SI.com article on the replacement referees (1 Viewer)

[pollardsvision]

Also, I respect everyone's view, but frankly I'm stunned at the reaction over this. Wait until you're playing against Calvin Johnson, and he hauls in a 60-yard TD pass to beat you in your fantasy game. Then on the replay, you see that the left tackle MUGGED the defensive end, and the referee blew an easy holding call.

Happens all the time with regular refs.

Because of a pay off?

No, because they accidently miss a call. If you are arguing about a replacement ref being payed off, you are seriously

Yes, a referee accepting money to influence the outcome is an impossibility.

I'm not sure where I stand on this issue (though my initial reaction is that the the NFLRA folk need to be thankful about such a nice part-time gig and get back to work), but I don't see the payoffs as a huge concern.Obviously, it could happen.

But I don't think the chances of it dramatically increase.

These guys now have a real opportunity to advance their career and they will be scrutinized very heavily. I also assume they are getting a nice pay bump over their old job (though I'm sure not as much as the current/former refs).

Plus, if these guys were looking for some gambling payouts, why wouldn't they stay under the radar in DIII? Doesn't that make more sense than running their game in the NFL, which has far more eyeballs?

I think you could certainly argue that it's the refs with more professional security and union protection that would be the bigger concern.

We certainly know these guys aren't satisfied with their current compensation.

I have no idea what's going on with these guys, but you could make the case both ways, I think.

If I'm looking to flip a dirty ref, I'm not looking for the wet behind the ears kid trying to impress his bosses, probably doesn't know how to do it without getting caught, and might see his career ended over some bad calls.

I'm looking for the old vet that knows how things work, is beyond reproach, and isn't satisfied his current pay status. There's a decent chance that there's already a well-respected NFL ref that's been dirty for years.

Oh NO my friend. These guys are considered SCABS to the NFLRA and their chances of ever being worked up to the NFL are DEAD to them. These guys are traitors in the eyes of the NFLRA.How much big money do you see being gambled on DIII vs. NFL. Reffing at the NFL level gives you much more opportunity to swing something that people gamble more on.

Are you saying the NFLRA would pass over good refs one day b/c they crossed the line?If that's the case then we must be talking about a highly replaceable skill that needs arbitrary barriers of entry to weed out the millions that love that job and would do well with good training.

 

[DiStefano]

Fine, don't listen to me. I'm a message board goon just like the rest of you.

Listen to the guys who play/played the game. Lomas Brown's quote is above, and now Boomer Esiason:

“It’s ridiculous,” said Esiason. “It is ridiculous that the NFL is going to allow replacement officials on the field (in the regular season).”

So...the NFL is supposed to just give in and give them whatever they want? Got it.

There are negotiations in life. The league appears unwilling to budge an inch.

A 5-11% pay raise per year isn't giving an inch?

Probably the least important issue on the table.

Yes, this whole thing is a catastrophe. It is Armageddon. It is doubtful America will survive; let alone the whole world. If we get replacement refs, we might as well hunker down in our bunkers, buy guns, and get ready for the Apocalypse.

 

[GroveDiesel]

Fine, don't listen to me. I'm a message board goon just like the rest of you.

Listen to the guys who play/played the game. Lomas Brown's quote is above, and now Boomer Esiason:

“It’s ridiculous,” said Esiason. “It is ridiculous that the NFL is going to allow replacement officials on the field (in the regular season).”

So...the NFL is supposed to just give in and give them whatever they want? Got it.

There are negotiations in life. The league appears unwilling to budge an inch.

No, it's the refs who aren't willing to budge an inch. What about the NFL offer is unfair? You haven't even addressed that because you know it's fair.If the replacement refs are bad and it creates injuries (it won't), them the blame is on the refs that want more than an 11% raise per year.

And yeah, 10 hours a week of studying rules and 5 hours for gameday for 6 months of the year and $170k seems pretty cushy to me.

IMO, anyone making $170k a year for 300 hours a year of work shouldn't be doing a whole lot of complaining. Especially when they're not even the product people are paying for.

You people acting like the NFL should give the refs anything they want are just silly. What if they asked for $1M a year each? Should the NFL just pay it?

 

[CrazyFox]

I'm not willing to dive into the specifics of what both sides are looking for and take a side in that aspect of it.

As a fan I just want the best product on the field. And as much as we complain about the regular refs, they are the best product at the moment.

So let's hope it gets settled soon.

 

[DiStefano]

The Onion has it right:

With contract negotiations failing and the league announcing plans to hire replacement officials, the NFL Referees Association may soon go on strike. We boil down the major sticking points of both sides.

Referees allege the NFL has covered up the long-term health risks of blowing whistles

NFL has declined referee's repeated requests to once and for all please explain to them in simple language exactly what is and is not pass interference

Refs have filed a $1.5 million defamation of character suit against league's replay booths, which they claim undermine their authority by constantly contradicting their decisions

NFL would require every ref to be as ripped as that hunky muscleman Ed Hochuli

Refs want to be permitted to join in when players do a touchdown dance

NFL won't guarantee that no official will ever have to share field with Jay Cutler more than once a season

Refs want fully furnished three-bedroom apartment from which they can comfortably watch the game instead of exposing themselves to harm on the field

NFL has demanded legally binding written guarantee that officials will never get anything wrong ever again.

 

[Shutout]

Three questions for you RN...

1) In your lifetime could you raise enough capital to buy an NFL team?

2) Could you ever develop the skills to replace Cam Newton, Calvin Johnson, or Chris Johnson?

3) Could you given four years of training ref on an NFL crew and basically go unnoticed as the current guys do?

This is basically like the peanut vendors demanding a raise 2-3X more than the cost of living increases for the next 7 years because they know their way around the stadium better than a replacement peanut vendor. The fans will be pissed when their peanuts aren't there when they want them, but they'll get over it. Heck, one could argue that an elite beer vendor who can a pour beer faster than the average person brings more physical skills to the table than the refs.

Bass, it's obvious you don't appreciate the work that goes into being an NFL referee, and I don't feel like arguing with you because neither of us will budge. These guys are studying rules and reviewing film every day during the season, and most days during the offseason. Just because they have other jobs doesn't mean they don't take time to be the best referees they can be. Have you ever managed to hold two (or three) jobs at once? How about holding a full-time job as well as going to school? People do it every day.

RN, you're missing his point. The NFL referee's don't have any specialized skill. So ANYBODY after a certain amount of studying and experience could do just a good a job as any current member of the NFLRA. In fact, a referee whose sole profession is to study and perfect being an NFL referee would, in the long run, do a BETTER job than the part-time referees of the NFLRA who don't want to become full-time employees and perfect their craft. The current members of the NFLRA are the best of their profession, but they can be better. Why not become full-time referees and be the best that they can be? I think the NFL is right to want them to do this. If that means that they have to go a few games of the 2012 NFL season with less than adequate referees to get these buffoons to realize this, then so be it.

You are completely misunderstanding what is being offered here. This Is NOT an offering to make all refs full-time. READ the article I linked. It is to make a very small amount of refs full-time and then their job becomes to filter out and train the rest, who are still not full-time.Someone gave a lot of great examples above, but its silly to say "given enough time", ANYBODY can do this. How much time you got on your hands? Want to come learn how to mix rocket propulsion fuel? If I teach you and there are some mishaps along the way, is that ok as long as its all "better over the long-term"? I have a Grandmother who makes fried chicken better than my mom and my mom's had decades to practice. It just doesn't translate like that.

you're talking about this, glossing it over like "What's a few games?" but the point that Raider Nation is trying to get some of you guys to see is this is BIG business with BIG issues. A lot of money is gambled on the NFL. The product makes a LOT of money. There are people's safety at stake. There is IMAGE at stake (something the NFL cares DEEPLY about). You can't just have a mockery of things and think its no big deal.

Say what you want, but Raider is exactly right about this. If you don't believe him, give it 10 days because I guarantee you, absolutely guarantee you, that THE topic come next Monday on every sports talk show and media outlet will be DOMINATED by people griping about the reffing instead of talking about the product they saw.

 

[GroveDiesel]

Fine, don't listen to me. I'm a message board goon just like the rest of you.

Listen to the guys who play/played the game. Lomas Brown's quote is above, and now Boomer Esiason:

“It’s ridiculous,” said Esiason. “It is ridiculous that the NFL is going to allow replacement officials on the field (in the regular season).”

So...the NFL is supposed to just give in and give them whatever they want? Got it.

There are negotiations in life. The league appears unwilling to budge an inch.

No, it's the refs who aren't willing to budge an inch. What about the NFL offer is unfair? You haven't even addressed that because you know it's fair.If the replacement refs are bad and it creates injuries (it won't), them the blame is on the refs that want more than an 11% raise per year.

And yeah, 10 hours a week of studying rules and 5 hours for gameday for 6 months of the year and $170k seems pretty cushy to me.

IMO, anyone making $170k a year for 300 hours a year of work shouldn't be doing a whole lot of complaining. Especially when they're not even the product people are paying for.

You people acting like the NFL should give the refs anything they want are just silly. What if they asked for $1M a year each? Should the NFL just pay it?

Of course not. All I know is that I can't stomach another second of THESE "officials"... so they'd better find a middle ground soon.

Again, what's not fair about what the league is offering? I'd say that the fairly significant increase in salaries is already a middle ground for moving to a 401(k) from a DB plan. I don't know of any white collar workers that are covered by a DB plan anymore. The demand to continue that seems fairly outrageous when viewed in today's reality.

 

[Raider Nation]

Fine, don't listen to me. I'm a message board goon just like the rest of you.

Listen to the guys who play/played the game. Lomas Brown's quote is above, and now Boomer Esiason:

“It’s ridiculous,” said Esiason. “It is ridiculous that the NFL is going to allow replacement officials on the field (in the regular season).”

So...the NFL is supposed to just give in and give them whatever they want? Got it.

There are negotiations in life. The league appears unwilling to budge an inch.

No, it's the refs who aren't willing to budge an inch. What about the NFL offer is unfair? You haven't even addressed that because you know it's fair.If the replacement refs are bad and it creates injuries (it won't), them the blame is on the refs that want more than an 11% raise per year.

And yeah, 10 hours a week of studying rules and 5 hours for gameday for 6 months of the year and $170k seems pretty cushy to me.

IMO, anyone making $170k a year for 300 hours a year of work shouldn't be doing a whole lot of complaining. Especially when they're not even the product people are paying for.

You people acting like the NFL should give the refs anything they want are just silly. What if they asked for $1M a year each? Should the NFL just pay it?

Of course not. All I know is that I can't stomach another second of THESE "officials"... so they'd better find a middle ground soon.

Again, what's not fair about what the league is offering? I'd say that the fairly significant increase in salaries is already a middle ground for moving to a 401(k) from a DB plan. I don't know of any white collar workers that are covered by a DB plan anymore. The demand to continue that seems fairly outrageous when viewed in today's reality.

Who am I to say what's "fair?" Were I a referee, I could answer this better. But from what I've read, the league's demands seem more unreasonable than the referees' demands. Not once in this thread have I said either side is 100% in the right as far as the negotiations go. But both sides have to put on their big boy pants to work something out. The quality of the officiating cannot be compromised.

 

[Hoss Style]

It sounds like Raider's main point is that the NFL is devaluing the importance of the refs. And I'd have to agree with that.

I'd also agree that the NFL's offer to them sounds reasonable for the most part.

But it still seems to me like the NFL is taking an "Eh... big whoop" as to whether it's the regular refs or the scabs. And I disagree with that attitude strongly.

 

[Banemorth]

The salary and pension issue is what it is. They refs and NFL can go back and forth over that all they want. These are the two points that interest me the most and that I want to see come to fruition:

The league would like to phase in full-time officials by first having a liaison-typeofficial in each of the seven on-field positions. Then, if the officiating department hasan enforcement matter with, say, an aspect of pass interference calls, this could beaddressed the full-time field judge, side judge, and back judge with instructions tobe filtered down to all in those positions. While the union has not expresseddisagreement with full-time referees, the issue becomes handcuffed to the officials’pension plan. Because full-time officials would be employees in the corporate office,there would be a disparity with the existing employees who do not have a pensionplan.Finally, the NFL has proposed increasing the number of crews from 17 to 20. This, ineffect, will give every crew a third and fourth bye week during the season if theadditional crews are assigned equally. The NFL has stated publicly that it could usethe extra officials to address performance issues midseason. This has a practicaleffect of suspending officials, and coupled with two less game checks per season, theproposal obviously throws sand in the gears of any negotiation.

The ability to give a bad crew a "suspension" would be awesome. Also getting full timers to help with some call consistency would be amazing as well.

 

[GroveDiesel]

It sounds like Raider's main point is that the NFL is devaluing the importance of the refs. And I'd have to agree with that.I'd also agree that the NFL's offer to them sounds reasonable for the most part.But it still seems to me like the NFL is taking an "Eh... big whoop" as to whether it's the regular refs or the scabs. And I disagree with that attitude strongly.

I'm not sure the league has many other options than to act like that. If they come out and say "without the refs, the product on the field will be bad and players will get hurt" then pressure would be overwhelming to cave and give the refs whatever they want. I don't see why all the pressure seems to be placed on the NFL by those in this thread who also seem to agree that the NFL's offer seems fair. Why aren't people calling out the refs for being greedy and forcing the NFL to put out an inferior product?

 

[Dismattle]

Effectiveness of Publicity

The theory, Any press is good press, has been coined to describe situations where bad behaviour by people involved with an organization or brand has actually resulted in positive results, due to the fame and press coverage accrued by such events.

One example would be the Australian Tourism Board's "So where the bloody hell are you?" advertising campaign that was initially banned in the UK, but the amount of publicity this generated resulted in the official website for the campaign being swamped with requests to see the banned ad.[1]

The popular sitcom, Married... with Children, achieved skyrocketing ratings after activist Terry Rakolta petitioned sponsors to withdraw their support from the program.[citation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Publicity

The NFL is yet again getting free Pub (air time) newspaper articles etc. The worst example of how this could continue (from sorta a WWE perspective) would be for us to see interesting storys, on games played where the game isnt sold-out. On a positve note, I recall hearing the threshold for black-outs for games has decreased.

I must admit, Im not so sure, more injury's will be seen (League is constant in review, post game, ie. illegal hits) But small things like: |game delay's| could cause an increase of muscle fiber issues cramps (body needs to stay warmed up, loose, and hydrated) ie. standing around, distracted by delayed poor-play/calls isnt very conducive to solid play.

If the noon game is delayed, should the game coverage stop? Or continue to the next game? I imagine this could actually be a positive (Ref's keeping pace of game on schedule) In other words, not knowing all the angle's, Refs would should be quick in making calls

p.s. heres an older articlle http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/2010-09-06-nfl-tv-blackouts-forecast_N.htm (11 out of 32) My appology for boring you w my two cents. imo getting upset at the Ref, is part of the thrill (at least give me a competent opponent) http://www.refcostume.com/wp-content/themes/eCommerce/thumb.php?src=http://www.refcostume.com/wp-content/uploads/products_img/blindrefereecostume.jpg&w=590&zc=1&q=80&bid=1 << Obviously a real NFL ref

 

[Addai's Adidas]

We don't really need refs. It' s all instant replay anyway.

 

[renesauz]

No matter which side you are on - even if I disagree strongly with you - I'm glad to see so much passion for the topic. I was afraid this would fall to page 3 an hour after I posted it.

Actually...I started a thread on this topic about a week ago. Not one repsonse...it's buried on page 8 by now.

 

[Banemorth]

We don't really need refs. It' s all instant replay anyway.

Can't tell if serious.......Many game changing penalties you can't review. Holding calls, PI, Personal Fouls, etc.

 

[Hoss Style]

It sounds like Raider's main point is that the NFL is devaluing the importance of the refs. And I'd have to agree with that.

I'd also agree that the NFL's offer to them sounds reasonable for the most part.

But it still seems to me like the NFL is taking an "Eh... big whoop" as to whether it's the regular refs or the scabs. And I disagree with that attitude strongly.

I'm not sure the league has many other options than to act like that. If they come out and say "without the refs, the product on the field will be bad and players will get hurt" then pressure would be overwhelming to cave and give the refs whatever they want. I don't see why all the pressure seems to be placed on the NFL by those in this thread who also seem to agree that the NFL's offer seems fair. Why aren't people calling out the refs for being greedy and forcing the NFL to put out an inferior product?

Well, I do think the refs are being a bit greedy.But the onus is clearly on the NFL to get this done. After all - it's the NFL's product out there - not the refs. There should be more urgency on the NFL's part to get this done and therefore put a better product on the field.

If my favorite ice cream shop's employees go on strike and I don't get the same quality sundae I'm used to when I go there, I don't care what the employees are asking for or why they are striking. I just tell the owner "Your sundaes stink lately. These new guys aren't cutting it. Bring back Bob. His sundaes rule." The sundae is the product. The shop is responsible for the product. The quality of the product is bad. The shop should be working like hell trying to improve it and letting everyone know that they acknowledge the inferior product.

Like I said, I don't really agree with the refs in this. I just don't like the NFL's flippant attitude towards it. I think they should 1) take responsibility for the crappy product we've been getting lately, 2)apologize and 3)try like mad to get the top refs back on the job. I don't get the feeling that they are doing any of the three. It looks to me like they are in a personal showdown with the union and are putting the quality of the product on the back burner.

Sometimes it pays as a business to just swallow your pride and let the other side think they are right. Give a little more than you think you should if the return quality gained to your product outweighs what you've given. In this case I think it would. (From what little we know of the situation)

 

[renesauz]

It sounds like Raider's main point is that the NFL is devaluing the importance of the refs. And I'd have to agree with that.I'd also agree that the NFL's offer to them sounds reasonable for the most part.But it still seems to me like the NFL is taking an "Eh... big whoop" as to whether it's the regular refs or the scabs. And I disagree with that attitude strongly.

What other attitude can they publicly display while in negotiations?I mean...do you expect them to say they're worried and have to get it done ASAP or the league's gonna fall apart? Why give the refs any kind of negotiating help? REGARDLESS of how the NFL actually feels/thinks about this, I don't see how they could publicly say/do anything differently than they've done.

 

[Hoss Style]

It sounds like Raider's main point is that the NFL is devaluing the importance of the refs. And I'd have to agree with that.

I'd also agree that the NFL's offer to them sounds reasonable for the most part.

But it still seems to me like the NFL is taking an "Eh... big whoop" as to whether it's the regular refs or the scabs. And I disagree with that attitude strongly.

What other attitude can they publicly display while in negotiations?I mean...do you expect them to say they're worried and have to get it done ASAP or the league's gonna fall apart? Why give the refs any kind of negotiating help? REGARDLESS of how the NFL actually feels/thinks about this, I don't see how they could publicly say/do anything differently than they've done.

Perception is reality oftentimes in business.

Like another poster said above - the NFL cares about the way it's perceived BIG time. I'd tend to agree with that.

With a flailing product on display, like we've been seeing the last few weeks, I'd say some sort of public relations is in order. If it's this bad during the season it could be a disaster. Again, I think the refs are pushing it a bit too far, but then again - the refs aren't putting out the product. In the negotiations with the players the NFL was constantly trying to look like the good guys. PR was in full effect. With the refs I see none of that. I just see a "We don't need you" attitude. I think they do need them, as do many others.

 

[pollardsvision]

It sounds like Raider's main point is that the NFL is devaluing the importance of the refs. And I'd have to agree with that.

I'd also agree that the NFL's offer to them sounds reasonable for the most part.

But it still seems to me like the NFL is taking an "Eh... big whoop" as to whether it's the regular refs or the scabs. And I disagree with that attitude strongly.

What other attitude can they publicly display while in negotiations?I mean...do you expect them to say they're worried and have to get it done ASAP or the league's gonna fall apart? Why give the refs any kind of negotiating help? REGARDLESS of how the NFL actually feels/thinks about this, I don't see how they could publicly say/do anything differently than they've done.

Perception is reality oftentimes in business.

Like another poster said above - the NFL cares about the way it's perceived BIG time. I'd tend to agree with that.

With a flailing product on display, like we've been seeing the last few weeks, I'd say some sort of public relations is in order. If it's this bad during the season it could be a disaster. Again, I think the refs are pushing it a bit too far, but then again - the refs aren't putting out the product. In the negotiations with the players the NFL was constantly trying to look like the good guys. PR was in full effect. With the refs I see none of that. I just see a "We don't need you" attitude. I think they do need them, as do many others.

The good news for fans generally side with billionaires over millionaires, for some reason.And it won't be very hard to turn the fans against the NFLRA refs, as most fans feel they could do the job with a few month's training, and that the refs should feel lucky to have that cushy part-time job

That may not be true, but that's the perception.

As much as they hate the millionaire players seeming ungrateful, they'll hate 6-figure refs even more.

The NFL just needs a few of things to happen:

-Make this about those greedy NFLRA refs (easy to do)

-Get a tad bit of sympathy and understanding from fans, for these courageous DIII jumping into an impossible situation. With any luck, they might even get a pass from bad calls.

-Of course, the trickiest part is they need for something really awful not to happen. But even then, they can still make this about those greedy refs.

The NFL can handle a few weeks of bad officiating because they can prolong the image that they don't care about it and they can keep this about the greedy NFLRA refs for a very long time.

 

[Bo Skiboski]

I can't believe any football fan would be on the league's side here. You guys love paying 10 bucks for a beer at the stadium too i bet.

 

[GroveDiesel]

I don't think the product has been a failing product much at all. Other than the ludicrous call against Buffalo where the ball was downed at the 4 and the ref awarded a touchback, I could see the actual refs making every single one of the bad calls/no-calls that people have complained about. Every. Single. One. Heck, O remember a play last year where it was 100% clear on the replay that it was the wrong call and the refs STILL made the wrong call by not overturning it. There are always bad calls, it's just not normally magnified to this extent because of the situation.

 

[Bo Skiboski]

I don't think the product has been a failing product much at all. Other than the ludicrous call against Buffalo where the ball was downed at the 4 and the ref awarded a touchback, I could see the actual refs making every single one of the bad calls/no-calls that people have complained about. Every. Single. One. Heck, O remember a play last year where it was 100% clear on the replay that it was the wrong call and the refs STILL made the wrong call by not overturning it. There are always bad calls, it's just not normally magnified to this extent because of the situation.

Just wait until week one.

 

[GregR]

There was a terrible call made on the last play of the Giants-Pats game last night. A Giants DB running downfield with a Pats receiver intercepted the ball on the half yard line. Obviously his momentum carried him into the endzone. Refs spotted the ball on the 1/2 yard line instead of giving him the touchback. Meaningless game, but an utterly embarrassing mistake. I mean come on.

From your description, the refs were correct. If on an interception you get 2 feet down in the field of play, with the ball in the field of play, then if your momentum carries you in the end zone and you're downed, you get the ball at the spot of the interception. If at least one of your two feet came down in the end zone, or if the ball was in the end zone when your two feet touched, only then would it be a touchback.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

I can't believe any football fan would be on the league's side here. You guys love paying 10 bucks for a beer at the stadium too i bet.

Some people just like billionaires more than millionaires (or hundred thousandaires in this case).

 

[pollardsvision]

I can't believe any football fan would be on the league's side here. You guys love paying 10 bucks for a beer at the stadium too i bet.

I do find it odd that fans seem to care about wealth the owners and the League when it comes to labor and player contract issues. I find myself doing it sometimes and I don't even know why (that NYT fella coined a phrase for this phenomenon)., Regardless, your $10 beer comment makes no sense. I know what you really meant (we must like putting money owners' pockets), but I highly doubt paying officials more money would do anything to help reduce the cost of attending a football game.Whether it's true or not, most fans likely think the added cost for officials will eventually be paid by the fans.

 

[Bo Skiboski]

I can't believe any football fan would be on the league's side here. You guys love paying 10 bucks for a beer at the stadium too i bet.

I do find it odd that fans seem to care about wealth the owners and the League when it comes to labor and player contract issues. I find myself doing it sometimes and I don't even know why (that NYT fella coined a phrase for this phenomenon)., Regardless, your $10 beer comment makes no sense. I know what you really meant (we must like putting money owners' pockets), but I highly doubt paying officials more money would do anything to help reduce the cost of attending a football game.Whether it's true or not, most fans likely think the added cost for officials will eventually be paid by the fans.

What? Yeah, you missed my point. It wasn't really a great one so no harm no foul.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

I dont give a #### about the money, because... these current refs are so ####### god awful horribly bad.

I hope the NFL reaches an agreement with the Refs, even if they overpaid some.

The level of officiating is unacceptable regardless of any savings.

 

[⚡DEADHEAD⚡]

Unions across the board are overplaying their hands these days. I'm not sympathetic to the NFLRA's demands. The private sector has been moving away from defined benefits to defined contributions for a couple decades now. We've suffered from the lack of such a transition in the public sector as many of our communities go broke and some, literally, file for bankruptcy as they pay retirees their benefits for longer periods as longevity extends.

Very little gets me more excited than an upcoming NFL season and I'm usually averse to anything that will put that at risk but I'll tell you what, the NFLRA is not that strong. Whereas the NLFPA is powerful due to the players and personalities, I don't give a crap about who refs the game as long as it's refereed properly. If the NFL thinks it can have that in short order (a full season?), then more power to it.

I work for the federal government (via a contractor) and have been under a pay freeze for two years. The freeze may be extended. Remains to be seen. I sure as hell would like a guaranteed 5-11% annual raise for the foreseeable future. No sympathy here.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

I work for the federal government (via a contractor) and have been under a pay freeze for two years. The freeze may be extended.

Not even on the same planet when compared to the profitability of the NFL brand. Let alone the 32 franchises.

 

[⚡DEADHEAD⚡]

I work for the federal government (via a contractor) and have been under a pay freeze for two years. The freeze may be extended.

Not even on the same planet when compared to the profitability of the NFL brand. Let alone the 32 franchises.

Profitability is clearly irrelevant. If profitability was a critical factor here, then the dispute wouldn't exist.

 

[BassNBrew]

Fine, don't listen to me. I'm a message board goon just like the rest of you.

Listen to the guys who play/played the game. Lomas Brown's quote is above, and now Boomer Esiason:

“It’s ridiculous,” said Esiason. “It is ridiculous that the NFL is going to allow replacement officials on the field (in the regular season).”

So...the NFL is supposed to just give in and give them whatever they want? Got it.

There are negotiations in life. The league appears unwilling to budge an inch.

A 5-11% pay raise per year isn't giving an inch?

 

[BigSteelThrill]

I work for the federal government (via a contractor) and have been under a pay freeze for two years. The freeze may be extended.

Not even on the same planet when compared to the profitability of the NFL brand. Let alone the 32 franchises.

Profitability is clearly irrelevant. If profitability was a critical factor here, then the dispute wouldn't exist.

Profitability is irrelevant when discuss employee future earnings? Interesting.

 

[bonesman]

I don't know where I stand on this. The new refs are BAAAAAAAAD... however, the old refs weren't exactly awesome either.

 

[renesauz]

I can't believe any football fan would be on the league's side here. You guys love paying 10 bucks for a beer at the stadium too i bet.

Nope...actually I don't go to the stadiums often...ticket pricces are outragous!Lot of things I don't like about the NFL...this just happens to NOT be one of them. It's not an all or nothing proposition either. No...these guys as an entire group can't be replaced overnight...and I agree that it's ridiculous to assume that any couch potato could do it with enough training. But it's equally wrong to think that they CAN'T be replaced within a year or two. There are easily hundreds of guys out there, if not a few thousand, who could do that job just as well with a just little bit of seasoning. 150k for a part time job that comes with 7 months off yearly is a ridiculously cushy job, even if everyone can't do it. These guys simply aren't anywhere near THAT unique, and were probably already OVERpaid.So yeah....gonna side with the NFL here. When the product suffers (and it will), I'm going to blame the refs who publicly decided a 10% raise wasn't good enough, and (I believe) privately are far more worried about having to decide between being a full time PROFESSIONAL REFEREE and a part time ref/full time lawyer (or whatever). I know the NFL offered to phase this in, and so folks are saying it's not the issue....but it is. I bet the refs would sign immediately should they get 10% AND the NFL drops the plan to phase to full time.

 

[renesauz]

I can't believe any football fan would be on the league's side here. You guys love paying 10 bucks for a beer at the stadium too i bet.

I do find it odd that fans seem to care about wealth the owners and the League when it comes to labor and player contract issues. I find myself doing it sometimes and I don't even know why (that NYT fella coined a phrase for this phenomenon)., Regardless, your $10 beer comment makes no sense. I know what you really meant (we must like putting money owners' pockets), but I highly doubt paying officials more money would do anything to help reduce the cost of attending a football game.Whether it's true or not, most fans likely think the added cost for officials will eventually be paid by the fans.

I honestly believe if it were a simple matter of $$$, this would already be resolved.

 

[Sarlakticacid]

2 of the NFLs goals this year are player safety and to get games completed quicker.

I don`t see how replacements can do this

 

[pollardsvision]

2 of the NFLs goals this year are player safety and to get games completed quicker.I don`t see how replacements can do this

We keep hearing this, but is there any evidence that NFL players will be more at risk with replacement officials?

 

[BassNBrew]

I can't believe any football fan would be on the league's side here. You guys love paying 10 bucks for a beer at the stadium too i bet.

Nope...actually I don't go to the stadiums often...ticket pricces are outragous!Lot of things I don't like about the NFL...this just happens to NOT be one of them. It's not an all or nothing proposition either. No...these guys as an entire group can't be replaced overnight...and I agree that it's ridiculous to assume that any couch potato could do it with enough training. But it's equally wrong to think that they CAN'T be replaced within a year or two. There are easily hundreds of guys out there, if not a few thousand, who could do that job just as well with a just little bit of seasoning. 150k for a part time job that comes with 7 months off yearly is a ridiculously cushy job, even if everyone can't do it. These guys simply aren't anywhere near THAT unique, and were probably already OVERpaid.So yeah....gonna side with the NFL here. When the product suffers (and it will), I'm going to blame the refs who publicly decided a 10% raise wasn't good enough, and (I believe) privately are far more worried about having to decide between being a full time PROFESSIONAL REFEREE and a part time ref/full time lawyer (or whatever). I know the NFL offered to phase this in, and so folks are saying it's not the issue....but it is. I bet the refs would sign immediately should they get 10% AND the NFL drops the plan to phase to full time.

Good post but I'll take issue with one statment.

There are easily hundreds of guys out there, if not a few thousand, who could do that job just as well with a just little bit of seasoning.

That statement might apply to the players, but there must be at least 1 million people who could be a ref given enough seasoning.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

I'm glad to see that most folks are with the NFL on this one.

Personally, I could not care less if the "real" refs never come back. Not even a little bit. It blows my mind how some folks in here bring up a play or two from the replacements and completely forget how often the "real" refs make stupidly horrendous calls that cost teams games. You can't flip between 3 games on Sunday without seeing several calls that just blow your mind, and you can't surf these boards for 3 weeks without finding one that costs a team a game. I haven't seen any major difference in the quality of officiating this preseason vs any other preseason. Minor, maybe, but they've done an adequate job, which is all we ever get out of the "real" refs anywa.

NFL officiating needs to be a full time job and the striking crew isn't particularly good at it in the first place. I don't see what leverage they have. A replacement crew is nearly as good right off the bat and will be better in the long run if they work full time. If the regular crew will only work if they get to keep working part time then I don't want a single one of them back. Stay the hell out. The game will be better without you.

The annoying thing is that after a few weeks of the regular season people will point to a few blown calls and make a huge stink about it as if the regular refs wouldn't have blown just as many calls, or more since some of them enjoy flexing their muscles on tv so much (literally and figuratively).

 

[⚡DEADHEAD⚡]

I work for the federal government (via a contractor) and have been under a pay freeze for two years. The freeze may be extended.

Not even on the same planet when compared to the profitability of the NFL brand. Let alone the 32 franchises.

Profitability is clearly irrelevant. If profitability was a critical factor here, then the dispute wouldn't exist.

Profitability is irrelevant when discuss employee future earnings? Interesting.

Pretty much. There's no formal profit-sharing plan here. If the NFLRA's case is "we want a bigger piece of the pie" then good luck with that. They have no right to the profits and they have a skill set that is replaceable, albeit not without growing pains. The offer on the table is pretty spectacular. I don't feel a bit bad for the refs.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

I work for the federal government (via a contractor) and have been under a pay freeze for two years. The freeze may be extended.

Not even on the same planet when compared to the profitability of the NFL brand. Let alone the 32 franchises.

Profitability is clearly irrelevant. If profitability was a critical factor here, then the dispute wouldn't exist.

Profitability is irrelevant when discuss employee future earnings? Interesting.

Pretty much. There's no formal profit-sharing plan here. If the NFLRA's case is "we want a bigger piece of the pie" then good luck with that. They have no right to the profits and they have a skill set that is replaceable, albeit not without growing pains. The offer on the table is pretty spectacular. I don't feel a bit bad for the refs.

I dont feel bad for the Refs either. ftr

 

[bonesman]

I haven't seen any major difference in the quality of officiating this preseason vs any other preseason. Minor, maybe, but they've done an adequate job, which is all we ever get out of the "real" refs anywa.

I think they've been noticeably worse than usual. Things like the ball being placed on the wrong hash mark.Then, just a min ago in this Seattle game... you have Golden Tate catch a pass that was CLEARLY out of bounds... not even close... they call it a reception. Then Seattle went hurry up and got a quick play in but Oakland threw a flag out sometime after the snap and were awarded the challenge from the previous play. Now, they got the call right in the end... but damn, really?And now as I'm about to submit it they call PI on good coverage and announce the wrong player (o/c that happens every week though)

 

[Donnybrook]

I haven't seen any major difference in the quality of officiating this preseason vs any other preseason. Minor, maybe, but they've done an adequate job, which is all we ever get out of the "real" refs anywa.

I think they've been noticeably worse than usual. Things like the ball being placed on the wrong hash mark.Then, just a min ago in this Seattle game... you have Golden Tate catch a pass that was CLEARLY out of bounds... not even close... they call it a reception. Then Seattle went hurry up and got a quick play in but Oakland threw a flag out sometime after the snap and were awarded the challenge from the previous play. Now, they got the call right in the end... but damn, really?And now as I'm about to submit it they call PI on good coverage and announce the wrong player (o/c that happens every week though)

Agree 100%. If I was the regular season and they allowed a challenge after the next play was snapped, I would be livid.

 

[Zigg]

I work for the federal government (via a contractor) and have been under a pay freeze for two years. The freeze may be extended.

Not even on the same planet when compared to the profitability of the NFL brand. Let alone the 32 franchises.

Profitability is clearly irrelevant. If profitability was a critical factor here, then the dispute wouldn't exist.

Profitability is irrelevant when discuss employee future earnings? Interesting.

Pretty much. There's no formal profit-sharing plan here. If the NFLRA's case is "we want a bigger piece of the pie" then good luck with that. They have no right to the profits and they have a skill set that is replaceable, albeit not without growing pains.

The offer on the table is pretty spectacular. I don't feel a bit bad for the refs.

I really don't think growing pains are a good idea in 2012. Too many other options and peoples attention spans are incredibly short. If the product is noticeably worse, the casual fan will leave in a hurry.

 

[⚡DEADHEAD⚡]

I work for the federal government (via a contractor) and have been under a pay freeze for two years. The freeze may be extended.

Not even on the same planet when compared to the profitability of the NFL brand. Let alone the 32 franchises.

Profitability is clearly irrelevant. If profitability was a critical factor here, then the dispute wouldn't exist.

Profitability is irrelevant when discuss employee future earnings? Interesting.

Pretty much. There's no formal profit-sharing plan here. If the NFLRA's case is "we want a bigger piece of the pie" then good luck with that. They have no right to the profits and they have a skill set that is replaceable, albeit not without growing pains.

The offer on the table is pretty spectacular. I don't feel a bit bad for the refs.

I really don't think growing pains are a good idea in 2012. Too many other options and peoples attention spans are incredibly short. If the product is noticeably worse, the casual fan will leave in a hurry.

The NFL is not getting rich on the casual fan and if the casual fan does leave - whatever that means - the NFL will still thrive. Why? Because we're not going anywhere. You, me, the 45,000 on this website, the millions who play fantasy, the tens of millions who watch every week even if it's the Rams vs. the Dolphins. We'll wait until they get it right (although I'd agree if you said we won't wait forever).

 

[netnalp]

I think it will make teams more reluctant to sit on 10 point or lower leads. The chances that a bad call can cause a point swing seems a lot higher. Teams that get conservative too early are going to get burned.

 

[GregR]

Sam Farmer ‏@LATimesfarmer

NFL officiating source tells me today's last-ditch talks with the league failed. No further talks scheduled.

Retweeted by Adam Caplan

 

[GroveDiesel]

According to Albert Breer, the sticking point is the pension plan. The union wants all current refs grandfathered in and the NFL to continue the DB plan for them. New refs would go into a 401(k) plan. The NFL wants to freeze the DB plan for everyone and move everyone to a 401(k). Neither side is budging on that issue.

 

[⚡DEADHEAD⚡]

According to Albert Breer, the sticking point is the pension plan. The union wants all current refs grandfathered in and the NFL to continue the DB plan for them. New refs would go into a 401(k) plan. The NFL wants to freeze the DB plan for everyone and move everyone to a 401(k). Neither side is budging on that issue.

Anyone know what the DB plan is as it stands?

 

[GregR]

PFT:

But an attempt at the conclusion of the release to characterize the financial portion of the dispute as trivial could backfire. The NFLRA says that the compensation increase its members seek along with the continuation of the defined benefit pension plan (i.e., the employer invests the money and the employees always get the same amount even if the market goes to hell in a handbag) would cost “about 1/3 of 1% of its $9 billion in revenues.”

Seems small, right? But that translates to $30 million. And the NFLRA doesn’t explain whether that’s over the course of a year or over the length of the deal.

It’s a clumsy effort, in our view, to make the league look greedy. Especially since a fairly limited exercise in number crunching reveals that the stuff the NFLRA wants over and above that which the NFL has offered results in a gap of $252,100 per official.

The release from the NFLRA also makes no mention of the non-economic portion of the dispute. One source with knowledge of the situation claims that the union is resisting aggressively the effort to create a bench of backups who would replace during the season any officials who are underperforming.