• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About normal_gymnasium

  • Rank
    The Waterboy

Profile Information

  • Birthdate
  • Redskins Fan Since
  • Favorite Redskin
    John Riggins
  • Not a Skins Fan? Tell us YOUR team:
  • Location
    Spring Valley
  • Zip Code
  • Interests
    kelp farming
  • Occupation
    kelp farmer

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. normal_gymnasium

    Game Day Thread- Eli’s Stoopid Face at Redskins

    Better question: how many rock bottoms can one team have in 20 years?
  2. normal_gymnasium

    Game Day Thread- Eli’s Stoopid Face at Redskins

    I say quick kick on 1st down. They'll never see that coming.
  3. normal_gymnasium

    Game Day Thread- Eli’s Stoopid Face at Redskins

    I'm watching this game more out of reflex than any actual desire.
  4. normal_gymnasium

    Let's stop pretending that the NFL isn't fixed (Josh Norman holding call)

    After reading the post by Monk4thaHALL, and watching the video he embedded in the post, it seems more obvious than ever that there is influence by outside parties on the outcomes of games. When you stop and think about it, how could there not be? Whenever money is involved, people will ALWAYS resort to nefarious means to funnel the money in their direction. When the money is really big, the sharks get into a downright feeding frenzy. And the NFL is a 10 billion-dollar-a-year business. That doesn't include gambling, which is many billions more. Think about it. With literally tens of billions of dollars at stake, what are the chances that powerful, ambitious, competitive men are just sitting around going "Golly gee, I darn sure hope things go the way we want them to go"? In other words, which scenario seems more likely: a) Such men are sitting around doing nothing to influence games and leaving things to chance, or; b) That they have thought things through and come up with various solutions to influence games in their favor, while maintaining a veil of plausible deniability that the public can swallow? If you agree that scenario b is at least somewhat plausible, then why does it seem like some wild, laughable conspiracy theory to assume that the powers that be in the NFL and gambling circles have come up with some kind of systematic methodology to influence games?
  5. normal_gymnasium

    Let's stop pretending that the NFL isn't fixed (Josh Norman holding call)

    Why would it take such a massive level of coordination? It would take nothing more than referees understanding of what the NFL wanted from an internal organization standpoint. They want close games. They want sexy quarterbacks. All it would take would be a "nudge nudge wink wink" factor among referees. Example: Referee A calls defensive holding in a close game between 2 teams. One is a big market team with a marketable QB. Their opponent is a small market team with a boring offense and good defense with a game manager QB. Big market sexy QB team gets the benefit of the call. The referee crew that makes the call finds themselves officiating playoff games. The crew that doesn't make such calls is watching the playoffs on TV (and not getting paid, incidentally). How hard would it be for refs to figure out what's going on if this pattern was repeated over and over again over the course of years? How hard would it be for them to talk among themselves and "share notes", as it were? But even if – IF – there was some kind of direct 'front-office-to-referee fix' going on, the coordination would not be massive at all, nor would it be unsustainable. It would take no more than a meeting between Roger Goodell and a handful of referees. And I am NOT saying that this is occurring! Obviously I have no way of knowing what is, or is not, happening behind the NFL's closed doors. This is all theoretical. All I'm saying is that it wouldn't take much coordination at all.
  6. normal_gymnasium

    Let's stop pretending that the NFL isn't fixed (Josh Norman holding call)

    Oh good Lord just say it. Go too far, even. Give us an early Christmas present.
  7. A few years ago, I noticed a pattern. Illegal contact or defensive holding was very frequently called in very specific situations. Usually, it happened on third downs, when a team needed to be bailed out one way or the other. And more often than not, it happened late in games to give a team new life, usually to extend potential game winning drives. I would really like to see statistics on defensive back penalties as regards to when they occur, to confirm what my eyes and gut feelings already tell me. It's not just the Redskins either, in case this post is coming across like sour grapes from an overly-emotional fan after a loss. It has happened to plenty of teams. I watch a lot of football and I've noticed this happening on a good 20-25 occasions by my best estimation. On nearly every occasion, when the replay is shown, the "penalty" is either one of two things: It's something that happens on nearly every single play but mysteriously only gets called in the most crucial, game-influencing situations, or; As with the one called on Norman when the Redskins stopped the Texans on 3rd down, there simply is no penalty. There's nothing that occurs at all that even comes close to resembling a penalty. The announcers see the replay and say "Gee Jim, I don't know about that one" or something to that effect. Now, I can only theorize – if this theory has any merit at all – why this happens, or how the “fix” is decided upon, or how it’s implemented. As I try to come up with such an explanation, I admit that I sound like some idiot wearing a tinfoil hat who that believes the earth is flat or that crisis actors exist. My best explanation is that the league wants close, exciting games for ratings purposes, and the refs who “get it” know to call (and when to call) phantom illegal contact/defensive holding penalties to extend games. Perhaps in other cases, there are “preferred” teams, i.e. teams that are deemed to have a bigger excitement factor, specifically a more marketable quarterback, which the league can exploit to hype late-season games with playoff implications (to say nothing of the playoffs themselves). The refs who “get it” get the coveted playoff and Super Bowl assignments. This has been an inkling I’ve had for some time now. I know I’m not the only one. The phantom call on Norman has changed this from a strong inkling to a virtually certain belief. Anyone else think there is something to this? Or should I loosen the tinfoil hat a bit?
  8. normal_gymnasium

    Game Day Thread - Redskins at Schiltz Magic

    Hence the phrase "felt like". Perhaps too nuanced a concept for you.
  9. normal_gymnasium

    Game Day Thread - Redskins at Schiltz Magic

    Am I the only one who has felt like the Redskins lost in 4 of their 6 wins?
  10. Was just thinking that. It's like they're trying to recreate that long 64 yard TD run, and it's not going to happen. They should run quick blasts up the middle and get 2-3 yards to shorten 2nd & 3rd downs/
  11. The refs literally call a penalty on nearly every positive Redskins play. I know that beeotching about the refs is lame, but come on man. There have been 438 ball spins after catches this year. 437 of them have not resulted in a penalty. Every one of these holding calls has been questionable at best. And their have been things that would be good teaching examples of holding calls on the Falcons that jump off the screen which have not been called. Atlanta doesn't need this help. They are the better team, obviously. But this is out of hand.
  12. This game is a skid mark on the tighty whities of humanity.