1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
  2. Announcement is LIVE: Read the Forum Post

CM3 is NFL sack leader...for now.

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by Oshkoshpackfan, Oct 11, 2012.

  1. Oshkoshpackfan

    Oshkoshpackfan YUT !!!

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2012
    Messages:
    3,286
    Ratings:
    +1,453
  2. packerfan4ever

    packerfan4ever Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2005
    Messages:
    1,065
    Ratings:
    +53
    I like Watt but glad the Claymaker is a head for right now I hope he gets more Sunday night.:)
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. Oshkoshpackfan

    Oshkoshpackfan YUT !!!

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2012
    Messages:
    3,286
    Ratings:
    +1,453
    If the NFL can go back and change stats by some type of review panel, why the FU*K can't they go back and award us the win over seattle? The ref that made the bad call even admitted it was a bad call, all the analist say it was as well......official review panel or whatever they are should do that, us= win, seaCawks = loss....change the STATS...
     
    • Agree Agree x 6
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  4. rodell330

    rodell330 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,991
    Ratings:
    +1,013
    i love CM3 but i'm leaning towards Watt to have more sacks come Sunday. Hopefully not tho. The o-line needs to take it personal that people call them the weak link on the offense.
     
  5. rodell330

    rodell330 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,991
    Ratings:
    +1,013

    I agree!
     
  6. Valhalla Express

    Valhalla Express SKOL VIKINGS!

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    142
    Ratings:
    +65
    It was a designed running play. Same thing happened to NYG's Strahan, PHI's Reggie White and several others. YAC has been added and subtracted from receivers, YFC added and subtracted from running backs, etc... it's the way it is. Stats are adjusted all the time after a panel review. Game outcomes though are not. I may be a Vikings fan, but I *KNOW* offensive pass interference when I see it. Seattle had a B.S. call go their way. Sucks that it happened to your Packers. I wish it had happened to the Cowboys instead... God, I hate the Cowboys.

    ~Val
     
  7. Oshkoshpackfan

    Oshkoshpackfan YUT !!!

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2012
    Messages:
    3,286
    Ratings:
    +1,453
    I know stats get adjusted as the season goes along, we all know that. All I am saying is that there is a first time for everything.....why not?
     
  8. ThxJackVainisi

    ThxJackVainisi Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    4,122
    Ratings:
    +3,190
    Here's a piece of advice from an old-timer: Whenever contemplating the motivation behind human behavior and interactions the first line of inquiry should be, "follow the money". Money is not always the answer but it is frequently enough that it should be invested and dismissed before proceeding. To wit: Why doesn't the NFL go back and award the Packers that game? Because it would have caused havoc in Los Vegas and around the globe with sports-betting establishments. Sad but true: Whether it’s the regular season, playoffs, or even the Super Bowl when the final whistle blows and the final replay is reviewed and decided there has to be certainty about the final score, not only to determine the winner but also so stats like point spread are decided. Unfortunately, certainty is more important than accuracy. And few bettors have money on the over/under on sacks per players per games.
     
  9. Oshkoshpackfan

    Oshkoshpackfan YUT !!!

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2012
    Messages:
    3,286
    Ratings:
    +1,453
    Sports betting is just that, a bet, a gamble, slight of chance. They take HUGE hits each week on every single sport out there. If not just by a win or a loss, but by the spread....the lines get blown away each and every week and people win big and lose big, its the way it goes. You can't get your money back if you've lost and you wont get any more if you won. If you have the money to place the bet, you know the chances that your money wont be coming back to you. So, if the cleveland browns had kept that 14-0 lead they put up on the giants last week and even added to it and won the game, lets say....35-21....they would have not only upset the normal betting house odds and blew away the spread, they would have made some folks very rich. I doubt to many people would have lost that much money on that game.....lol...

    My main point was: A win is a stat, a lose is a stat. If stats can be changed for a sack or YAC, or fumbles etc.... it should be considered.
     
  10. ivo610

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    16,244
    Ratings:
    +4,116
    I like watt better as a person but am more inclined to cheer for a packer than a Texan
     
  11. ThxJackVainisi

    ThxJackVainisi Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    4,122
    Ratings:
    +3,190
    Millions upon millions of dollars are bet each week on NFL games to win or lose. That is not the case with sacks or YAC or fumbles, etc. While wins/losses is a stat, it along with point spreads are the focus of gamblers.
     
  12. Oshkoshpackfan

    Oshkoshpackfan YUT !!!

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2012
    Messages:
    3,286
    Ratings:
    +1,453
    ^ I UNDERSTAND THAT !!! What would happen if they did change it?.... People get pissed about money...yup, those who lost it......we got pissed we got ripped on the game.... money lost/money won is already done with. I could give two sh!ts less about people money, you are an idiot addict to bet on a sports game anyways. I didn't lose any cash because I'm not dumb enough to bet away my hard earned cash.....so who gives a crap about the dumb junkies that lost? Not me, I just want our win were it belongs.

    This season will forever have an asterics next to it.
     
  13. jaybadger82

    jaybadger82 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2012
    Messages:
    810
    Ratings:
    +387
    Actually, there are numerous prop bets that are affected by such stat corrections.

    I understand the NFL's refusal to overturn the result of the Packers/Seahwawks game. It sets a bad precedent: you don't want every big mistake to become grounds for overturning the result. At some point, the need for finality wins out.

    Regardless, I found Oshkoshpackfan's comments both pointed and funny.

    As for the "Follow the Money" Vegas angle, I think this makes little sense from the standpoint that the NFL revenues have virtually nothing to do with sports betting. A reversal might lead to chaos for sportsbooks but the NFL can't be held liable for this. Nor will Vegas stop taking sports bets as a result of such a whopper of a reversal (which would cost them millions in bets that were already paid out). Sports betting is offered because there is such healthy demand for it; it's a relatively low revenue proposition for Vegas casinos (they finish remarkably close to even year in and year out). They're not doing it to make money, they're doing it to bring bodies into the casino.
     
  14. Alex

    Alex Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2012
    Messages:
    407
    Ratings:
    +213
  15. ThxJackVainisi

    ThxJackVainisi Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    4,122
    Ratings:
    +3,190
    They comprise no where near the amount of money bet on wins/losses.

    What you and Oshkoshpackfan don't appear to understand is betting on NFL games adds greatly to it's viewership, popularity and a decline in it would lead to fewer viewers, less interest and revenue for the league. The league has to pretend to hold sports betting at arms' length but it understands how important it is to its popularity.

    And for Oshkoshpackfan, it looks like this 'season will forever have an (hy)sterics next to it'. ;)
     
  16. jaybadger82

    jaybadger82 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2012
    Messages:
    810
    Ratings:
    +387
    Please spare me the condescending language about understanding and consider what's being said:

    Do people bet on games because the NFL is popular or is the NFL popular because people are betting on games?

    You seem to be arguing the latter and I don't think that conforms to the reality.

    The NFL's major revenue streams (i.e., tickets, merchandise, television contracts, endorsements/sponsorships) will not be threatened or diminished by a one-time disruption to the relatively small number of folks that placed money on the Green Bay/Seattle game. Those that lost as a result of the bad call would suddenly be holding a winning ticket while many that already collected their winnings on Seattle beating the spread have already received their boon.

    It's the casinos that get screwed by such a reversal from the NFL and they're not going to close their sportsbooks out of spite. People bet the sports they watch and that won't change as a result of a single game being reversed. The sportsbooks will modify their policies (e.g., winning tickets cannot be redeemed until 48 hours after a sporting event) and the betting will continue because gambling ranks alongside sex, drugs, and alcohol amongst the most addictive and popular vices known to man.

    Is the subset of fans that bet games responsible for the league's current popularity? -Perhaps they contribute to it. But I suspect that most gamblers bet the NFL because it's what they're watching.

    Regardless, the "follow the money" axiom doesn't really make sense where the decision to reverse the outcome would have no direct effect on the league's revenues or seriously hurt gambling by any stretch of the imagination.

    Sports gambling is the fly on the elephant, not the other way around. -Granted, a large fly, but a fly nonetheless. It isn't threatened when the elephant changes position and the elephant doesn't owe its massive size to the fly.

    The NFL wouldn't reverse this one because it didn't want to establish a precedent that was bound to be problematic down the road and because doing so would force the league to correct its replacement officials in a very public manner during collective bargaining negotiations with its regular referees.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  17. Raptorman

    Raptorman Vikings fan since 1966.

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Messages:
    2,221
    Ratings:
    +847
    Just want to point out that the last NFL sack leader that played on a winning Super Bowl team was in 1999. So maybe it's not a good thing to be the sack leader.
     
  18. ThxJackVainisi

    ThxJackVainisi Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    4,122
    Ratings:
    +3,190
    The issue isn't regarding one game - it's a policy of not reversing the decision who won a game after the game is over. And I never posted the NFL is popular because people bet on games. I posted betting on games adds to more viewers which lead to higher ratings which lead to higher revenues from TV deals. [quote="jaybadger82, post: 468804, member: 6211"]The NFL wouldn't reverse this one because it didn't want to establish a precedent that was bound to be problematic down the road and because doing so would force the league to correct its replacement officials in a very public manner during collective bargaining negotiations with its regular referees.[/quote]The NFL has never reversed the outcome of a game - this policy has been in place long before the replacement refs.

    The NFL is an entertainment business and the object of business is to make money. Protecting it's integrity, increasing its competitive balance, increasing interest and the number of viewers are all geared toward making money.
     
  19. DevilDon

    DevilDon Inclement Weather Fan

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2010
    Messages:
    1,392
    Ratings:
    +445
    The NFL has never reversed the outcome of a game - this policy has been in place long before the replacement refs.

    The NFL is an entertainment business and the object of business is to make money. Protecting it's integrity, increasing its competitive balance, increasing interest and the number of viewers are all geared toward making money. [/quote]
    Sorry for bolding your statement ThxJack but I wanted to emphasize that. If you start to reverse a game's final score you've completely ruined the integrity of the game as it's played. If you have to wait a day or two or a week for a final ruling you've just destroyed that sudden death overtime or an interception that is ruled simultaneous catch. It's opening a can of worms that would devastate the game.
    Nobody could celebrate until the final ruling comes down from the NFL and that is why I think that Nick Perry received a fine for a poor call and why the league makes a stand on backing up calls once a game is decided. It IS entertainment whether you like it or not and the show must go on.
    It's why magicians don't like to reveal their tricks, it takes the drama out of them. Bad calls are part of the game, let's hope we see a few next week, you know it will even out.
     
  20. Forget Favre

    Forget Favre Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Messages:
    7,834
    Ratings:
    +2,674
    Some folks on here are still not over that bad call and I don't blame them. And I 100% agree that if stats can be changed then so should the outcome of games even when it's over and the ref makes a mistake.
    We would be 3-2 and still in third place though.
    If that game somehow determines us not getting into the playoffs, then lets grab the torches and pitchforks and storm the refs house.
    Until then, let's see what happens.
     
  21. jaybadger82

    jaybadger82 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2012
    Messages:
    810
    Ratings:
    +387
    Yep. All of these policy considerations go to my original conclusions on the subject above: overturning the game sets a bad precedent. The situation with the refs at that time only made the choice more obvious.

    As a reminder, I didn't bring up the whole "follow the money" / gambling angle:
    I don't think causing havoc in Vegas played much of a role in the NFL's calculations on the matter, which is why I criticized the suggestion. You now seem to be backing off this. It's been fun going in circles with you...
     
  22. ThxJackVainisi

    ThxJackVainisi Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    4,122
    Ratings:
    +3,190
    Nice try but we don’t agree. You’re ignoring the major motivation of every business enterprise.
     
  23. Raptorman

    Raptorman Vikings fan since 1966.

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Messages:
    2,221
    Ratings:
    +847
    So here are the numbers. The NFL started tracking sacks in 1982. Since then there have been 3 sack leaders that have played in the Super Bowl. All 3 were on the winning team.

    10% of the time the sack leader plays in the Super Bowl.
    47% of the time,team the sack leaders team does not make it into the playoffs.

    From 1982 to 1997 the sack leaders team made it to the playoffs 75% of the time. (12 of 16)

    From 1988 to 2011 the sack leaders team made to the playoffs 29% of the time. (4 0f 14)

    I find it interesting that the sack leader made it to the playoffs more before 1998 than after.
     
  24. jaybadger82

    jaybadger82 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2012
    Messages:
    810
    Ratings:
    +387
    I'll edit my post.

    I don't think I'm ignoring the league's underlying profit motive at all. I just think the "follow the money" lecture and pointing to concerns over chaos in Vegas as the reason the NFL wouldn't go back and award the Packers that game is rather stupid where the league was clearly taking steps to preserve the integrity of its product (even though that meant denying an obvious flub by the officials). I don't think gambling or Vegas were significant factors in the NFL's calculations...
     
  25. ThxJackVainisi

    ThxJackVainisi Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    4,122
    Ratings:
    +3,190
    If the sole concern of the NFL was the integrity of it’s product it would correct a situation which the vast majority of its customers viewed as lacking integrity. And here’s a way to avoid reading my “lectures”: Ignore my posts. After all complaining about reading lectures while continuing to do so would be stupid.
     

Share This Page