dbulls874

ROOKIE
  • Content count

    71
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

14 Kinda Meh

About dbulls874

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday 06/11/1984

Profile Information

  • Gender Male
  1. Tin foil hat time (Im starting to Believe it though)

    The problem with this thinking, and most conspiracy theories, is a lack of consideration for the economics that govern personal decision making.  Millions of extra advertising dollars, which we're assuming for the sake of argument would be the reward for such a conspiracy, split 32 ways (at a minimum), constitute very little return for the billionaires who own teams. That's a very minimal reward on what is essentially an existential risk - the billions in TV money would vaporize if such a risk failed (by being exposed). If you're a billionaire who wants to risk large amounts of money in exchange for marginal returns, there are infinitely easier ways to do it. And the owners would have to be in on it, because why would Roger Goodell, who made tens of millions of dollars a year from Day 1, risk his career doing this on behalf of the owners without their knowledge? So that the owners could make slightly more money and be in a slightly better position to give him a raise? The same goes for 9-11 conspiracies (at least, the ones I'm familiar with.) George W. Bush knocked down the towers so his Halliburton buddies could rake in millions? What reward could possibly incentivize him to do that, that he doesn't already have? Wealth? Approval? The promise of favors in return? None of those things could incentivize Bush, who had all of those rewards secured in abundance for perpetuity by being president, and all of which he would have jeopardized by conspiring to knock those towers down.