In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 790
Online now 780 Record: 11761 (2/27/2012)
The Web's No. 1 forum for coverage and discussion of Terps sports
Visitor discussion of University of Maryland and college sports
A place for lively discussion for all other sports unrelated to Maryland athletics
Feedback for IMS and 247Sports
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
is there a list of ref demands? what are they asking for?
I mean are we talking 30%-Chicago-teacher-crazy or just some skittles in the break room?
Bwahaha nice call out tecmo. I'll just blame the NFL on that one. Uv for u.
At this point, does it really matter?
Whatever it is, its going up by the minute.
It is the business walk of the biggest, baddest bear in the national park happening upon an abandoned picnic.
This has made games with no rooting intrest 100 times more interesting.
Yes, I think it does matter. I have no idea which side of the negotiation is being unreasonable. My intraweb search has turned up no information.
Maybe the ref's are working with the replacements?
"keep it up boys, remember, you get 10% of our ever improving deal!"
I have no chance to be productive at work for a week now. Cheese heads on strike everywhere.
According to Rovell, refs are asking for 50M over 5 years. They're asking for this from a league that will make 60B (yes, BILLION) over the next 5 years.
This post was edited by jsh 19 months ago
I'm shocked that the ultimate arbiter of truth, he being Mike Pereira, has not been able to speak his mind on Twitter.
I hate to go all Kunal on you, but Imma play devil's advocate* here.
What does the total revenue generated by the NFL have to do with how refs should be paid? Should we re-evaluate how much the guys who hold the down markers are paid? What are they worth? I mean, the NFL is making BILLIONS!
Is this truly a specialized skill set that warrants premium pay? Or just a closed group of professionals that has cornered a market?
Last I checked, $8k for a half day of work is pretty good pay.
Also, who are the negotiators? I have trouble believing that Goodell has the only voice and vote here.
*I would like the regular refs back plskthxbye.
It's an interpletion!!
Makes sense, but could you imagine Apple shipping knowingly defective iPhones just to save less than 1% of their revenues? Knowing the damage it would do to their brand. Whether its "right" or not, the NFL should just big the bullet and pay them at this point. This can only get worse for them as it goes on.
After the Hall of Fame game in August, Mike Pereira let it slip that Craig Ochoa, the referee who worked that game, had been fired from the Lingerie Football League. The Lingerie Football Leagues charge then.
The moment they hit the ground, I guess maybe there possibly was shared possession?
This post was edited by Terpes 19 months ago
With the realization you're playing devil's advocate...
The NFL's revenue indicates that they can afford to pay the demands. It's a rounding error in their overall budget. No one's claiming that it's a reason in and of itself to pay the refs more.
From what these past 3 weeks have shown (not to mention the preseason), it's pretty clear to me that it's a specialized skill set that warrants premium pay. These guys have had 7 weeks (including preseason) to develop their skills and have made it very obvious that they have a long, long way to go before they get to the skill level of the regular refs. Officiating isn't rocket science, and I have no doubt that people could learn to officiate at a high level. However, it appears that such a learning process clearly can't happen overnight, without a lot of training and practice - which, of course, is going to lead to higher pay/benefit demands.
Sure, they're part-time workers. So are athletes. They're the best in the world at what they do, so they should get paid accordingly. The guys who hold the chains are replaceable; the actual officials (to me) clearly aren't.
I have no idea who's actually doing the negotiations, but I struggle to see why it's hard to believe that Goodell has the deciding vote, if not the only vote. I mean, he's the one who hears appeals on decisions that his office makes. I'm sure he has people advising him on various issues, but it seems logical based on his actions that he's the primary decision maker. I'm sure the owners have some level of input, though where the line between them is, I have no clue.
This post was edited by tecmoHOOperbowl 19 months ago
Blame the owners. They support Goodell. He works for them.
1. You did.
2. How do we define premium pay? I would consider their existing pay to be premium. Very premium.
3. Agreed. Is there a training program for new ref recruits? I have to imagine there is. However, who are these jokers? Like you said, no rocket science here. Everyone watching that game, EVERYONE, knew what the right call was. Why didn't they? I don't know the answer.
4. Agreed. See #2. Some people might argue they are already very well compensated.
5. Until every other employee group in the NFL strikes to get their bigger, "deserved" bite of the multi-Billion dollar pie, and then it's their turn.
6. Why is it so opaque? I also imagine the owners are all over this. Why are they not in the conversation/media storm? Again, I would love to know...but have no idea.
Woah, Clay Matthews posted Goodell's phone number on his facebook page.
1. Where did I say that the revenue the NFL earns is a reason by itself to pay the refs more? All I said was that they can afford to, not that it means they should. Perhaps you have me confused with someone else or are misinterpreting something I wrote.
2. Same way any higher-level EE negotiates pay. If I think I'm worth a raise, I ask for it. My employer can either pay me, or let me go. In this case, the refs think they're worth more than they're getting paid. The NFL has chosen to try to replace them, and have found out in no uncertain terms that you can't replace them quite as simply as they thought. Whether an outsider thinks I'm already paid enough is immaterial. If it's worth it to my employer, they'll keep me by paying me more. If not, they'll replace me for someone working at my former pay or less.
5. Other groups are welcome to try the same thing. However, other groups are going to be far more easily replaced than officials. With today's unemployment rate, I imagine there would be plenty of Joe Six-Pack football fans ready to get a small paycheck for holding a chain on a sideline for 3 hours every Sunday should the chainholders' union decide to strike.
6. No clue. All good points and I don't have any idea why the dynamics are the way they are, other than that it's easy to focus on one person representing the league rather than 32 old guys, many of whom are faceless rich guys representing a team that I don't care about. It'll be interesting to see if there are chinks developing in the owners' armor as their individual teams get screwed by incompetent officials.
I was just going to post that it must be crap. ... Until they just mentioned it on SportsCenter. Wow
"One of the main points Commissioner Goodell has always harped on is protecting the shield: not letting anything tarnish the brand of the NFL. Commissioner, I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but right now the shield is tarnishing faster than a sailor's virtue in a two-dollar whorehouse. Players see it; coaches see it; fans see it. These refs are not fit to stand in for the men you've locked out for what is increasingly looking like nothing more than simple greed—attempting to squeeze blood from a stone simply because you can. The NFL is America's No. 1 sport in part because everyone watching it knows that the players determine the outcome of a game, not the refs. As of right now, you're hurting business by putting a product out on the field that challenges that belief."
« Previous entry
Obviously it was a terrible call, and the refs (and league) deserve all the criticism they are getting, However, it looks like it would have been a tough call to make live, especially in that situation. What seems to be going under the radar is the fact that the replay official is a full-time NFL employee. It seems to me like he should be getting more of the criticism for this then the refs on the field. Feel free to call me an idiot now
You can't review whether or not the ball was caught simultaneously. I'm sure they were looking at a litany of other BS things like whether either Jennings or Tate had a foot out of bounds, none of which came into play.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports