SEC Officials on the Take

[MoronDawg]

The Southeastern Conference is a sports competition organization which generates nearly $1 billion dollars per year in revenue. Just from a business perspective, its games should be run in a fair, clean, and efficient manner, to protect its own and collective members' assets.

MSU lost three successful athletic directors and a coach to fellow SEC schools. (Thanks, buddies! It's good to have allies.) Then, when the athletic department was suffering from an absence of leadership, we lost a successful, legendary coach to the afterlife. (I would love to be a fly on the wall in the bar where Leach and Hemingway are hanging out now, but that's a different conversation.)

First and foremost in any competitive gaming event is the assumption of fairness. Otherwise, what's the point? It's one thing to put a finger on the scales to promote an even match between opponents of different strengths, but to do it against a program and fan base who are kneecapped underdogs is a travesty.

There is no excuse for the level of incompetence demonstrated in both level one and level two officiating in the MSU-Arkansas game. The Bulldogs were deprived of their due rewards for fighting tenaciously against the odds, and the Razorbacks' sweet cherry of victory must taste a bit like a persimmon. That's on you SEC. Spend some of your billion dollars on getting the sport right. Otherwise, what's a fan to conclude?

For the record, I don't believe that the SEC refs are on the take. But, we know that gambling and bribes have even recently been a part of the sport. What would a ref who is on the take do in a game? How would he demonstrate that he is compromised?

Exactly.

Do better SEC. We're beginning not to trust you.

 

[Leeshouldveflanked]

The Southeastern Conference is a sports competition organization which generates nearly $1 billion dollars per year in revenue. Just from a business perspective, its games should be run in a fair, clean, and efficient manner, to protect its own and collective members' assets.

MSU lost three successful athletic directors and a coach to fellow SEC schools. (Thanks, buddies! It's good to have allies.) Then, when the athletic department was suffering from an absence of leadership, we lost a successful, legendary coach to the afterlife. (I would love to be a fly on the wall in the bar where Leach and Hemingway are hanging out now, but that's a different conversation.)

First and foremost in any competitive gaming event is the assumption of fairness. Otherwise, what's the point? It's one thing to put a finger on the scales to promote an even match between opponents of different strengths, but to do it against a program and fan base who are kneecapped underdogs is a travesty.

There is no excuse for the level of incompetence demonstrated in both level one and level two officiating in the MSU-Arkansas game. The Bulldogs were deprived of their due rewards for fighting tenaciously against the odds, and the Razorbacks' sweet cherry of victory must taste a bit like a persimmon. That's on you SEC. Spend some of your billion dollars on getting the sport right. Otherwise, what's a fan to conclude?

For the record, I don't believe that the SEC refs are on the take. But, we know that gambling and bribes have even recently been a part of the sport. What would a ref who is on the take do in a game? How would he demonstrate that he is compromised?

Exactly.

Do better SEC. We're beginning not to trust you.

The SEC doesn’t care, they would happily accept us going to another conference.

 

[Howiefeltersnstch]

I'm not sure either time that the ball crossed the imaginary line but imo they both did. But it's egregious to watch replays for 2 minutes and say they did not. Then place the ball on the 1 yard line. Apparently it was 17n closer than that. One inch line would be acceptable. Huge difference there. Yuge. Biggly affected the game.

 

[Leeshouldveflanked]

This was the same crew that worked the UGA-Texas game. I’m surprised they actually worked a game this week.

 

[onewoof]

The simple reality is that Arkansas will play in a bowl. We will not. This crazy ref treatment happens every season. There was no way they were going to let us beat Arkansas. Would serve no purpose.

 

[MoronDawg]

The simple reality is that Arkansas will play in a bowl. We will not. This crazy ref treatment happens every season. There was no way they were going to let us beat Arkansas. Would serve no purpose.

Do you believe that the Southeastern Conference manipulates the outcomes of its sporting events to maximize its revenues?

You don't need to comment on that. Your post should alarm the SEC office that their incompetence is breeding mistrust in their administration.

 

[onewoof]

Do you believe that the Southeastern Conference manipulates the outcomes of its sporting events to maximize its revenues?

At times. Primarily a business. Secondarily, entertainment that can be sold. Third, at times, sport.

 

[L4Dawg]

When you get net as bad as we did yesterday the refs didn't do it. I don't recall any controversy over the FIFTY EIGHT points they scored.

 

[onewoof]

Refs can kill momentum. Watch for it and you'll see it often.

 

[MoronDawg]

When you get net as bad as we did yesterday the refs didn't do it. I don't recall any controversy over the FIFTY EIGHT points they scored.

It wasn't 58-0 when those egregious calls occurred. They happened at pivotal moments in the game, where momentum was shifting.

 

[Colonel Kang]

1. Terribly written letter. It's like you're looking for empathy.

2. There were not 3 successful ADs. There were about 1.5 successful ADs. Byrne, Strickland (half), & Cohen was not successful. Huge problem

3. Those goal line calls were unfortunate but the problem is less about the refs & more about the rule that there must be "Convincing evidence that the call on the field was incorrect" to overturn the call on the field. When a call is made on the field, the ref are just calling what they think happened. So, what I don't understand is, why once we go to replay, the officials can't just call what they think happened & instead have to find irrefutable evidence that the call on the field was wrong. Why does the call on the field get that advantage? Why can't the refs just call what they think happened? The fact that both of those calls would not have been overturned if they were called TDs is the problem. The flawed call on the field is given unfair bias.

 

[kired]

I was at the game so don’t have benefit of tv, but I was convinced from Jumbotron that his hand hit the pylon before the ball crossed the line.

The other should definitely have been spotted a foot or so closer but wouldn’t make a difference when we just lose yards every time we try to run inside the 5

 

[MoronDawg]

1. Terribly written letter. It's like you're looking for empathy.

2. There were not 3 successful ADs. There were about 1.5 successful ADs. Byrne, Strickland (half), & Cohen was not successful. Huge problem

3. Those goal line calls were unfortunate but the problem is less about the refs & more about the rule that there must be "Convincing evidence that the call on the field was incorrect" to overturn the call on the field. When the call is made on the field, the ref is just calling what he thinks happened. So, what I don't understand is, why once we go to replay, the officials can't just call what they think happened & instead have to find irrefutable evidence that the call on the field was wrong. Why does the call on the field get that advantage? Why can't the refs just call what they think happened? The fact that both of those calls would not have been overturned if they were called TDs is the problem. The flawed call on the field is given unfair bias.

Thanks for your reply, Colonel. I have enjoyed your chicken since I was a kid. We used to get it next door to the Krystal on Terry Road in South Jackson.

I'm not looking for empathy, but I appreciate that you recognize that I have a motive in my post. It's this, that the SEC's incompetence, either willful or not, has an impact.

There are a few logical conclusions to be drawn from the situation:

1) It's intentional. Either the conference or the individual refs have a benefit to cheating Mississippi State out of its rightful scores.

2) It's unintentional. Refs are human, and the action is fast. People make mistakes. That's why we have reviews. When the reviews seem to defy what we have seen on the field, it is one of two things:

a) We prefer that Mississippi State not be given its just due, for ulterior motives.
b) We are completely incompetent, which is inconsistent for an organization that manages multi-millions of dollars.
c) We don't care, and hope you just don't care enough to say anything, since you don't matter anyway.

My motivation is to encourage the conference to understand that they have a billion dollar enterprise because people like us care about the sport. They need to respect that.

 

[MoronDawg]

I was at the game so don’t have benefit of tv, but I was convinced from Jumbotron that his hand hit the pylon before the ball crossed the line.

The other should definitely have been spotted a foot or so closer but wouldn’t make a difference when we just lose yards every time we try to run inside the 5

Thanks for attending the game and being a loyal MSU fan.

A poster on EliteDawgs mentioned that the refs can only look at whether it is a touchdown or not, but they can't spot the ball off a replay. Again, I would suggest that a billion-dollar enterprise can do better. And it behooves them to do so.

 

[karlchilders.sixpack]

Those spots were poor, I mean poor, at the least.

Are they on the take? I think they definitely show favoritism, always have.

Plus a ref could have a buddy to bet on a game, say a 7 point line, and the refs can see to it that we don't beat the line.
That could easily be done. Nobody would know.

They know we are down, and have no problem exploiting us, for now.

 

[MoronDawg]

Those spots were poor, I mean poor, at the least.

Are they on the take? I think they definitely show favoritism, always have.

Plus a ref could have a buddy to bet on a game, say a 7 point line, and the refs can see to it that we don't beat the line.
That could easily be done. Nobody would know.

They know we are down, and have no problem exploiting us, for now.

Again, I want to emphasize that I don't think that the refs are "on the take."

Betting has become very specific, where gamblers can wager on when, how, or who scores. They bet on things that you and I wouldn't give a thought to.

The SEC must invest in the most state-of-the-art technologies and practices for officiating to avoid any resemblance of impropriety. Their unwillingness to do so would imply either incompetence or intention.

 

[MoronDawg]

The SEC doesn’t care, they would happily accept us going to another conference.

Well, the SEC can go 17 themselves if they think that. We are like kudzu, mosquitoes, and mole crickets.

 

[msstatelp1]

It’s Hanlon’s Razor.
"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."

SEC refs should be full time refs. During the week they should study film to determine what they did right, what they did wrong, and what they could do better. They should also be held accountable for bad calls.

 

[TXDawg.sixpack]

Thanks for attending the game and being a loyal MSU fan.

A poster on EliteDawgs mentioned that the refs can only look at whether it is a touchdown or not, but they can't spot the ball off a replay. Again, I would suggest that a billion-dollar enterprise can do better. And it behooves them to do so.

That’s absolutely incorrect. They review to check spots all the time.

 

[The Cooterpoot]

The Southeastern Conference is a sports competition organization which generates nearly $1 billion dollars per year in revenue. Just from a business perspective, its games should be run in a fair, clean, and efficient manner, to protect its own and collective members' assets.

MSU lost three successful athletic directors and a coach to fellow SEC schools. (Thanks, buddies! It's good to have allies.) Then, when the athletic department was suffering from an absence of leadership, we lost a successful, legendary coach to the afterlife. (I would love to be a fly on the wall in the bar where Leach and Hemingway are hanging out now, but that's a different conversation.)

First and foremost in any competitive gaming event is the assumption of fairness. Otherwise, what's the point? It's one thing to put a finger on the scales to promote an even match between opponents of different strengths, but to do it against a program and fan base who are kneecapped underdogs is a travesty.

There is no excuse for the level of incompetence demonstrated in both level one and level two officiating in the MSU-Arkansas game. The Bulldogs were deprived of their due rewards for fighting tenaciously against the odds, and the Razorbacks' sweet cherry of victory must taste a bit like a persimmon. That's on you SEC. Spend some of your billion dollars on getting the sport right. Otherwise, what's a fan to conclude?

For the record, I don't believe that the SEC refs are on the take. But, we know that gambling and bribes have even recently been a part of the sport. What would a ref who is on the take do in a game? How would he demonstrate that he is compromised?

Exactly.

Do better SEC. We're beginning not to trust you.

User name checks out

 

[HammerOfTheDogs]

The Southeastern Conference is a sports competition organization which generates nearly $1 billion dollars per year in revenue. Just from a business perspective, its games should be run in a fair, clean, and efficient manner, to protect its own and collective members' assets.

MSU lost three successful athletic directors and a coach to fellow SEC schools. (Thanks, buddies! It's good to have allies.) Then, when the athletic department was suffering from an absence of leadership, we lost a successful, legendary coach to the afterlife. (I would love to be a fly on the wall in the bar where Leach and Hemingway are hanging out now, but that's a different conversation.)

First and foremost in any competitive gaming event is the assumption of fairness. Otherwise, what's the point? It's one thing to put a finger on the scales to promote an even match between opponents of different strengths, but to do it against a program and fan base who are kneecapped underdogs is a travesty.

There is no excuse for the level of incompetence demonstrated in both level one and level two officiating in the MSU-Arkansas game. The Bulldogs were deprived of their due rewards for fighting tenaciously against the odds, and the Razorbacks' sweet cherry of victory must taste a bit like a persimmon. That's on you SEC. Spend some of your billion dollars on getting the sport right. Otherwise, what's a fan to conclude?

For the record, I don't believe that the SEC refs are on the take. But, we know that gambling and bribes have even recently been a part of the sport. What would a ref who is on the take do in a game? How would he demonstrate that he is compromised?

Exactly.

Do better SEC. We're beginning not to trust you.

We lost 58-25. If that had been a touchdown, we'd have lost 58-29 (assuming our kicker made a 43 yard extra point attempt).

 

[Dawgzilla2]

It’s Hanlon’s Razor.
"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."

SEC refs should be full time refs. During the week they should study film to determine what they did right, what they did wrong, and what they could do better. They should also be held accountable for bad calls.

This, all day. Hanlon's razor should be applied in some OT threads around here that tend to get locked, too.

And, seriously, what does the SEC gain financially from Arkansas beating State? The financial payouts to the league are locked. The TV contracts are already signed. The bowl slots are set, they are just waiting to see which SEC teams fill them. If we were talking about trying to promote an additional team to the playoffs, that might mean additional revenue to the league, but simply trying to help Arkansas become bowl eligible isn't nearly enough financial incentive to rig a game.

In theory, the league is better off helping State in this scenario, since it would promote the image that even the league bottom feeders are tough teams...which then helps negotiate more lucrative TV deals in the future.

I've posted on this before; SEC officiating has improved massively over the last couple decades, but still needs work. Officiating is hard, and these guys only get about $3,000 per game. You get what you pay for.

Conspiracy theories of every ilk are for losers, people who would rather blame their problems on some evil cabal of power brokers than look inward and address the real problems.

Our team sucks, and we are in the premiere football conference in college football. Our alumni base, our total fan base, and our financial revenues are at or near the bottom of the league. We caught a horrible break when our head coach died right after our AD took a different job. We can overcome these obstacles, and there is no reason to think "The Man" is keeping us down.

 

[Pilgrimdawg]

All of this referee mystery is nothing new. It has been going on for many, many years. Do I think that the referees try to protect certain teams? Absolutely. I have seen it waaay too many times to think otherwise and while I am mostly focused on our games, I have seen it happen to plenty of other teams too. It’s primarily the teams that are ranked high in the polls plus of course, always Alabama. We were actually on the receiving end of the protection in our 2014 game with Kentucky. We recognized it immediately and honestly I felt a bit embarrassed by it because we know all too well what being on the other side of that feels like. Now, do I think the front office is directing the referees to manipulate the outcome of certain games? No, not really but I do sometimes wonder. Do I think that certain individual referees or certain referee crews try to manipulate specific situations in some games? Absolutely. They normally don’t give a flip when we play an Arkansas, or Vandy, or ole miss type of opponent, but they do care when we play an Alabama or Georgia type of opponent when the playoffs are on the line. Sometimes it’s hard to decide between incompetence and something more nefarious. Yesterday was probably incompetence and just a lot of don’t care. There used to be an SEC referee named Skelton whose Grandfather had played quarterback for Bear Bryant. That SOB was as crooked as they come and always had Alabama’s back. It’s not just the SEC, I used to travel a great deal for work and of course ended up in many football conversations with customers around the country. People all over the Big 10 felt just like we do and were totally convinced that Ohio State received constant protection from the referees. I guess we will never know for sure, but I don’t trust them at all and it’s been that way for a really long time.

 

[MoronDawg]

User name checks out

Yes, but i got a 26 on the English part of the ACT.

 

[Mts68]

We lost 58-25. If that had been a touchdown, we'd have lost 58-29 (assuming our kicker made a 43 yard extra point attempt).

Yeah. Didn’t change any else, just the points. That’s all

 

[StillTbonewannabe]

Look at how Mahomes is treated vs every other QB in the NFL. Hell, look at last year's Superbowl and see the refs gift wrapped it for KC. It isn't just us getting screwed.

SEC wants more bowl teams and they are going to guarantee that they have enough.

 

[MoronDawg]

Look at how Mahomes is treated vs every other QB in the NFL. Hell, look at last year's Superbowl and see the refs gift wrapped it for KC. It isn't just us getting screwed.

SEC wants more bowl teams and they are going to guarantee that they have enough.

So you believe that these errant calls by the officials are intentional?

 

[OG Goat Holder]

Thanks for your reply, Colonel. I have enjoyed your chicken since I was a kid. We used to get it next door to the Krystal on Terry Road in South Jackson.

I'm not looking for empathy, but I appreciate that you recognize that I have a motive in my post. It's this, that the SEC's incompetence, either willful or not, has an impact.

There are a few logical conclusions to be drawn from the situation:

1) It's intentional. Either the conference or the individual refs have a benefit to cheating Mississippi State out of its rightful scores.

2) It's unintentional. Refs are human, and the action is fast. People make mistakes. That's why we have reviews. When the reviews seem to defy what we have seen on the field, it is one of two things:

a) We prefer that Mississippi State not be given its just due, for ulterior motives.
b) We are completely incompetent, which is inconsistent for an organization that manages multi-millions of dollars.
c) We don't care, and hope you just don't care enough to say anything, since you don't matter anyway.

My motivation is to encourage the conference to understand that they have a billion dollar enterprise because people like us care about the sport. They need to respect that.

It’s 2b. I happen to have some perspective here. Refs, in general, are not biased, just incompetent and make mistakes. And subliminally, they lean toward whoever is the perceived better team. Just human nature. Then you add the shortage, and it compounds the issue.

I’m sure there are plenty of cases of corruption, for whatever reason. But that’s really rare when you consider the totality.

 

[She Mate Me]

1. Terribly written letter. It's like you're looking for empathy.

2. There were not 3 successful ADs. There were about 1.5 successful ADs. Byrne, Strickland (half), & Cohen was not successful. Huge problem

3. Those goal line calls were unfortunate but the problem is less about the refs & more about the rule that there must be "Convincing evidence that the call on the field was incorrect" to overturn the call on the field. When a call is made on the field, the ref are just calling what they think happened. So, what I don't understand is, why once we go to replay, the officials can't just call what they think happened & instead have to find irrefutable evidence that the call on the field was wrong. Why does the call on the field get that advantage? Why can't the refs just call what they think happened? The fact that both of those calls would not have been overturned if they were called TDs is the problem. The flawed call on the field is given unfair bias.

Your #3 is right on target for sure. On every close call they were erring on the side of not giving us the points, and it got upheld every time. If they go the other way, those are confirmed as TDs.

That's a serious problem.

But, we still played like **** again on D and would have lost.

 

[OG Goat Holder]

Your #3 is right on target for sure. On every close call they were erring on the side of not giving us the points, and it got upheld every time. If they go the other way, those are confirmed as TDs.

That's a serious problem.

But, we still played like **** again on D and would have lost.

Honestly I’d rather just get of replay, it slows the game down too much. I don’t mind a little drama. At the end of the day, officiating rarely decides a game anyway - it just seems that way in the moment.

 

[She Mate Me]

It’s Hanlon’s Razor.
"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."

SEC refs should be full time refs. During the week they should study film to determine what they did right, what they did wrong, and what they could do better. They should also be held accountable for bad calls.

How would this full time ref idea work? They work like 15 or so games as a college ref. That entails maybe a month of work and travel I assume.

Is the SEC supposed to pay these guys to just better themselves as refs for the remainder of the year?

 

[MoronDawg]

Honestly I’d rather just get of replay, it slows the game down too much. I don’t mind a little drama. At the end of the day, officiating rarely decides a game anyway - it just seems that way in the moment.

I know that you are a frequent poster and that you love Mississippi and Mississippi State. I'm always impressed with your steadfastness of opinion and mostly your pragmatism.

There are times in life when the ring is passed to you. It's almost magical, and it can make all the difference. When someone or something snuffs that out, you may not even know. It matters that you are treated fairly.

 

[MoronDawg]

How would this full time ref idea work? They work like 15 or so games as a college ref. That entails maybe a month of work and travel I assume.

Is the SEC supposed to pay these guys to just better themselves as refs for the remainder of the year?

Is an organization that generates $1 billion per year supposed to provide competent officiating for the very athletic events that generate its income?

 

[Chesusdog]

I'm not sure either time that the ball crossed the imaginary line but imo they both did. But it's egregious to watch replays for 2 minutes and say they did not. Then place the ball on the 1 yard line. Apparently it was 17n closer than that. One inch line would be acceptable. Huge difference there. Yuge. Biggly affected the game.

That's a thing that really bothers me on those short yardage calls. If they didn't make the goal line then the ball should be spotted inches short, not a yard out.

 

[MoronDawg]

That's a thing that really bothers me on those short yardage calls. If they didn't make the goal line then the ball should be spotted inches short, not a yard out.

That's what I'm sayin'. If that's not in the rules, then it should be.

 

[She Mate Me]

That's a thing that really bothers me on those short yardage calls. If they didn't make the goal line then the ball should be spotted inches short, not a yard out.

It doesn't bother me nearly as much as running plays from inside the 1 yard line out of a shotgun formation.

 

[Chesusdog]

It doesn't bother me nearly as much as running plays from inside the 1 yard line out of a shotgun formation.

It feels like ages since we've seen an old fashioned QB sneak at State.

 

[She Mate Me]

Is an organization that generates $1 billion per year supposed to provide competent officiating for the very athletic events that generate its income?

The officiating is mostly competent. I don't think paying somebody for doing nothing for the vast majority of the year is going to produce a difference in quality that justifies that expenditure.

Something tells me this has been thought through before.

 

[MoronDawg]

It doesn't bother me nearly as much as running plays from inside the 1 yard line out of a shotgun formation.

Your point is well taken. I want to make sure that this thread is directed at the appropriate party -- the SEC administration.

 

[MoronDawg]

The officiating is mostly competent. I don't think paying somebody for doing nothing for the vast majority of the year is going to produce a difference in quality that justifies that expenditure.

Something tells me this has been thought through before.

Please elaborate on how "this" has been thought through before. Not trying to be combative or confrontational. I just want to know how Mississippi State fans are supposed to think that it is par for the course.