Replay in college football is a sham, terrible

[4thngoal]

There's no doubt in my mind that the replay is being used as a tool by conferences or worse betting services to affect the outcome of games. It's been pretty obvious for a couple of years in the NFL, now it's in college football. On the field calls are being overturned with almost no evidence, clearly, the replay officials are either following someone's agenda or have usurped completely the officials' role on the field. I don't believe this was the intention of replay.

I don't think it's betting services. They release odds that are as close as they can. Then they adjust them if to much money comes in on one side.
As for conferences, idk. I'm sure like any business there is politics to it.
I'm struggling though to figure out why anyone would be so dumb and blatant if they are doing something shady. Seems like a good way to get exposed.

 

[JoeyLabasForPresident]

I don't think it's betting services. They release odds that are as close as they can. Then they adjust them if to much money comes in on one side.
As for conferences, idk. I'm sure like any business there is politics to it.
I'm struggling though to figure out why anyone would be so dumb and blatant if they are doing something shady. Seems like a good way to get exposed.

I assume he’s suggesting betting services are paying off the officials. I think that pretty much impossible, but others have mentioned ESPN’s stake and wide ownership throughout college football. Them paying off some officials, especially those in charge of replay, seems at least plausible if unlikely, though they are certainly in a better position to conceal such behavior than sportsbooks. It really is an incredible coincidence if nothing else that so many calls on replay are blatantly wrong, and so often favor the SEC (and Clemson, apparently).

 

[4thngoal]

I assume he’s suggesting betting services are paying off the officials. I think that pretty much impossible, but others have mentioned ESPN’s stake and wide ownership throughout college football. Them paying off some officials, especially those in charge of replay, seems at least plausible if unlikely, though they are certainly in a better position to conceal such behavior than sportsbooks. It really is an incredible coincidence if nothing else that so many calls on replay are blatantly wrong, and so often favor the SEC (and Clemson, apparently).

I understand.
I'm saying that as coaches turn in plays to be reviewed, refs would be needing to get paid huge amounts to compensate for the prospect of not having a very good paying job anymore.
Betting services pretty much keep the balance by changing the odds, they don't need to pay anyone off.

 

[uihawk82]

I started this thread because it seems to all or most of us, especially me, that my eyes can tell me if a ball is short of the goal line etc etc, or a players foot is out of bounds when you are looking at a 4K ultra high def tv. If anyone of you saw the dramatic ending of the 49ers-Seahawks game last sunday you can see that the 4th down catch came up a couple of inches short. Yet sometimes these reply officials seem to see stuff that aint there.

And then how many times are these overturns on replay due to officials disagreeing or viewing the rules different than the other refs. I cant understand how the various refs and replay officials can differ so many time on the wording or action of a rule. Someone mentioned how often the TV paid former official in the booth gets it wrong or right compared to what the actual replay official decides.

Just the fact that these replay calls go back to some underground bunker in some unknown location just adds to the conspiracy theories.

If most of you remember one of the first really big replay snafus was OU at a Pac 12 team where an onside kick was totally fucked up on replay. The replay official was reprimanded or fired, the Pac 12 had to eat crow. We should have known then it would be a mess.

 

[JoeyLabasForPresident]

I understand.
I'm saying that as coaches turn in plays to be reviewed, refs would be needing to get paid huge amounts to compensate for the prospect of not having a very good paying job anymore.
Betting services pretty much keep the balance by changing the odds, they don't need to pay anyone off.

Agreed, but presumably if you as a book were nearly guaranteed to know the outcome, you could set a line which encourages betting on the team you know will lose, and rather than having only a slight edge you could make boatloads of money.

 

[tksirius]

Speaking of terrible...

 

[Fryowa]

Speaking of terrible...

People who live in California deserve to live in California.

 

[uihawk82]

Speaking of terrible...

I guess you dont get it that humans are totally fucking up this planet. Iowa has lots of space and generally lots of water but the quality of water isnt that great with all the chicken and pig farms and fertilizer run off.

California has too many people for the water they have and their water supply is hard to plan for. And if you build your house up in some fire prone district you are asking for trouble just like all the people who build in flood plains etc.

Who knows how much microscopic shreds of plastic you eat that has gotten on or in your food. I could go on and on.

So what if they need to conserve water but that is where they live and a problem they have.

I heard a NDakota farmer who is their Farm Assoc president a year ago on Iowa Public Radio news say that just 20 years ago they didnt have a long enough growing season for soybeans but they do now. Who knows what kind of new weather patterns your location will have in the next 20 years.

Like many locations California has so much difference in locations and geographies compared to Iowa that it must be nice to drive a couple hours to see such beauty.

 

[JoeyLabasForPresident]

I guess you dont get it that humans are totally fucking up this planet. Iowa has lots of space and generally lots of water but the quality of water isnt that great with all the chicken and pig farms and fertilizer run off.

California has too many people for the water they have and their water supply is hard to plan for. And if you build your house up in some fire prone district you are asking for trouble just like all the people who build in flood plains etc.

Who knows how much microscopic shreds of plastic you eat that has gotten on or in your food. I could go on and on.

So what if they need to conserve water but that is where they live and a problem they have.

I heard a NDakota farmer who is their Farm Assoc president a year ago on Iowa Public Radio news say that just 20 years ago they didnt have a long enough growing season for soybeans but they do now. Who knows what kind of new weather patterns your location will have in the next 20 years.

Like many locations California has so much difference in locations and geographies compared to Iowa that it must be nice to drive a couple hours to see such beauty.

Right, so the logical policy decision is to fine anyone who has the gall to both run their washing machine and shower in the same day. The fact is that such a requirement is not really true. The actual law sets in place a quota on gallons used per day per person “Establishing an indoor, per person water use goal of 55 gallons per day until 2025, 52.5 gallons from 2025 to 2030 and 50 gallons beginning in 2030,” but the fact that you don’t recognize the inherent logical fallacy in such a proposition (People take different lengths of showers and some washing machines are more efficient than others) makes you look awfully dumb and favorable to tyranny. Perhaps the quota is too low, and perhaps California should subsidize the purchasing of more efficient washing machines.

 

[SteveGarvey1]

Speaking of terrible...

How do they enforce such a law? Look at each home's water usage and infer you've taken a shower and done laundry, based on each home's family size? Is this really an actual law now?

I know at least in some places in Cali, it's no longer a felony to steal something if the value is less than $950, just a misdemeanor. So, now, predictably, people are stealing more, making sure the value is less than $950.

Social engineering to combat perceived injustices I guess. Moronic.

 

[okeefe4prez]

I heard a NDakota farmer who is their Farm Assoc president a year ago on Iowa Public Radio news say that just 20 years ago they didnt have a long enough growing season for soybeans but they do now. Who knows what kind of new weather patterns your location will have in the next 20 years.

Is the growing season materially longer or did Pioneer come up with a seed/fertilizer combo that can grow quicker? Seems there is a helluva lot of variability in when you thaw and freeze every year.

 

[Fryowa]

Is the growing season materially longer or did Pioneer come up with a seed/fertilizer combo that can grow quicker? Seems there is a helluva lot of variability in when you thaw and freeze every year.

All of the seed producers have customized that to the Nth degree. Is absolutely wild what they can do.

Typical maturity dates (planting to crop maturity) are 95-115 days depending on your zone, soil conditions, weather, etc. They've gotten so high tech that 72 day corn is readily available here and you can even get 65 day seed corn if you needed it. In Iowa most of that stuff gets used due to acts of god. Like if you got hailed out early and still had 70 days left before you're last anticipated harvestable date you could plant that and--even though the yield is smaller--still get something harvested. Most people take insurance payouts for those situations (here at least). Soybeans are the same way.

The shit they've done with genetics is fucking mind-boggling. You know how even in the severest droughts, winds, and rains these days you never hear of wide-scale crop-outs? That's because they've designed this shit to use the absolute minimum amount of water per plant and weeded out all undesirable resilience traits ten times over.

In Iowa corn is 10 feet by July and most of it is 12' when it's done, and the roots are 6-8' in the ground. In the NW part of the state we're up over 230 bushels an acre with 240 in some spots. It's insane.

This definitely ain't our grand daddy's corn and beans.

 

[NCHawker]

step back and look at the bowl schedule. Who has the money and who stands to make money.... all those fuckers... I don't know what all that means but thought it would be cool to say it.

 

[Fryowa]

This is 9,000 years of selective corn breeding.

On the left is what it looked like in it's natural state before farming.

@tksirius is on the left/middle left-ish. At least that's what his wife told me.

 

[Fryowa]

step back and look at the bowl schedule. Who has the money and who stands to make money.... all those fuckers... I don't know what all that means but thought it would be cool to say it.

FIGHT THE MAN!

 

[tksirius]

This is 9,000 years of selective corn breeding.

On the left is what it looked like in it's natural state before farming.

@tksirius is on the left/middle left-ish. At least that's what his wife told me.

It's hard to tell without a scale, but it's probably accurate.

 

[okeefe4prez]

All of the seed producers have customized that to the Nth degree. Is absolutely wild what they can do.

Typical maturity dates (planting to crop maturity) are 95-115 days depending on your zone, soil conditions, weather, etc. They've gotten so high tech that 72 day corn is readily available here and you can even get 65 day seed corn if you needed it. In Iowa most of that stuff gets used due to acts of god. Like if you got hailed out early and still had 70 days left before you're last anticipated harvestable date you could plant that and--even though the yield is smaller--still get something harvested. Most people take insurance payouts for those situations (here at least). Soybeans are the same way.

The shit they've done with genetics is fucking mind-boggling. You know how even in the severest droughts, winds, and rains these days you never hear of wide-scale crop-outs? That's because they've designed this shit to use the absolute minimum amount of water per plant and weeded out all undesirable resilience traits ten times over.

In Iowa corn is 10 feet by July and most of it is 12' when it's done, and the roots are 6-8' in the ground. In the NW part of the state we're up over 230 bushels an acre with 240 in some spots. It's insane.

This definitely ain't our grand daddy's corn and beans.

Yeah, I worked at Pioneer back in the '90's and saw their splicing room and learned about their science. Totally insane. They've long had a goal of figuring out how to grow more corn and beans in places like North Dakota and Canada as well as Africa.

Spent a few weeks in August going through a bean shed that had a roof leak and soaked all kinds of samples. A bunch of them were pink from some treatment that made them roundup resistant or something. My old lady eats natto (fermented soybeans) every damned day and wonders why they trigger gag reflexes in me. I can eat the dry ones and their taste is rather pleasant, but the wet ones take me back to that shed every damn time.

 

[uihawk82]

How do they enforce such a law? Look at each home's water usage and infer you've taken a shower and done laundry, based on each home's family size? Is this really an actual law now?

I know at least in some places in Cali, it's no longer a felony to steal something if the value is less than $950, just a misdemeanor. So, now, predictably, people are stealing more, making sure the value is less than $950.

Social engineering to combat perceived injustices I guess. Moronic.

Interesting, in Iowa if you embezzle or steal the equivalent of $900 you might get 5 years in jail on a felony conviction.

 

[Fryowa]

How do they enforce such a law? Look at each home's water usage and infer you've taken a shower and done laundry, based on each home's family size? Is this really an actual law now?

I know at least in some places in Cali, it's no longer a felony to steal something if the value is less than $950, just a misdemeanor. So, now, predictably, people are stealing more, making sure the value is less than $950.

Social engineering to combat perceived injustices I guess. Moronic.

The law is gallons used, not shower and laundry. The TV show was using the average shower and load of laundry gallons which was over the limit.

And enforcing it would be easy since the meters are electronically read.

 

[Fryowa]

Interesting, in Iowa if you embezzle or steal the equivalent of $900 you might get 5 years in jail on a felony conviction.

Gary Barta has stolen millions and he still has a state job. I wouldn't worry about $900.