Well that makes sense since you consider yourself high and mighty over "most fans who don't know the rules".
You, Hulk Hogan and Hacksaw Jim Dugan are true legitimate sports legends...Just like Rocky!
Hey, glad you recognize my work!
Listen, I saw your video and it's base and basic at its best. It's full of "because there could be fraud, yeah, there's fraud" suppositions and makes Goodell into some puppeteer who says who wins and loses (obviously the Cowboys are on the lose list, lol). What did I disagree with? Here's a single one to chew on.
About that court case, your video states:
“… and the courts ruled on the NFL’s side stating that ‘as long as a fan gets to see a live sporting event, the NFL is legally able to fix the outcome for entertainment purposes,’ giving the NFL the legal right to fix its own games, the same as the WWE and the sports entertainment business.”
False. The case stated that just because something happened on the field outside of the league's rules like with Spygate, you, the fans only contracted to come in and see a game with a ticket and have no remedy if you think it wasn't an "honest" (or crappy) game. Same way you can't sue if a fan comes out of the stands to tackle a runner on the way to a game-winning TD that the NFL doesn't automatically rule a TD and that team loses. So naturally, the video takes the most evil leap and says the NFL puts on dishonest games because they can and the court would support them if they did.
This is your "proof?" I also like how they show pics of controversial plays that were actually correct as called by the rules but stir up the 'spiracy feelings in viewers. I mean, I could cook up better subliminals than that. Lol.
Here is the actual legal opinion from the case:
https://casetext.com/case/mayer-v-belichick-3
If you read through it, you'll see that the decision to deny the plaintiff was based on legal precedence going as far back as the scab replacement games in 1989 because someone sued about those. In case you didn't catch it, 1989 is 17 years before Roger Goodell took over as commissioner in the NFL. In fact, people have been suing for refunds over concert performances and sports performances that were subpar for years before that case and all were denied or thrown out. Someone sued the Rams because they sucked in 1999 (7 years before Goodell). Basically, the precedence says you're entitled to get into an event you wanted when you buy a ticket. Nothing else is guaranteed. Court decisions like this go back as far as 1905 [Collister v. Hayman, 76 N.E. 20 (N.Y. 1905)]!!! So then let's take huge leaps and fill in the gaps to say that the NFL is going to rig games under Goodell because NOW fans can't stop us. Uh, courts have been saying that for over a century already.
So your video's premise that Goodell as Dark Lord doesn't seem to hold more weight than the suggestion I gave off the top of my head, which is that the NFL, already having been through the courts over the years to fend off idiotic lawsuits from overzealous fans prior to Goodell, probably labels itself entertainment to protect against future loons in this age of "conspiracy because I didn't get what I wanted" the same as entertainment acts who fend off lawsuits because a singer didn't hit a high enough note as the recorded song or the performer was drunk and they didn't "get their money's worth." Are there not better rickshaws to chase through the streets? Really?
