Can everyone calm down? I'm sure Goodell will address this tomorrow when he's available to the media as he always is. Let's be cool about this.
2015 Colts: Karma Chameleon
- Thread starter Dr. Gonzo
- Start date
I know a good penalty for Indianapolis in response to lying about Andrew Luck and thus affecting the integrity of the game. I'm thinking 1 million dollar fine, a loss of a 1st and a 4th rounder and a 4 game ban of Andrew Luck. I'm sure Luck was generally aware of the injury report manipulation
Does anyone have a Kravitz interpreter handy?soxhop411 said:
If Luck *does* have rib fracture(s) and it's not included in the report, then the report is misleading. What am I missing?
djbayko said:
The injury report is under-inflated but any variance can be explained by the Ideal Hot Air Law. It's science, really.
I don't really understand what everyone is up in arms about, as much as I hate the Colts. If Luck is a full participant in practice and 100% to play then he doesn't need to be on the injury report
Considering the true purpose of the injury reports, anyone who thumbs their nose at it has my support. Except the colts. Fuck them.
From PFT post referring the rule book:
"All players with significant or noteworthy injuries must be listed on the report, even if the player takes all the reps in practice, and even if the team is certain that he will play in the upcoming game," the leagues policy regarding injury reports states. "This is especially true of key players and those players whose injuries have been covered extensively by the media. This policy is of paramount importance in maintaining the integrity of the game."
Edit: quotation and citation
"All players with significant or noteworthy injuries must be listed on the report, even if the player takes all the reps in practice, and even if the team is certain that he will play in the upcoming game," the leagues policy regarding injury reports states. "This is especially true of key players and those players whose injuries have been covered extensively by the media. This policy is of paramount importance in maintaining the integrity of the game."
Edit: quotation and citation
I just mean they love their made up phrase that the general public
never gave a shit about pre DFG
never gave a shit about pre DFG
Getting off topic for a minute…but can someone enlighten me as to why an injury report is required – much less "paramount to maintaining the integrity of the game"? Why are teams required at all to disclose injuries? Or is this like football PSI being what it is pretty much because "It's always been that way and, truth be told, no one can even remember why they decided on 11.5-12.5 in the first place"?Mugsy's Walk-Off Bunt said:
Or is it simply that disclosing injuries is paramount to maintaining the integrity of the fantasy football game?
Shit. I didn't realized the integrity of the game was at risk. Well, in that case, the stakes have been raised. If we consider the Colts first time offenders, then we're talking SpyGate as the precedent. A first round draft pick and $1 million seems about right.
Here's the NFL injury report policy: http://uaasnfl.blob.core.windows.net/live/1818/2015-injury-report-policy.pdf
Quotation above is accurate, though I agree it reads like satire.
Quotation above is accurate, though I agree it reads like satire.
I loved Curran's article, with the quote from Grigson's email to the league in January about upholding the integrity of the game. What goes around comes around bitch
The injury report "integrity" crap is really ridiculous in light of Bountygate. The league is so concerned about player safety that the integrity of the game is compromised if we aren't telling everyone where to target.
Yes, Aaron, by all means bitch out your receivers right after you throw a lazy screen pass into the turf.
Edit: Turns out I was an idiot (at least) twice last night. Wrong thread, sorry.
Edit: Turns out I was an idiot (at least) twice last night. Wrong thread, sorry.
mwonow said:
T.Y. Hilton texted Luck, "Yo, I'm fixing you some ribs." Case closed. Goodbye draft picks.
Troy Vincent, "We did not consider soul food, no."
soxhop411 said:
I'll frankly be surprised if they even fine them. Of course, in reality, this is no big deal at all and I'd be livid if the NFL hit my team with anything significant for a penalty.
However, given all we've heard about the integrity of the game, and how any violation of the rules is an attempt to gain a competitive advantage, blah blah blah, I want the hammer laid down on the Colts.
Plus, because....it's the Colts.
I think the rule is stupid, and has nothing to do with the integrity of the game. Why does anyone need to know who will or won't play? If the concern is teams forcing seriously injured players to play, they could be required to report to the league without the information being published.
That said, because the rule exists, there is a conceivable advantage gained by hiding injuries and requiring the opponent to game plan for multiple contingencies.
I'd like the league to explain, why, other than gambling and fantasy, this rule exists.
That said, because the rule exists, there is a conceivable advantage gained by hiding injuries and requiring the opponent to game plan for multiple contingencies.
I'd like the league to explain, why, other than gambling and fantasy, this rule exists.
MarcSullivaFan said:
If they do explain this (which they won't), I want them to explain the psi rule and why that exists, when they allow teams to prepare the balls any way they want according to their QB's preference. They won't do THAT either, of course.
They have their rules, and, as the rulebook states, this rule violates the "integrity of the game", and whenever a team violates the integrity of the game, the NFL now must levy HUGE punishments, fines, and take away draft picks.
That's the precedent they set with the Patriots.
I think it's funny that people complain about Belichick breaking the rules because he always lists Brady on the injury report when the actual violation is for not listing an injured player.
Also, there is some precedent to this rules violation:
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8555976/baltimore-ravens-fined-20k-not-listing-ed-reed-injury
Also, there is some precedent to this rules violation:
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8555976/baltimore-ravens-fined-20k-not-listing-ed-reed-injury
djbayko said:
No draft pick or fine. The ignominy that comes with having to put an asterisk on their "2015 Wild Card Weekend Participant" banner will be punishment enough.
Weren't there complaints at one point that Belichick wasn't listing guys like he should, and then we had that exercise where Belichick listed every little bump and bruise that people started complaining about him putting too many people on there?
edmunddantes said:
There was a lot of talk about this, but I am pretty sure the reality was guys like Brady kept getting listed since it was mandated by the league for missing certain practice sessions.
Thinking more about this, I can see a legit reason why the NFL wants this information to be public. If there is no public disclosure, injury information becomes very valuable to gamblers, and the likelihood of financial entanglements between team employees and/or league employees with access to the information and bookies, sharps, etc increases. Understanable that the league would be concerned about that issue.
Given that the whole reason they pursued DFG was "integrity of the game", and given that the rulebook literally uses the phrase "integrity of the game" when talking about the injury report, the league has seemingly been backed into a bit of a corner here. They must pursue and punish all instances of violations of integrity of the game in an equal manner. I am sure the media and fanbases and owners won't care so nothing will come of this, though.
All that being said, and sorry to bring DFG into this, but if the league does NOT punish the Colts for this "integrity of the game" issue, can that at all be used in the next round of the case in terms of bias / unequal treatment?
All that being said, and sorry to bring DFG into this, but if the league does NOT punish the Colts for this "integrity of the game" issue, can that at all be used in the next round of the case in terms of bias / unequal treatment?
This has nothing to do with player conduct, and it's too late for any new facts in the Brady case.
tims4wins said:
One of the arguments the NFL has been using is that basically Goodell has the power to do whatever he wants. He's under no obligation to impose a similarly stiff penalty against the Colts just because he did so against the Patriots. It's all arbitrary. We all know it's arbitrary. It's whatever the hell Goodell feels like at any given time.
If this was a sensible, logical world, there would be this wonderful thing called "consistency". But alas......
Exactly.MarcSullivaFan said:
And with regard to a comment about Vegas upthread, the NFL never has and never will get a dime from Vegas. That probably explains the NFL's dalliance with fantasy, which is a form of gambling. But the NFL relies on Vegas as a canary in the coal mine on game integrity.
MarcSullivaFan said:
Yes, but it's an unclear path to that affecting the game competition being played on the field, however.
dcmissle said:
Of course it's indirect, but the engine driving the interest/revenue that has made the NFL the king of the hill is the betting interest. So the bulk of NFL $ has come from Vegas historically.
If one team produces an accurate report, and the other does not, it could give one an advantage in game planning. I agree it's probably not that big of a deal in terms of on the field competition.Harry Hooper said:
Harry Hooper said:
The path is actually pretty clear.
Let's say that in our parallel universe where injuries are not required to be reported, someone on a coaching staff is providing information about injuries to gamblers. Do you think this person is doing it as an act of charity? Or because they are getting paid for their information? (Answer: they are getting paid.)
During the course of each season, every player is dinged up. Just the nature of the game. There are times when players will want to take a risk with their health to play and the coaches have to step in and prevent players from doing harm to themselves for the long-term good of the team. But what if the motivation of the one coach is not to protect the long-term interests of the team? What it he knows that if he can persuade other coaches or a key player that no matter how that player feels, he needs to sit out this next game because it's more important to get him back to good health than playing? And what if that information finds it's way to gamblers before the public knows about it?
In this scenario, the players that take the field are giving it their all, but it's not accurate to say that the competition is unchanged. And this is just one of any number of scenarios I can think of where an insider (like a position coach, who is important but not making tons of money) can compromise the on-field competition without needing to enroll players in his scheme.
Tyrone Biggums said:
djbayko said:
It shows just how outlandish the NFL is when both of these facetious comments are completely correct.
So basically if we didn't have injury reports football coaches would be taking mass payoffs from bookies? Why is football different than any other sport? And how is failing to disclose an injury any different than the thousands of other ways coaches can manipulate the outcome of a game?
Even if these rules have been around for years, I fail to see how injury reports have any more to do with "the integrity of the game" of football today than do laws against bribery.
As I said upthread, they do, however, have everything to do with the game of fantasy football. And if that's the case the League should just admit it.
Even if these rules have been around for years, I fail to see how injury reports have any more to do with "the integrity of the game" of football today than do laws against bribery.
As I said upthread, they do, however, have everything to do with the game of fantasy football. And if that's the case the League should just admit it.
There's way too much analysis here. This is about integrity, it's right there in the damned rule! Integrity. As we've seen from the Patriots, lying about injuries is a Gateway Cheat, and who the hell knows what's coming next from the Colts. I'm worried about the league and fair play, and the values we're teaching our children. Posters like MarkSulliCHEAT can do their best to marginalize the problem we're all facing, but the longer we put up with this kind of behaviour as a football society the closer we all become to 1940s Germany. The ostriche defense works no longer, this is the information age and the closer we come to Perestroika, the further we are from salvation.
Van Everyman said:
That's a pretty huge strawman you are building.
What people have pointed out is that non-public injury information is extremely valuable to gamblers. Why would the NFL want to create a system that encourages gamblers to seek out that information from teams?
You can believe whatever you want, but the requirement to report injuries predates fantasy football.
I wonder who Glazer's source was? Just tossing darts, but maybe it was Michael Lombardi. Former front office guy who's also worked in the media. He's appeared on podcasts with Glazer as a co-guest. Hmm.
This is much ado about nothing, but Kravitz is taking the same stance he took over Deflategate: http://www.wthr.com/story/30410342/kravitz-colts-find-themselves-in-a-fine-mess-over-lucks-injury-situation
Plus points for consistency, minus points for being a sanctimonious "knight of the keyboard."
ARS, I'm just trying to point out that while insider injury information may be valuable, so is a bunch of other information coaches and teams regularly have that they could sell to the highest bidder if they were so inclined. It's particularly valuable to fantasy football however, as we learned just a few weeks ago.
I still don't get why this would be a big issue in football, but not so much in all the other major sports. Then again, I don't really know the first thing about sports betting so maybe it is bigger than I imagine.
Three options as I see it:
1) League Office: "See? We treat every team with the same righteous indignation we treat the Patriots!"
2) Pats/Lombardi-type: "Psst, Chandler Jones actually heard Luck's ribs shatter, yet it seems odd that nothing is on the injury report."
3) League Office: "This is actually about the integrity of the game! No seriously!"
I still don't get why this would be a big issue in football, but not so much in all the other major sports. Then again, I don't really know the first thing about sports betting so maybe it is bigger than I imagine.
SO YOU'RE TELLING ME DRAFT PICKS ARE ON THE TABLE?Super Nomario said:
CoffeeNerdness said:
Three options as I see it:
1) League Office: "See? We treat every team with the same righteous indignation we treat the Patriots!"
2) Pats/Lombardi-type: "Psst, Chandler Jones actually heard Luck's ribs shatter, yet it seems odd that nothing is on the injury report."
3) League Office: "This is actually about the integrity of the game! No seriously!"