Agree with the bolded, but these are three different things.
Subtract the Ravens annoying whining from the picture and I don't think was an objectionable rule change in and of itself. Most football fans don't want to watch defenses struggling on a play-by-play basis to figure who is a receiver and who isn't. They want to see football, dammit, not athletes grappling with procedural technicalities. It was stupid and poor-sported of the Ravens and media sources to equate this with cheating, but I don't really take issue with the league closing the loophole on this tactic, so to speak.
I think you're the only one that actually believes this. Either that, or my sarcasm meter is way off. Players go in motion, offensive lineman pull from their position, receivers run crossing patterns and pick plays, offenses line up in wildcat formation, all to confuse the defense. Then there are fake punts, fake field goals, surprise onside kicks, flea flickers and reverses, etc. The problem was that the Ravens coaching staff was too dumb to realize what was happening, even when explicitly told by the officials. And for that, an unnecessary rule change was made that only servers to further dumb down the game.
I'm not a tin foil hat person when it comes to conspiracies. But had Vikings did that against the Cardinals in a hypothetical random divisional round playoff game, I doubt there would have been any cry for a rule change. Remember, even the local mediots (Shank, Bob Ryan, Borges, Volin) were extremely butt hurt that Belichick had the hubris and arrogance to pull off a trick play during a playoff game.
Back on topic: the anti-Patriots sentiment among the league's owners and GM's and coaches is likely very real; where there's smoke there's usually fire. The fact that the league office actively fosters and encourages it is a serious indictment on Goodell's leadership (or lack thereof). Bottom line is that there will be very little sympathy for New England if they should lose in Denver over a messed up call, but lots of gnashing of teeth should a call go the other way.
But there is absolutely zero evidence that the NFL's officials have had it out for New England this season, or any other season for that matter. And that is a thesis that requires solid evidence to be even worthy of serious discussion. As for the claims of the existence of unconscious bias, that does not sound like a testable hypothesis. The home field bias may be real; or then again, it may not be; the subtle differences found in the studies of the
futbol matches could just as easily be due to random noise or measurement error.
I think there are arguments to be made about the difficulty in differentiating pass interference from incidental contact while watching from the field in real time, or in deciding which player initiated the contact. Or how closely defensive holding and illegal contact should be called, or whether an inconsequential brush by a defender 5.03 yards beyond the LOS on a 3rd-and-17 should result in an automatic first down for the offense. Or the officials' knowledge of the rule book, or the ability to correctly call a coin toss. Discussion conspiracy theories only distracts from the real and potentially fixable problems, IMO.
