas City Chiefs or the Houston Texans. Both have young, dynamic QBs whom the NFL can continue hype, and it'd make a good defense v. offense battle. My ultimate pick for the AFC is whichever QB can remain healthy for the entire season (and if neither gets injured, I'll go with KC).

Lastly, because I have a life and other worries outside the NFL, if you see something of interest -- an article, a tweet or just an observation -- please send it my way. I can't do this alone. Your help is always appreciated.
Share by: