Picking Referees for the Super Bowl (1 Viewer)

[BlueOnion]

I genuinely believe this topic deserves it's own thread, I hope it doesn't get me banned.

Mystery Achiever and I were discussing the Roethlisberger touchdown and the following concept emerged.

But this could be the crux of the problem[RE: Roethlisberger touchdown]; the way head referees run their 'referee teams' and how inconsistent this may be.

The referee who signaled the touchdown could have been on an "NFL referee team" this past year in which the head referee of the team ran the 'referee team' on the guidelines of, "Try to let plays go as long as you can, make your best judgment call after the play has finished and we will sort out any confussion in the replay booth if a play is challenged."

The head referee during the Super Bowl clearly ran his "NFL referee team" with instructions of, "Make your best call on the field and unless it is a glaring mis-call, I will not overturn your call if it is challenged."

I think what we could have witnessed is a short-coming in a 'referee all-star team' and the variance in how head referee's use instant replay and what instructions they give their referee teams?

 

[BGP]

Yes I think it would help the super bowl refs if they are all familiar with each other through working together for the entire season. Sending the best "team" of refs would be a better idea.

 

[BlueOnion]

Another good point I saw mentioned:

What it comes down to is that I don't think a referee has the luxury of waiting to see what happens on a play before throwing a flag. If he throws a flag when he sees a penalty, people complain if they don't agree with the call. If he waits to throw the flag, people complain that it was a late flag and the ref didn't really see anything.

Clearly some teams of referee's don't mind picking up flags while others may not believe in picking up flags. I don't have a problem with either group of referee teams as long as they are consistent, but when you start grouping referees from different teams together, you then lose your consistency.

 

[jurb26]

I agree, the NFL should keep teams together. It never has made much sense to me that they split them up. I guess in a way they look at the SB for refs as they look at the ProBowl for players though.

 

[BlueOnion]

I will be honest, originally I didn't think an all-star team of referees would be that different from the best referee team. But the more I read about the referees, the more I am cognitive of the varying degrees of discretion in how certain head referees may handle certain circumstances.

For example, a head referee could encourage his team to throw a flag and encourage his referees to talk about the call and not be afraid to pick up a flag after discussion. However, this would be a stark contrast to a head referee who likes to encourage his referees to call exactly what you see at the moment of the play.

 

[brettdj]

They are officials.

The officials have different positions, referee(white hat), head linesman (chains), line judge(opposite of head linesman),

umpire(middle), back judge(deep), side judge(deep sideline), and field judge(deep sideline.)

Just complaining because I could not understand the original post very well because of it.

 

[BlueOnion]

They are officials.

The officials have different positions, referee(white hat), head linesman (chains), line judge(opposite of head linesman),

umpire(middle), back judge(deep), side judge(deep sideline), and field judge(deep sideline.)

Just complaining because I could not understand the original post very well because of it.

All these guys make up an officials' team and a single refereee (white head) oversees the same team each week. I was wondering what is the difference between each team; as far as rules or guidelines laid out by the head referee of each team?

 

[Refbuz]

They are officials.

The officials have different positions, referee(white hat), head linesman (chains), line judge(opposite of head linesman),

umpire(middle), back judge(deep), side judge(deep sideline), and field judge(deep sideline.)

Just complaining because I could not understand the original post very well because of it.

All these guys make up an officials' team and a single refereee (white head) oversees the same team each week. I was wondering what is the difference between each team; as far as rules or guidelines laid out by the head referee of each team?

Each referee is different. The ultimate responsibility of the referee (white hat) is administer the game. Some are rigid in their pregame preparation, while others are more laid back. But ultimately it is up to the officials at the other positions to call their game. Imagine if you worked in a big department in a company. The department is so big that it requires multiple supervisors. Not all of the supervisors are going to have the same management style, but they are all working towards a common goal. Its no different for the white hat in each crew. They all have thier own styles to prep their crew.

As far as mixing and matching crews, I don't think that it is a problem. Its a pretty common practice for big games at every level. Odds are the guys that worked in the Orange and Rose Bowls weren't an entire crew for the year.

 

[The Jerk]

I will be honest, originally I didn't think an all-star team of referees would be that different from the best referee team.  But the more I read about the referees, the more I am cognitive of the varying degrees of discretion in how certain head referees may handle certain circumstances.

For example, a head referee could encourage his team to throw a flag and encourage his referees to talk about the call and not be afraid to pick up a flag after discussion.  However, this would be a stark contrast to a head referee who likes to encourage his referees to call exactly what you see at the moment of the play.

I think there are other benefits from advancing the best team instead of forming an all-star crew. The team of officials will:1. know each other's tendencies (and therefore know when a call is unusual for a given official)

2. have a shared history (or database, by analogy) of calls and scenarios to which they can compare current situations

3. may be better able to divide the region of the field each is viewing and avoid dead zones due to familiarity

 

[BlueOnion]

I think there are other benefits from advancing the best team instead of forming an all-star crew. The team of officials will:

1. know each other's tendencies (and therefore know when a call is unusual for a given official)

2. have a shared history (or database, by analogy) of calls and scenarios to which they can compare current situations

3. may be better able to divide the region of the field each is viewing and avoid dead zones due to familiarity

I am starting to see a lot of advantages for having the 'best crew' instead of an 'All-Star' crew.

 

[BlueOnion]

Imagine if you worked in a big department in a company. The department is so big that it requires multiple supervisors. Not all of the supervisors are going to have the same management style, but they are all working towards a common goal. Its no different for the white hat in each crew. They all have thier own styles to prep their crew.

This is a great intrepration of what I was trying to say.

 

[Refbuz]

I think there are other benefits from advancing the best team instead of forming an all-star crew. The team of officials will:

1. know each other's tendencies (and therefore know when a call is unusual for a given official)

2. have a shared history (or database, by analogy) of calls and scenarios to which they can compare current situations

3. may be better able to divide the region of the field each is viewing and avoid dead zones due to familiarity

I am starting to see a lot of advantages for having the 'best crew' instead of an 'All-Star' crew.

How would you feel if in my earlier example another supervisor's "crew" got a raise because they were the rated on the whole as better "crew"??? Yet you, as an individual, rated higher than anyone else in that crew? I'd imagine that being passed over because of things that are out of your control wouldn't make you too happy...

 

[BlueOnion]

How would you feel if in my earlier example another supervisor's "crew" got a raise because they were the rated on the whole as better "crew"??? Yet you, as an individual, rated higher than anyone else in that crew? I'd imagine that being passed over because of things that are out of your control wouldn't make you too happy...

Ah yes. This is a seperate topic in my opinion but equally important. This would suck as a referee, but I am not a referee.

 

[The Jerk]

I think there are other benefits from advancing the best team instead of forming an all-star crew. The team of officials will:

1. know each other's tendencies (and therefore know when a call is unusual for a given official)

2. have a shared history (or database, by analogy) of calls and scenarios to which they can compare current situations

3. may be better able to divide the region of the field each is viewing and avoid dead zones due to familiarity

I am starting to see a lot of advantages for having the 'best crew' instead of an 'All-Star' crew.

How would you feel if in my earlier example another supervisor's "crew" got a raise because they were the rated on the whole as better "crew"??? Yet you, as an individual, rated higher than anyone else in that crew? I'd imagine that being passed over because of things that are out of your control wouldn't make you too happy...

Interesting point. I'll answer that with two more questions:1. Is the more important goal to have the best possible refereed SB or reward the best officials by having them in the SB?

2. Why should the officials be different than the teams?

I think most of us answer #1 pretty easily -- best refereed game.

As for #2, this question speaks to the point made earlier that the NFL uses a Pro Bowl-like approach to putting together a Super Bowl officiating crew. This leads me to a third question: Why not use the best officiating TEAM for the SB, and use the best INDIVIDUAL officials (at each position) for the Pro Bowl?

 

[Franknbeans]

Interesting point. I'll answer that with two more questions:

1. Is the more important goal to have the best possible refereed SB or reward the best officials by having them in the SB?

2. Why should the officials be different than the teams?

I think most of us answer #1 pretty easily -- best refereed game.

As for #2, this question speaks to the point made earlier that the NFL uses a Pro Bowl-like approach to putting together a Super Bowl officiating crew. This leads me to a third question: Why not use the best officiating TEAM for the SB, and use the best INDIVIDUAL officials (at each position) for the Pro Bowl?

Take it a step further. Use the grades to determine which teams are the best from the regular season (I assume they already do this) and then continue the grading process throughout the post-season such that those with the best grades from the wild card games advancing until the best team reaches the Superbowl.

 

[The Jerk]

Interesting point. I'll answer that with two more questions:

1. Is the more important goal to have the best possible refereed SB or reward the best officials by having them in the SB?

2. Why should the officials be different than the teams?

I think most of us answer #1 pretty easily -- best refereed game.

As for #2, this question speaks to the point made earlier that the NFL uses a Pro Bowl-like approach to putting together a Super Bowl officiating crew. This leads me to a third question: Why not use the best officiating TEAM for the SB, and use the best INDIVIDUAL officials (at each position) for the Pro Bowl?

Take it a step further. Use the grades to determine which teams are the best from the regular season (I assume they already do this) and then continue the grading process throughout the post-season such that those with the best grades from the wild card games advancing until the best team reaches the Superbowl.

Should the NFL make their grades, and more importantly their grading criteria, public so that there can be more objective analysis by outside (theoretically more objective) people as to the performance of the officials?Look at this week's announcements that the game was properly officiated. Most people who believe otherwise have not and will not change their opinion due to the league's announcement. Would they be more persuaded if there was a neutral party involved?

This is probably unrealistic, as I imagine that the average fan and sportswriter would not want to get into the technical terms of officiating. There's a lot more going on to grade officials than how many calls each made were close/wrong/whatever.

 

[Franknbeans]

Interesting point. I'll answer that with two more questions:

1. Is the more important goal to have the best possible refereed SB or reward the best officials by having them in the SB?

2. Why should the officials be different than the teams?

I think most of us answer #1 pretty easily -- best refereed game.

As for #2, this question speaks to the point made earlier that the NFL uses a Pro Bowl-like approach to putting together a Super Bowl officiating crew. This leads me to a third question: Why not use the best officiating TEAM for the SB, and use the best INDIVIDUAL officials (at each position) for the Pro Bowl?

Take it a step further. Use the grades to determine which teams are the best from the regular season (I assume they already do this) and then continue the grading process throughout the post-season such that those with the best grades from the wild card games advancing until the best team reaches the Superbowl.

Should the NFL make their grades, and more importantly their grading criteria, public so that there can be more objective analysis by outside (theoretically more objective) people as to the performance of the officials?Look at this week's announcements that the game was properly officiated. Most people who believe otherwise have not and will not change their opinion due to the league's announcement. Would they be more persuaded if there was a neutral party involved?

This is probably unrealistic, as I imagine that the average fan and sportswriter would not want to get into the technical terms of officiating. There's a lot more going on to grade officials than how many calls each made were close/wrong/whatever.

I don't think opening it up for review would help the process at all and my original thought of having a referee team playoff, so to speak, would still do little to prevent the advancing referee team from having a bad game in the Superbowl. Let's face it. There was only one obviously bad call in the Superbowl (the phantom Hasslebeck blocking below the waist call) . It sucks that all the "close" calls went against the Seahawks but that's football. I am not sure there is anything anyone could do to eliminate the human factor that is inherent in the game.

 

[BlueOnion]

Let's face it. There was only one obviously bad call in the Superbowl (the phantom Hasslebeck blocking below the waist call) . It sucks that all the "close" calls went against the Seahawks but that's football. I am not sure there is anything anyone could do to eliminate the human factor that is inherent in the game.

Please don't hijack this thread with more Pittsburgh whinning.

 

[Franknbeans]

Let's face it.  There was only one obviously bad call in the Superbowl (the phantom Hasslebeck blocking below the waist call) .  It sucks that all the "close" calls went against the Seahawks but that's football.  I am not sure there is anything anyone could do to eliminate the human factor that is inherent in the game.

Please don't hijack this thread with more Pittsburgh whinning.

Just stating the facts.

 

[Dvorak]

How would you feel if in my earlier example another supervisor's "crew" got a raise because they were the rated on the whole as better "crew"??? Yet you, as an individual, rated higher than anyone else in that crew?  I'd imagine that being passed over because of things that are out of your control wouldn't make you too happy...

Ah yes. This is a seperate topic in my opinion but equally important. This would suck as a referee, but I am not a referee.

Is this where we start talking about how much money the refs pulled in for working the Superbowl (under-the-table, *wink* *wink*)?

 

[Refbuz]

Interesting point. I'll answer that with two more questions:

1. Is the more important goal to have the best possible refereed SB or reward the best officials by having them in the SB?

2. Why should the officials be different than the teams?

I think most of us answer #1 pretty easily -- best refereed game.

As for #2, this question speaks to the point made earlier that the NFL uses a Pro Bowl-like approach to putting together a Super Bowl officiating crew. This leads me to a third question: Why not use the best officiating TEAM for the SB, and use the best INDIVIDUAL officials (at each position) for the Pro Bowl?

What do you think is more prestigious in the officiating world. Working the most watched championship in the world or an all-star game that is an afterthought???

 

[The Jerk]

Interesting point. I'll answer that with two more questions:

1. Is the more important goal to have the best possible refereed SB or reward the best officials by having them in the SB?

2. Why should the officials be different than the teams?

I think most of us answer #1 pretty easily -- best refereed game.

As for #2, this question speaks to the point made earlier that the NFL uses a Pro Bowl-like approach to putting together a Super Bowl officiating crew. This leads me to a third question: Why not use the best officiating TEAM for the SB, and use the best INDIVIDUAL officials (at each position) for the Pro Bowl?

What do you think is more prestigious in the officiating world. Working the most watched championship in the world or an all-star game that is an afterthought???

In case you missed it, my point is that I strongly believe that most people don't care what is more prestigious for the individual official. They'd rather see the best possible officiating. If that involves using intact teams rather than all-star teams, then the NFL should do it.

 

[BeTheMatch]

I think they've gone back and forth in recent years. They used to keep crews together for the longest time, then I remember them forming these all-star crews for a while, but it didn't work out, so they switched back. Apparently this year, they went back to the all-star variety.