[Mr.Coffee]

My replies below in red.

Originally Posted by Shazam

Well first you're talking about wanting a certain outcome, and now it's simply bias? And bias goes two way: Are they anti-Flames or pro-Oilers? Because those are two different things. Pro-Oilers

The questions you must ask yourself are:

Is there deliberate bias? Yes

If so, is this bias being deliberately hidden? Yes, obviously

Because you need both for your scenario. You need to shut a whole bunch of mouths up. Also, this is the complete opposite of what the NHL needs to do to expand gambling, because the FTC will gladly throw a whole bunch of people in jail for rigging. It's just something that doesn't get talked about, I'm sure there's no manilla envelopes of documentation held by evil top hat people. Easy to see how the bias can create a rigged outcome, and of course people aren't sitting around chatting about that. I could see conversations like "wouldn't it be cool / great if McDavid / Mackinnon played each other?" but I agree you are not going to find a smoking gun. If you are the type of person that requires written and physical evidence before you believe anything than this conversation is effectively over because you're stating you'll never believe anything without seeing it with your own two eyes. Which is fine, but it doesn't necessarily mean that those who see the outcomes of bias and comment on it are "conspiracy theorists"; a term used of course to intentionally discredit reasonable positions formed from what we literally just witnessed.

Just remember, the Flames had a 2-0 and 4-3 lead in the game.

Also, the goddamned Kings had a 3-2 series lead over the Oilers in round 1. What does this have to do with anything?