ESPN Report. Disturbing Stats regarding penalties and Saints (1 Viewer)

[RJ in Lafayette]

Even before bountygate, Sean was not the league's favorite coach. There was some kind of an incident before or after the Super Bowl where Payton upset the league. And there was Payton's relationship with Mike Ornstein, which was both foolish and arrogant. Payton had a reputation for arrogance, and it was well-deserved. And then came the bounty allegations against the backdrop of an ongoing head-injury class action lawsuit, the NFL was looking for a sacrificial lamb to show it took head injuries seriously, and Payton and the Saints organization had burned too many bridges and had few friends at Park Avenue.

The league did put Payton on its competition committee. Perhaps the league wanted to compensate for the no-call. Perhaps the league recognized Payton's intelligence and judgment in football matters, and truly wanted his voice on the committee. Perhaps the league thought that membership on the committee would bring Payton more in line with league thinking--the old Lyndon Johnson tenet that it was better to have someone inside the tent urinating outside it rather than someone outside the tent urinating in it. Regardless of the league's motivations, service on the competition committee is a big deal.

That Payton abruptly resigned from the committee and then commented that he better not say why he was resigning suggests strongly that he was upset with what was happening on the committee or more likely with what was happening with the league. Regarding the latter, one could speculate that Payton was unhappy with how the league received measures recommended by the committee or that he was unhappy with what he perceived as officiating biased against his team, though one would think that the officials, if anything, would show bias towards a team coached by a member of the committee (I believe Tomlin also sits on it).

Gayle Benson is certainly not one of the league's strong owners. But she seems to be a very pleasant person and one who routinely supports what the league establishment wants to do. If anything, I would think she is well liked at Park Avenue--certainly better than Tom was--and her clout or lack thereof is not the reason that any officiating bias against the Saints has lingered.

The only way to end the perceived bias is to embarrass the league. The ESPN article is a start. When someone on a national TV pregame show says he is picking the Saints' opponent because it is well known that the officials, perhaps out of bias, give Saints' opponents the close calls, the officials will overcompensate in favor of the Saints. It is called working the refs, and on the margins, it can work.

 

[sfidc3]

Someone with clout needs to push the rumor that the league is taking advantage of Gayle because she's a woman...let the feminists catch wind and the NFL will silently course correct from the pressure

It's a nice thought but I think in reality? It would have zero effect on the NFL and how they do things....the only way to change/improve/restore some dignity and fairness to the game is for folks to boycott the games....interrupt the mighty revenue stream....I don't see that happening anytime soon....

 

[AARPSaint]

Even before bountygate, Sean was not the league's favorite coach. There was some kind of an incident before or after the Super Bowl where Payton upset the league. And there was Payton's relationship with Mike Ornstein, which was both foolish and arrogant. Payton had a reputation for arrogance, and it was well-deserved. And then came the bounty allegations against the backdrop of an ongoing head-injury class action lawsuit, the NFL was looking for a sacrificial lamb to show it took head injuries seriously, and Payton and the Saints organization had burned too many bridges and had few friends at Park Avenue.

The league did put Payton on its competition committee. Perhaps the league wanted to compensate for the no-call. Perhaps the league recognized Payton's intelligence and judgment in football matters, and truly wanted his voice on the committee. Perhaps the league thought that membership on the committee would bring Payton more in line with league thinking--the old Lyndon Johnson tenet that it was better to have someone inside the tent urinating outside it rather than someone outside the tent urinating in it. Regardless of the league's motivations, service on the competition committee is a big deal.

That Payton abruptly resigned from the committee and then commented that he better not say why he was resigning suggests strongly that he was upset with what was happening on the committee or more likely with what was happening with the league. Regarding the latter, one could speculate that Payton was unhappy with how the league received measures recommended by the committee or that he was unhappy with what he perceived as officiating biased against his team, though one would think that the officials, if anything, would show bias towards a team coached by a member of the committee (I believe Tomlin also sits on it).

Gayle Benson is certainly not one of the league's strong owners. But she seems to be a very pleasant person and one who routinely supports what the league establishment wants to do. If anything, I would think she is well liked at Park Avenue--certainly better than Tom was--and her clout or lack thereof is not the reason that any officiating bias against the Saints has lingered.

The only way to end the perceived bias is to embarrass the league. The ESPN article is a start. When someone on a national TV pregame show says he is picking the Saints' opponent because it is well known that the officials, perhaps out of bias, give Saints' opponents the close calls, the officials will overcompensate in favor of the Saints. It is called working the refs, and on the margins, it can work.

Agree with every word. I have expienced first hand how college administrators, for instance, will put gripers in positions that make it LOOK as though they are listening to dissenting voices. It must be a technique taught somewhere. The LBJ comment is exactly what I am talking about

 

[sfidc3]

Agree with every word. I have expienced first hand how college administrators, for instance, will put gripers in positions that make it LOOK as though they are listening to dissenting voices. It must be a technique taught somewhere. The LBJ comment is exactly what I am talking about

I've actually done this. As my son's soccer team manager I made the most obnoxious blow hard parent.....the parent police....his job was to make sure parents were behaving themselves at games....never had one problem with him and he was pretty darn good at it....

 

[milo.d.venus]

>>>>>>> Payton's relationship with Mike Ornstein <<<<<<<<<
Bingo!

Even before bountygate, Sean was not the league's favorite coach. There was some kind of an incident before or after the Super Bowl where Payton upset the league. And there was Payton's relationship with Mike Ornstein, which was both foolish and arrogant. Payton had a reputation for arrogance, and it was well-deserved. And then came the bounty allegations against the backdrop of an ongoing head-injury class action lawsuit, the NFL was looking for a sacrificial lamb to show it took head injuries seriously, and Payton and the Saints organization had burned too many bridges and had few friends at Park Avenue.

The league did put Payton on its competition committee. Perhaps the league wanted to compensate for the no-call. Perhaps the league recognized Payton's intelligence and judgment in football matters, and truly wanted his voice on the committee. Perhaps the league thought that membership on the committee would bring Payton more in line with league thinking--the old Lyndon Johnson tenet that it was better to have someone inside the tent urinating outside it rather than someone outside the tent urinating in it. Regardless of the league's motivations, service on the competition committee is a big deal.

That Payton abruptly resigned from the committee and then commented that he better not say why he was resigning suggests strongly that he was upset with what was happening on the committee or more likely with what was happening with the league. Regarding the latter, one could speculate that Payton was unhappy with how the league received measures recommended by the committee or that he was unhappy with what he perceived as officiating biased against his team, though one would think that the officials, if anything, would show bias towards a team coached by a member of the committee (I believe Tomlin also sits on it).

Gayle Benson is certainly not one of the league's strong owners. But she seems to be a very pleasant person and one who routinely supports what the league establishment wants to do. If anything, I would think she is well liked at Park Avenue--certainly better than Tom was--and her clout or lack thereof is not the reason that any officiating bias against the Saints has lingered.

The only way to end the perceived bias is to embarrass the league. The ESPN article is a start. When someone on a national TV pregame show says he is picking the Saints' opponent because it is well known that the officials, perhaps out of bias, give Saints' opponents the close calls, the officials will overcompensate in favor of the Saints. It is called working the refs, and on the margins, it can work.

 

[DaveXA]

The technical term they use for that is “bang-bang”

They are a bunch a treacherous snakes.

More like "bang.....bang".

 

[VPCajun]

...

Oh, and speaking of bad calls, no one so far on this thread has mentioned Galette being held in a chokehold on the last play of a game in NE vs. Brady, allowing Brady to complete a game winner.

I believe it was the same game where the Cheatin Refs picked up a flag for Offensive Holding by the Patricheats "because the defender played through the hold".

I'm almost 68 yrs old and have been watching games when the AFL was in existence, and I have NEVER heard of such a thing before! (Or since.)

 

[HoustonSaint68]

The only way to end the perceived bias is to embarrass the league. The ESPN article is a start. When someone on a national TV pregame show says he is picking the Saints' opponent because it is well known that the officials, perhaps out of bias, give Saints' opponents the close calls, the officials will overcompensate in favor of the Saints. It is called working the refs, and on the margins, it can work.

Speaking of which, have ANY of the talking heads picked up on the Triplett story? I saw two worthwhile retweets yesterday but otherwise am still avoiding football talk on tv as I’m still wallowing in the non-playoff blues.

 

[wwepatriot]

Another team i think that was screwed over by outside forces was 3-4 yrs ago with Jacksonville. Beating the Patriots and who was it that said the coach had to let the foot off the gas? Not exactly sure how that went. That is another odd game similar to our no call game, where you think to yourself “no way they going to let the Saints play in the sb”, same can be said for Jacksonville at that moment to.

I got post dating as far back as before the nfccg calling that to, where we going to get screwed over by something.

 

[Summed7]

False analogy.

This isn't a theoretically "objective" test that can be replicated over and over again largely unaffected by outside forces that have a variable effect on any individual test.

The whole point here is that outside forces ARE creating an anomalous result -- the feeling among more than a few referees that Sean Payton needs to be reminded who is in charge.

Just because there is a human element, does not in any way mean that it's a false analogy. You get in multiple car wrecks in a year, Taco Bell always seems to get your order wrong. Neither necessitates that there is a cabal trying to orchestrate bad things happening to you. I'm in no way trying to discount your theory, but what I said is still correct.

 

[Taurus]

Just because there is a human element, does not in any way mean that it's a false analogy. You get in multiple car wrecks in a year, Taco Bell always seems to get your order wrong. Neither necessitates that there is a cabal trying to orchestrate bad things happening to you. I'm in no way trying to discount your theory, but what I said is still correct.

If Taco Bell gets your order (and only your order) wrong year after year, location after location, you're quite justified in believing it's intentional. Whether the franchise managers gather in a back room or not.

 

[DJ1BigTymer]

This statistic is at best alarming. The article would have been stronger had ESPN consulted with a statistician to determine the odds of the Saints ranking so low for four consecutive years. My thoughts:

1. I generally do not believe in conspiracies, and I do not believe that a conspiracy--a concerted agreement among a high percentage of officials--is the reason for this statistical anomaly. Think of how many people would have to know and agree to such an unethical and illegal course of action. And think of how much the league--the collective value of the 32 franchises may be $120 billion--would be destroyed were such an agreement to be discussed, much less proven. And think of how many officials and others would have to be involved? No, I do not believe there is a conspiracy.

2. For those who say the league simply hates the Saints, be reminded that the league put Sean Payton on its most prestigious committee, the competition committee. Sean chose to leave. I am sure he had substantial reasons for that decision, but for a coach who feels that his team is not being fairly treated, it is far better for that coach to have a seat at that table where major decisions are made than not to have a seat.

3. My belief is that the numbers are statistically so bizarre--would the odds be 1 out of 1,000?--that a number of NFL officials truly dislike the Saints organization and that for some their bias results in the Saints' opponents, and not the Saints, getting the close calls. The reasons for the hostility could be embarrassment over the no-call in the Rams game and Payton's actions on the competition committee. We do know that as a whole the officials like their current structure of being allowed to work full-time and work part-time as an NFL official; I would think a good number feel financially threatened by proposals to have officials work full-time.

I think pretty much any statistician would say that the possibility of that happening is yeah……I’m still P'Oed off, but would pay a good amount $ to read Coach Payton’s book when he retires.

 

[saintmdterps]

Always trying to help -- it's why I'm here!

The no-call had nothing to do with us -- whoever was playing the Rams that day was a dead team walking unless you blew them out so badly there was nothing the refs could do.

And the bullying obviously pre-dates Gayle.

Then the 2 league darlings met in the Super Bowl, which is EXACTLY how the NFL drew it up in the sand before the season ever began.

 

[AARPSaint]

Speaking of which, have ANY of the talking heads picked up on the Triplett story? I saw two worthwhile retweets yesterday but otherwise am still avoiding football talk on tv as I’m still wallowing in the non-playoff blues.

Newspage. Mike Florio.

 

[RJ in Lafayette]

This may be the most important and alarming story I have read about the Saints in years. I applaud Mike Triplett for running it, but ESPN or nola.com needs to go one step further and hire at least two statisticians for a professional opinion on the odds of this happening.

In an earlier post, I threw out an estimate of the odds being 1 out of 1,000. If the Mike Silver comment above is correct that the the likelihood is 0.007725 percent, then rounding up to 0.008 percent, the odds would be 1 out of 12,500. Please check my numbers because my courses in math and my one college statistics class were more decades ago than I want to admit. If we are looking at penalties called against a team, one can argue that the numbers may show a team that is inordinately aggressive or badly coached. But that argument cannot be made with the number of penalties called against the teams a particular team plays.

And I am curious as to how the Saints during that four-year period fared with regard to the number of penalties called against it and the disparity between the number of penalties called against the Saints and their opponents.

My only conclusion is that a certain percentage of NFL officials do not care for the Saints organization and subconsciously in close plays are inclined not to call penalties against Saints' opponents. I do not believe there is a conspiracy, which requires an agreement. But if a substantial percentage of NFL officials simply do not like the Saints organization--whether because of embarrassment over the no-call in the Rams game or because of Payton's outspoken advocacy of measures NFL officials did not like when Payton was on the competition committee--then we could find 10 percent or so of officials subconsciously giving Saints' opponents the benefit of the doubt in close plays.

This ends when it becomes an open secret in Las Vegas and among the betting public that the officials seem biased against the Saints and start factoring that bias in setting betting lines and making bets.

 

[RJ in Lafayette]

At this time, this story will not gain traction nationally. It is the divisional round of the playoffs, all four games are attractive, and the Saints are not playing. If the Saints were playing, it would be a different matter.

And God knows how much the NFL would fine and penalize Payton or the Saints organization if Payton publicly accused NFL officials of implicit bias when officiating Saint games, citing the data in the Triplett story.