10 Sports Conspiracy Questions We Still Haven't Answered

We love a good conspiracy theory. That holds true for the sports world. 

Some of the most iconic moments in the history of sports have been clouded by controversy. Were the New York Giants stealing signals before Bobby Thomson hit his "shot heard 'round the world"? Was the fix in when Muhammad Ali landed the "phantom punch" on the jaw of Sonny Liston? Did the National Basketball Association go out of the way to make sure the New York Knicks were able to acquire Patrick Ewing during the 1985 NBA draft? 

The last 25 years have been filled with a plethora of supposed sports conspiracy stories that have left us scratching our heads. What is the truth behind Michael Jordan's first NBA retirement? Why is it that the New England Patriots have been accused of cheating on multiple occasions? Would the Ultimate Fighting Championship really fix the result of a fight for the sake of business? 

Perhaps the best part about such alleged sports conspiracies is that we may never completely disprove certain notions or learn the truth beyond a shadow of a doubt. There is something entertaining about speculating over such issues and about the idea that we may have more knowledge than a casual observer. One can only wonder what the next big sports conspiracy will bring. 

It will probably have something to do with the Patriots, because of course it will. 

Did the UFC Fix the Rousey-Holm Fight?

Associated Press

Taz thinks Ronda Rousey vs. Holly Holm fight was a work.

Holly Holm's knockout victory over Ronda Rousey at UFC 193 in November 2015 sure looked legitimate to the naked eye. Holm bloodied Rousey's face in the opening round of the contest with a barrage of jabs. Holm then ended the fight in the second round with a crunching high kick that floored Rousey. While the fight probably should have been stopped then, Holm left no doubt when she finished Rousey with a couple of hammerfist strikes. 

Former pro wrestler Taz was not convinced. He stated on his CBS Radio program that he believed what fans saw at UFC 193 was not all that different than what occurs on World Wrestling Entertainment programming (h/t CBS Local Sports):

"

Why are some people not seeing this?” Taz asked. “This has been done in the wrestling industry for years. A guy or girl is going to take a break or go away, or has an injury that they have to tend to, whatever the reasons are, and they’re a champion – you take the championship off of them. You do not want your champion sitting home or making a movie, ‘Roadhouse 2’ or whatever Rousey’s going to do, or whatever Rousey’s going to do, or just needs a personal break, which she’s earned. This girl’s earned it. But you don’t want that person sitting home for five, six, seven months with that championship. IT’S BAD FOR BUSINESS! TAKE THE BELT OFF HER!”

"

Taz's conspiracy theory arose, in part, because Rousey had told Mike Bohn of Rolling Stone that she was going to "disappear" following her fight against Holm and that she didn't want to fight again until UFC 200 in July. We now know that won't be happening, as Rousey is not scheduled to be on that card. 

According to Martin Rogers of USA Today, Rousey made $10 million just from the fight versus Holm. Rousey has earned millions of dollars from fighting, has managed to land acting gigs and magazine covers and had an in-ring appearance at WrestleMania 31. Rousey may never have to fight again to be financially stable for the rest of her life. 

Perhaps Taz's theory isn't all that crazy, after all. 

Were Tottenham Hotspur Poisoned in May 2006?

Some conspiracy theories involve players being accused of immoral activities. Others, however, are all about a plate of lasagna. 

Tottenham Hotspur were one positive result versus middle-of-the-table West Ham United away from qualifying for the Champions League on the night of May 6, 2006. Tottenham players gathered together that evening for a routine pre-match meal as they had over 30 times that season. 

Disaster then struck Spurs. Oliver Brown of the Telegraph explained:

"

A sprawling buffet was laid out by the Marriott, who advertised that they would "satisfy the most discerning palates with a fresh approach", in a private room. The majority of the team chose lasagne.

With early-night pre-game protocols in force, there was no sign of anything untoward. It was not until a touch past midnight that several players began to fall violently ill. Edgar Davids, Teemu Tainio, Michael Dawson, Aaron Lennon, Radek Cerny, not to mention the recently restored Keane and Carrick, all succumbed with alarming speed.

Those who saw Carrick recall him barely being able to walk. So endemic was the illness that Daniel Levy, the Tottenham chairman, telephoned Richard Scudamore, the Premier League chief executive, to ask about the consequences of a postponement.

The blood drained from his face at the answer. Tottenham's failure to fulfil their fixture, Scudamore told him, could be subject to a Premier League inquiry and possible points deduction.

"

Tottenham took the pitch the following day as best they could but lost 2-1. Arsenal, Tottenham's north London rivals, earned a victory on the final day of the campaign, taking home three points and jumping ahead of Spurs in the table. Arsenal, thus, secured what was to be Tottenham's Champions League spot. 

Were the Gunners responsible for the tainted pasta? Was it an Arsenal fan who did whatever he could to make sure the Tottenham players would get sick on that fateful night? Were Tottenham merely unlucky at the worst possible time?

We'll probably never know for sure.  

Was the Super Bowl XLVII Blackout Done on Purpose?

The Baltimore Ravens were dominating the San Francisco 49ers during Super Bowl XLVII to the tune of 28-6 in the second half when the lights inside the Superdome in New Orleans went out. It took over 30 minutes for power and order to be restored, and the 49ers then rallied from behind and put 17 points on the scoreboard in the third quarter. San Francisco's rally came up just short, though, as the Ravens defeated the 49ers 34-31. 

Things go wrong. Equipment failures happen. Baltimore linebacker Ray Lewis did not, however, view the power outage as an "act of God" or a malfunction. Lewis had the following to say while speaking about the matter for the America's Game special that aired on the NFL Network, per Nate Davis of USA Today:

"

"I'm not gonna accuse nobody of nothing — because I don't know facts," says Lewis. "But you're a zillion-dollar company, and your lights go out? No. (Laughs) No way.

"Now listen, if you grew up like I grew up — and you grew up in a household like I grew up — then sometimes your lights might go out, because times get hard. I understand that. But you cannot tell me somebody wasn't sitting there and when they say, 'The Ravens (are) about to blow them out. Man, we better do something.' ... That's a huge shift in any game, in all seriousness. And as you see how huge it was because it let them right back in the game."

"

As ESPN.com's Jamison Hensley relayed, Baltimore linebacker Terrell Suggs pointed the finger at NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell on an E:60 episode. "I thought he had a hand in it," Suggs said. "Most definitely, he had a hand in it."

It is difficult to imagine a scenario where somebody working for the NFL would admit that the league had something to do with the power outage. The question you have to ask yourself is this:

Is it all that hard to believe that the NFL and also certain individuals working for a television network would do anything possible to keep a Super Bowl interesting and make sure viewers didn't change the channel until the end of the game? 

Think about that the next time it looks like a Super Bowl may not be a close contest after three quarters. 

Was Game 6 of the 2002 Lakers-Kings Series Fixed?

Tim Donaghy, the disgraced former basketball referee who spent time in prison because of his involvement in a gambling scandal, claimed in 2008 that the 2002 playoff game involving the Los Angeles Lakers and Sacramento Kings was not on the level. The goal, per Donaghy, was for officials to "manipulate" Game 6 so that the Lakers would win and the series would go to a decisive Game 7. 

From Chris Sheridan of ESPN.com: 

"

In the letter submitted by Donaghy's attorney, the following "manipulation" is alleged:

"Referees A, F and G were officiating a playoff series between Teams 5 and 6 in May of 2002. It was the sixth game of a seven-game series, and a Team 5 victory that night would have ended the series. However, Tim learned from Referee A that Referees A and F wanted to extend the series to seven games. Tim knew referees A and F to be 'company men,' always acting in the interest of the NBA, and that night, it was in the NBA's interest to add another game to the series. Referees A and F heavily favored Team 6. Personal fouls [resulting in obviously injured players] were ignored even when they occurred in full view of the referees. Conversely, the referees called made-up fouls on Team 5 in order to give additional free throw opportunities for Team 6. Their foul-calling also led to the ejection of two Team 5 players. The referees' favoring of Team 6 led to that team's victory that night, and Team 6 came back from behind to win that series."

Although no teams are specifically named, it is not hard to deduce the game in question. The Lakers-Kings series was the only one that postseason that went seven games, and the officiating in Game 6 was so questionable that consumer advocate and former presidential candidate Ralph Nader called for a formal investigation.

"

A letter submitted by an ex-referee who was found to be responsible for some shady activities is not, on its own, enough for anybody to say that Game 6 of the Kings-Lakers series was rigged. Nobody can, however, simply toss out the allegations. Those watching the game with their own eyes could see how many calls were going in favor of the Lakers during the final quarter of play.

The numbers, as Sheridan pointed out, are staggering to this day: "The Lakers attempted 40 free throws to the Kings' 25 in that game, and Los Angeles made 21-of-27 from the line while Sacramento converted 7-of-9 in the fourth quarter alone."

Fans may remember the sixth game of the series as being particularly controversial. As Jonathan Abrams of Grantland.com explained, the series as a whole was breathtaking and emotional. Los Angeles star Kobe Bryant came down with food poisoning after the first game, and some Lakers fans found that to be strange. Samaki Walker buried a three-pointer that came after the buzzer and shouldn't have counted during Game 4, a shot that started a Los Angeles rally that Robert "Big Shot Rob" Horry finished off by draining a buzzer-beater for the win. Shaquille O'Neal was dominant and shockingly good from the free-throw line during Game 6 as well. 

What should have been remembered as an all-time great NBA series may instead be viewed as one that was dirty. Are there any Kings fans who don't believe their favorite team was robbed? 

Did the NHL Help the Pittsburgh Penguins Land Sidney Crosby?

Gene J. Puskar/Associated Press

Did the NHL fix it so Sidney Crosby would go to the Pittsburgh Penguins?

The Pittsburgh Penguins have become playoff mainstays over the past 10 years. There is a young generation of hockey fans who may not realize that Pittsburgh nearly lost its hockey franchise over a decade ago. 

The Penguins were a financial mess in the early 2000s. As Michelle Crechiolo of NHL.com wrote about back in 2011, it was heavily rumored that the club could be relocated to Kansas City. The argument could even be made that the work stoppage that canceled the 2004-05 NHL season was the best thing that could have happened to pro hockey in Pittsburgh, as it delayed what otherwise could have been the inevitable. 

The Penguins had previously been saved when team legend Mario Lemieux swooped in and bought the club so that it would remain in Pittsburgh. Lemieux was no longer a superstar on the ice when the NHL lockout ended in 2005, though, and thus he needed a draw to bring fans to the arena for regular-season games. 

Enter Sidney Crosby, a once-in-a-generation prospect who was going to go to whichever team won the 2005 draft lottery. 

As explained on the Off Wing blog, fans were skeptical about what had been announced as a secret draft lottery even before the Penguins won the right to select Crosby. Greg Wyshynski of Yahoo's Puck Daddy wrote about how his friends believed the fix was in for Lemieux and the Penguins to land Crosby. 

All we can say for sure is that the secret draft lottery changed the NHL forever. The Penguins, a team on the cusp of moving or ceasing to exist, were saved and remained in Pittsburgh, and Crosby helped the Penguins win the Stanley Cup in 2009. 

What Did the NFL Really Know About Spygate?

Unless somebody with direct knowledge of the Spygate scandal speaks on the record, we will never know all that was taped by the New England Patriots from 2000 to 2007. 

This is because the evidence was destroyed by the NFL, according to the New York Times. 

The Patriots violated NFL rules by videotaping defensive signals used by coaches of the New York Jets during a game in 2007, according to Don Van Natta Jr. and Seth Wickersham of ESPN.com. That same story also claimed that the Patriots had filmed signals used by opposing coaches during 40 total games. 

But what about Super Bowl XXXVI? 

It has been rumored for years that the Patriots secretly and illegally taped a walk-through practice of the St. Louis Rams before the Patriots played the Rams in Super Bowl XXXVI, per ESPN.com. The Boston Herald produced a piece in 2008 that featured an unnamed source claiming that the Patriots had filmed the Rams, but the Herald later retracted that story. 

It has not, as of the posting of this piece, been confirmed that the Patriots have ever taped a walk-through of a Super Bowl opponent. 

This conspiracy has more to do with the actions of the NFL than the alleged order supposedly given by New England head coach Bill Belichick. Why, if what the Patriots recorded wasn't a big deal, would the league destroy the tapes rather than hand them over to media members so that the public could know once and for all what had been filmed?

The obvious and unconfirmed answer is that NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell does not want the public to know that the Patriots cheated their way to at least three Super Bowl victories. 

Regardless of what the Patriots did or didn't do from 2000 to 2007, the perception has been that the NFL did not do enough to punish the franchise or prevent those running the club from viewing league rules as mere recommendations. Maybe that perception is why Goodell decided to punish New England quarterback Tom Brady over Deflategate.

Was Pacquiao vs. Bradley I Fixed?

Promoter Bob Arum was apparently stunned after Timothy Bradley won a split-decision victory over Manny Pacquiao on June 9, 2012. "I've never been as ashamed of the sport of boxing as I am tonight," Arum told reporters following Bradley's win, per ESPN.com. 

Arum had plenty of company. According to NBCChicago.com, the Associated Press scored the bout 117-111 in favor of Pacquiao. Per ESPN.com's Dan Rafael, ESPN, HBO and other media members sitting at ringside believed that Pacquiao had clearly defeated Bradley. ESPN boxing analyst Teddy Atlas said after the fact that he believed the two judges who scored the fight in favor of Bradley were either "incompetent" or "corrupt," per BadLeftHook.com. 

As Rafe Bartholomew of Grantland.com explained, Arum also had millions of reasons to be happy about the result. 

Both Bradley and Pacquiao were represented by Arum, the CEO of Top Rank Boxing, which did not have to split the pot for any fight involving Bradley and Pacquiao. The latter had already taken care of every other noteworthy Top Rank fighter before June 2012, but the company could still cash in by having Pacquiao lose the fight and set up a rematch with Bradley. 

Of course, Top Rank would handle the rematch.

Maybe the two judges who named Bradley as the winner of the fight really did just have an off evening. As Bartholomew touched upon at the end of his piece, reporters joked that night that Arum must have been responsible for the scorecards in question. It made too much sense. Arum and Co. laughed all the way to the bank, while some fans had to wonder why they bothered following the sport anymore. 

What Happened to Ronaldo Before the 1998 World Cup Final?

DUSAN VRANIC/Associated Press

What happened to Ronaldo before the 1998 World Cup Final?

The 1998 World Cup Final featuring France, the hosts of the tournament, and Brazil was a dream matchup on paper. Both sides had superstar talent, including legends such as Ronaldo and Zinedine Zidane. The game was largely a bust for casual fans with no ties to either country, though, as France cruised to a 3-0 victory. 

The Final is now remembered, though, because of what allegedly happened before the two sides took the pitch. 

Alex Bellos of the Guardian painted quite the picture with his words about the physical trauma Ronaldo reportedly suffered in the hours before the Final. According to Bellos, Ronaldo's body convulsed, and a teammate had to take action to make sure that Ronaldo would not swallow his tongue. While the rest of the squad made their way to the stadium, Ronaldo was taken for tests and left off the teamsheet. 

Ronaldo was eventually allowed to travel to the stadium, however, and he started the match for Brazil. He was largely ineffective in the losing effort. 

One could write an entire piece about just the conspiracy theories linked with this bizarre event. We'll start by assuming that something really did happen to Ronaldo before the game.

Is it possible that somebody, a person within the French federation or even a fan, poisoned Ronaldo? Did he suffer an emotional breakdown before the match, as BBC.com alleged? Was he secretly ill but still forced to play by Nike, which had used Ronaldo in World Cup advertisements, and/or by the Brazilian federation? Did Ronaldo force his way into the team even though he was unwell? 

There is also the conspiracy theory that claims a healthy Ronaldo wanted no part in Brazil allegedly gifting the World Cup to Brazil. This theory involves Brazil "selling" the Final to Brazil. 

The whole thing sounds like a tremendous CSI plot. 

Did Tom Brady Deflate Footballs?

In the event of a nuclear holocaust, the following things will likely survive: cockroaches, Twinkies and stories about Deflategate. 

We couldn't have imagined what we were going to read and hear about this matter back in January 2015 when we first learned that the New England Patriots were accused of doctoring footballs before the AFC Championship Game versus the Indianapolis Colts.

The Patriots apparently had a staff member nicknamed "The Deflator," according to the Wells Report. New England quarterback Tom Brady likes to break his cellphones every now and again. The NFL is willing to spend millions of dollars on investigating a game that ended 45-7—a game in which beach balls could have been used and the outcome would have been the same. 

Brady has denied any wrongdoing since first being asked about Deflategate. That trend will likely continue even after the original four-game suspension handed down to Brady by NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell was reinstated by an appeals court on Monday.

Did Brady deflate footballs or have somebody within the organization deflate footballs before the 2015 AFC Championship Game? Brady knows the truth, and you have to decide for yourself if you believe what he has said on the matter. Maybe the real conspiracy here has little to do with the footballs Brady handled during the first half of the 2015 conference title game. 

Perhaps the conspiracy has to do with his punishment. 

New York sports talk icon Mike Francesa raised an interesting point during his April 25 program: Maybe the four-game ban handed down to Brady is the NFL's revenge for the Spygate scandal. Perhaps, in hitting Brady hard now, Goodell and the NFL can forever erase how the league handled the Spygate matter from the minds of fans. 

Is it possible that Brady and the Patriots are victims this time around? 

Was Michael Jordan Forced to Retire the First Time?

The stories that make up the top tier of unanswered conspiracy questions are well-known. Was there more than one shooter who was responsible for the death of John F. Kennedy? What exactly went on at Roswell, New Mexico, all those years ago? 

The sports version of these tales is probably the theory regarding Michael Jordan's first retirement from the NBA. 

Jordan shocked the sports world in October 1993 when he announced that he was retiring from basketball. The Chicago Bulls were on the verge of going for a fourth straight NBA title, and Jordan was the biggest sports star on the planet who was seemingly well on his way to having the greatest career in the history of the league. 

Jordan's first NBA retirement was understandable. He had conquered the NBA, and there was little reason at the time to believe that any team would stop him and the Bulls from repeating as champions in '93, '94 and so on. Add in that Jordan's father was tragically murdered in July 1993, and one can see why Jordan would have wanted to escape from the spotlight. 

Not everyone bought the story. As Steve Aschburner of NBA.com wrote about in 2013, some people believed that Jordan was asked to step away from the NBA because of his gambling habits that were made public in May 1993:

"

The gambling? The suspicions that Jordan’s “retirement” was in fact a covert suspension, mandated by NBA commissioner David Stern to duck further scrutiny? Those theories have persisted for 20 years, too, though Wennington and Stacey King, another former Jordan teammate, didn’t even give them wink-wink life in conversations this weekend. And (Jordan's agent David Falk was more adamant still.

“Absurd. Stop. Oliver Stone,” he said of the conspiracy theories. “Not a scintilla of truth to those rumors.”

"

For what it's worth, Roland Lazenby of Hoops Habit poured cold water on this conspiracy in May 2014 in his book, Michael Jordan: The Life:  

"

The conspiracy theories are perhaps fun, and they’ve driven lots of Internet traffic for media companies of all stripe, but for years those theories have overlooked one huge element: There has never been evidence or even the slightest accusation that Jordan bet on his own games, or even bet on basketball or any other sporting event, other than his own golf matches.

"

Lazenby continued: 

"

When Jordan came back to basketball in 1995, there wasn’t the slightest iota of sensitivity about his gambling. The Bulls even scheduled a preseason game in Vegas in 1996, so that Jordan and his teammates, including mega gambler Dennis Rodman, could all have plenty of time to hit the tables.

If MJ had been suspended, there’s no way the Bulls and the NBA would have been so casual about his gambling. All of that is allowed. What is forbidden is betting on basketball games in any fashion.

The greatest proof that Jordan never, ever did such a thing?

Already a minority owner of the Bobcats in 2007, he would become the majority owner just a few short years after his bummer night in Vegas.

"

It's hardly a mystery why Jordan's first retirement remains so fascinating to so many. We'll probably never again see a story like it. An athlete who was a cultural icon and in the prime of his playing days walked away from his sport, only to then play small-town baseball before ultimately returning to his first sport as if he never left.

What do you believe about Jordan's first retirement?