Lines are set before they know who the officials will be. Officials rarely have any impact on the line of a sporting event. Baseball is one where it impacts the line the most, and that is in regards to the total, not favoring one team.
refereeing...
- Thread starter Quintana
- Start date
Lines are set before they know who the officials will be. Officials rarely have any impact on the line of a sporting event. Baseball is one where it impacts the line the most, and that is in regards to the total, not favoring one team.
So there's corruption in every other human endeavor, through all of time and everywhere, EXCEPT college sports officiating? That's the proposition you want people to believe?
Do you really believe that some guy that's a teacher, living on a teacher's income, sees the coaches driving cars that cost four times more than the teacher's annual salary is incapable of bagging a few games, especially where there's already an expected result like Sparty v Iowa?
Making the most money possible is the objective of every commercial enterprise, again through all of human history. The conferences, the NCAA and sports media are all commercial entities. In the 21st century they exist only to make money and they do what they can do to make the most money possible. Its not even really evil, its just what reality, however ugly or nasty, is.
Last edited:
What? Do you think they assign the officials on game day, where the lines are still moving anyway? Wouldn't that kinda make travel plans difficult for the refs?
Let's take the corruption component out for a moment. Are you saying that an official known to call a tight game, hence a likelihood of more free throws being taken, would have no effect on the over/under? Or a guy that makes few calls and let's 'em play produces few free throws. There are actuaries and computers spinning those models almost until the final gun is heard.
Do you think lines are set the day of games? Or just the day before? Refs have a very minimal impact on the line, if any. It is rare when they do.
No lines aren't set on game day but they change in response to almost anything that could affect the outcome, including the officials. Of course, the dominant factor is the action but anything that could possibly affect the outcome is considered and billions of dollars turn on how each and every factor is calculated and fed into the actuarial models.
Let's say there's a ref known to have a short fuse. F Mac is coaching one of the teams in that ref's game. Do you think that wouldn't be potentially important to the outcome?
All officials have tendencies because all humans have tendencies. If the ref has been around a while it possible to chart and predict those tendencies. At that point their behavior becomes predictable and somebody with a double major in math and actuarial science is paid a great deal of money to understand, analyze and predict that official's behavior in every game.
If you are a big time college official in a major sport, you have to submit to continuous background checks, and other types of oversight. I have had friends lose post season assignments due to the most ridiculous "concerns" over debt issues that could possibly to exploited by gambling racketeers. You'd have to be a financial genius at tax evasion to get away with any kind of game fixing or point shaving.
First of all, BS! Garza is downright stoic given the amount of contact other players are allowed to inflict on him, including your Illini bigs. I would like you to point out one player who has taken more damage to his facial area this past year than Garza and given that, he has never retaliated in any way showing a great deal more composure than most players would. Secondly, your portrayal of him as a whiner is absurd given some of the antics displayed by players from the other teams in the B1G, including Illinois. Hell, your coach whines more than Garza does on every damn call against your team.
The Illinois assistant coaches were whining like little bitches on the Wieskamp dunk when Illinois was pressing.
Well, apparently I am irrational and an idiot. But, I'm ok with that, because I prefer it over being convinced that the fix is in against the Hawks. Why on earth would you choose to be an Iowa BB fan if the officials are intentionally trying to make the Hawks lose?
"The Big Ten for FORTY years has been advising refs to go against Iowa when they have their games."
The B1G has been advising refs to go against Iowa? For 4 decades? And, the people in the B1G that are privy to these discussions and the refs ALL go along? Everyone is afraid to blow the whistle? Do the refs get extra pay then? Or, is it a bag of money at half time?
So, I'll go back to my bubble now and pretend the world has some honest people in it.
thank you , great post . been trying to tell them that for 3 years . oh no , i think i hear the DSD typing . lol
thank you but why would you be getting on anyone for " stupid snark " ?
Dude, take a look at Garza after a game. Looks like he's been in a MMA fight. No doubt thats all incidental contact? Hell Matt Painter and your own coach Underwood said quite openly in interviews that their plan against Iowa was to HIT Garza and pound him WHENEVER he touched the ball. Thats not supposed to be basketball, (unless your MSU of course). Most players whine about calls, and Garza's probably got plenty of good reasons. Maybe you should talk to your own coach about whether or not they are hacking Garza and will deal with whatever ones actually get called, knowing full well most won't.
