League's Lying/Denial Making it Worse

[Ramius]

Ramius, you're right man, but jeez...what's going on here?  People are going mad!!!  On Stevens' reception to the 1, there appeared to be holding.  Maybe it wasn't, but it was close enough to flag.  The lineman didn't need to get his hands up around the LB's neck, he could have just bumped him to the outside and it would've been a non-factor.  Even still, while 1st and goal inside the 5 is HUGE, they still had the ball and were still in FG range.  They came away with 0 points.

Warrick's punt return...There's always penalties on punt returns.  They still had the ball, they could've made something happen.  How come nobody is blaming the refs for the 30-yd pass that hit Stevens right in the chest on the 10 yard line???  Even after all of these penalties and setbacks, Seattle had plenty of chances to pin Pittsburgh deep, and their punter booted nine in a row through the endzone.  And Holmgren punts from the 50 with six minutes left when they're down by two scores???  I know it was 4th & 12 (the refs sacked Hasselbeck  ) but how do you give the ball back to one of the best clock-eating teams in the league, when you know you will need it twice more?

 

The calls certainly did not go their way- nobody is disputing that.  But Seattle compounded that with poor decisions and poor play.

598252[/snapback]

 

I'm not saying Seattle didnt shoot themselves in the foot numerous times, because they did. All of a sudden their punter thinks hes in canada and can score a point by kicking it in the endzone, and holmgren forgets how to read a clock. The point is, pittsburgh played like complete sh-- aside form those 3 big plays. Those 3 big plays got about 160 yards of offense. Pittsburgh rolled up about 170 yards of offense on their other 52 offensive plays.

 

The point is, that pit played like sh--, but their big plays bailed them out. Seattle played bad as well, and their big plays may have bailed them out, but almost every big play got called back. thats how the refs hurt them.

[Johnny Coli]

the league can say what they want, but by stating that the hasselbeck personal foul was correct makes them lose all credibility. Whats with the blindly supportig the officials?

as spidersweb said, 3-4 plays usually make a game, and here they are pittsburgh's and seattle's.

 

Pittsburgh

1. 75 yd willie parker TD run

2. roth 40 yd duck to hines ward to the 1

3. randle el 50 yd TD pass to ward

 

Seattle

1. Hasselbeck TD pass to D-Jax

2. 23 yard completion on 3rd down to pit 18

3. Warrick 35 yd punt return to pit 45

4. Herndon 76 yd int return

5. Stevens 18 yd reception to pit 1

 

Notice anything? All of pittsburghs big plays led to TD's

Notice anything else? For seattle, # 1, 2, 3, and 5 were all wiped out on bogus penalties. Seattle scored after #4.

 

Think maybe they may have put up some more points had those 4 big plays not been wiped out?

598219[/snapback]

Great post, Ramius.

Add to that that of the ten penalties called in that game, seven were called against Seattle for a net loss of something around 160 yards. Seattle was tied for the second least penalized team in the regular season.

[Acantha]

I'm not saying Seattle didnt shoot themselves in the foot numerous times, because they did. All of a sudden their punter thinks hes in canada and can score a point by kicking it in the endzone, and holmgren forgets how to read a clock. The point is, pittsburgh played like complete sh-- aside form those 3 big plays. Those 3 big plays got about 160 yards of offense. Pittsburgh rolled up about 170 yards of offense on their other 52 offensive plays.

 

The point is, that pit played like sh--, but their big plays bailed them out. Seattle played bad as well, and their big plays may have bailed them out, but almost every big play got called back. thats how the refs hurt them.

598269[/snapback]

Exactly. I can't understand how people keep saying Seattle screwed themselves too, so who cares??? THAT MAKES NO DAMN SENSE!!!

 

Every team, in every game, makes mistakes. It's the ability to overcome those mistakes with big plays that gets you the win. But when the refs are there to make sure you can't get those big plays....you can't win!

 

A great example:

 

On the Randle El pass, Ben threw a block by diving at a players legs. That block allowed Randle El time to set up and thrown the ball, which got them 7 points.

A few plays earlier Hasselback was penalized for throwing that same block (I'll leave out the whole it was actually a tackle thing) for a huge loss.

So, if the refs had called that same penalty (which had to be within 5 min of each other), that 7 points is called back and they are 15 yards further back.

 

The refs let Pitt make their plays. They took Seattle's away.

[scribo]

I've asked others, and nobody has given me an answer, but I'll try again -- how would hiring full time officials help in the least...?  It's not like there's anything to do during hte offseason (and don't think that they're not reading the rule book already during the offseason, on their own time).

 

I don't see how that would help...

 

CW

598162[/snapback]

This is an easy one. First off, making them fulltime employees is the most effective way to make each official responsible for their performance. If a ref screws up now, yeah, he may be fired, but he still has his "real" job to go back to. If he is a fulltime NFL employee and he screws up, he is now jobless, so he will put more effort into preparing for games, staying in top shape, ect.

 

During the offseason, the refs can review film, discuss trends, help come up with rule changes, ways to protect the game's integrity, ect. They can visit each team to work with coaches on minimizing reoccuring penalties. They can ref practices and scrimmages.

 

It would be win-win for everyone!

[Fezmid]

This is an easy one. First off, making them fulltime employees is the most effective way to make each official responsible for their performance. If a ref screws up now, yeah, he may be fired, but he still has his "real" job to go back to. If he is a fulltime NFL employee and he screws up, he is now jobless, so he will put more effort into preparing for games, staying in top shape, ect.

 

During the offseason, the refs can review film, discuss trends, help come up with rule changes, ways to protect the game's integrity, ect. They can visit each team to work with coaches on minimizing reoccuring penalties. They can ref practices and scrimmages.

 

It would be win-win for everyone!

598357[/snapback]

The refs already do all of those things that you mention (film, rules, etc)... So having them fulltime doesn't change that. And there's not much reffing they'd be able to do in the April camps - since there's no contact, of course there'll be no penalties (aside from obvious stuff like false starts). I wouldn't be surprised if refs are at the mini-camps either, although I'm not 100% sure on that.

 

And the whole "jobless" thing? I don't know about you, but I don't really worry about making a mistake and being fired at my current job. If I lost my current job, I'd just go get a new one... It's not like anyone says, "I'm going to be an NFL ref when I grow up!" You make peanuts moving up the ranks. High school games get you about $30/game. College games aren't that much more (unless you get to Division 1, then maybe it's more... But it's still not enough to live on). So all of these people will have lots of other marketable skills, I doubt they'd do a better job because they're fulltime and could be fired.

 

So I still don't see how fulltime=better.

 

CW

[bleedinblue]

So I still don't see how fulltime=better.

 

CW

598364[/snapback]

A. Fitness and age - most refs are middle aged or retired guys who are unable to cope with the speed of today's game. Turning officiating into a true, well compensated career attracts younger more fit candidates. Just like the game, there is not substiute for speed and conditioning.

 

B. Accountability - far too many NFL officials are retired guys who don't need the pitance the NFL pays, there are financially secure with or with out the ref gig. Fines and even firing are really meaningless.

 

C. Consistency - yes refs watch tons of tape, but seldom are they all together, in a single location, working on how to get better. That is what is done with them in the "off season". One crews pass interference is anothers incidental contact, one's down by contact is another's fumble. The NFL needs to work on enforcing the rules with some semblance of consistency. You simply cannot do this with PT officials, there is not enough time. Between seminars, rules interpretation and nuance training, you can easily fill an off season. When the season is underway, they could be at camps watching and discussing how things will be called, mentoring players and coaches. Good luck doing that with paid by the game guys.

 

D. Not really an PT/FT issue, but the NFL should go to the college method of replay as far as officials. The replay official in the booth should be the guy to review the call and make any decisions, not the guys on the field who missed or messed it up to begin with. Not only removes the inherent disincentive to go against themeselves, but speed up the game. The reply official should also not be a member of the crew to eliminate that conflict.

[Fezmid]

A.  Fitness and age - most refs are middle aged or retired guys who are unable to cope with the speed of today's game.  Turning officiating into a true, well compensated career attracts younger more fit candidates.  Just like the game, there is not substiute for speed and conditioning.

 

B.  Accountability - far too many NFL officials are retired guys who don't need the pitance the NFL pays, there are financially secure with or with out the ref gig.  Fines and even firing are really meaningless. 

 

C.  Consistency - yes refs watch tons of tape, but seldom are they all together, in a single location, working on how to get better.  That is what is done with them in the "off season".  One crews pass interference is anothers incidental contact, one's down by contact is another's fumble.  The NFL needs to work on enforcing the rules with some semblance of consistency.  You simply cannot do this with PT officials, there is not enough time.  Between seminars, rules interpretation and nuance training, you can easily fill an off season.  When the season is underway, they could be at camps watching and discussing how things will be called, mentoring players and coaches.  Good luck doing that with paid by the game guys.

 

D.  Not really an PT/FT issue, but the NFL should go to the college method of replay as far as officials.  The replay official in the booth should be the guy to review the call and make any decisions, not the guys on the field who missed or messed it up to begin with.  Not only removes the inherent disincentive to go against themeselves, but speed up the game.  The reply official should also not be a member of the crew to eliminate that conflict.

598800[/snapback]

A. I don't buy that. I havn't seen any refs not being able to keep up with the game. Fans say, "You're old and that's why you suck!" but that doesn't make it true.

B. The refs are already accountable. Full time, part time, doesn't matter. It goes back to my previous post; the "fear of being fired" doesn't really make you work better, IMHO.

C. That's a good reason. However, I don't think it would happen. The other sports have full-time refs, and there's still major inconsistencies between crews.

 

CW

[bleedinblue]

A.  I don't buy that.  I havn't seen any refs not being able to keep up with the game.  Fans say, "You're old and that's why you suck!" but that doesn't make it true.

B. The refs are already accountable.  Full time, part time, doesn't matter.  It goes back to my previous post; the "fear of being fired" doesn't really make you work better, IMHO.

C. That's a good reason.  However, I don't think it would happen.  The other sports have full-time refs, and there's still major inconsistencies between crews.

 

CW

598810[/snapback]

I disagree, far too many times I see officials trying to spot a play from behind or making a call from a position from which it is hard if not impossible to get it right. As far as accountability IMHO it does make a difference if your job is your career and feeds your family rather than it being a pastime and the compensation is "drinkin money". Again, in my opinion, ther other major sports have fewer problems with bad and missed calls and do have more consistency. An ump may have a high or low strike zone, but if its in that zone its a strike and players can adjust. The NFL doesn't give the players that ability. There is inconsistency in calls within a game let alone between crews. Even if it only helps a little, a multi billion dollar industry can afford it.

[MadBuffaloDisease]

A.  I don't buy that.  I havn't seen any refs not being able to keep up with the game.  Fans say, "You're old and that's why you suck!" but that doesn't make it true.

Byron Boston (an NFL ref, and father of David Boston) was out of position during the HomeJob ThrowUp and had to run to get to where the play was happening. He could NOT have judged where Wychek was in relation to Dyson while running towards the play because his perspective was constantly changing. Hence he didn't make a call and hoped replay would sort it out. But most everyone who saw the play, including the Titans players and owner, thought it was a forward lateral and was going to come back, and had a flag BEEN thrown, the play would have stood because of inconclusive evidence.

[Sisyphean Bills]

Byron Boston (an NFL ref, and father of David Boston) was out of position during the HomeJob ThrowUp and had to run to get to where the play was happening.  He could NOT have judged where Wychek was in relation to Dyson while running towards the play because his perspective was constantly changing.  Hence he didn't make a call and hoped replay would sort it out.  But most everyone who saw the play, including the Titans players and owner, thought it was a forward lateral and was going to come back, and had a flag BEEN thrown, the play would have stood because of inconclusive evidence.

598836[/snapback]

 

The problem with instant replay in a nutshell is that it affords the officials the ability to not make the call at the time of the infraction. Instead of "calling what you see," the official can call things he thinks he might have wanted to see with undeniable knowledge that if he screws it up then the replay can bail him out. This is even more insane when you consider that the number of challenges are limited so that the NFL can better squeeze their games into the allotted 3 hour period AND jack in a maximum number of commercials. The officials are officiating the game with the mindset that it can always be reviewed but even this is false, the plays cannot always be reviewed for a variety of reasons.

 

In the Super Bowl, Leavy should not have been applauded and given the Super Bowl for his league leading refusal to reverse calls on the field. In my opinion, he was rewarded for being statistically the most incompetent of all officials! He abdicated his responsibility to make sure the calls were correct and fair to his crew more often than any other official to the point of being the statistical outlier. And, people are surprised the Super Bowl looked like it was officiated by clowns from a circus troupe?