Does the NFL need full time refs?

[Raptorman]

So, after watching the games this season and seeing how poor the refs have been, (and not just in Vikings games), does the NFL finally need to come out and make the refs full time?

 

[G0P4ckG0]

Absolutely. As much as most fans complain about the refs, they have a VERY difficult job that 99.99 % of us would fail at succeeding. I have watched a few NCAAF games over the past few weeks where camera angles were shown that were attached to the umpire's head and...well....it looked A LOT more crazy than what we as spectators typically see. I am shocked that the referees see as many penalties as they currently do. Not to mention the fact that they have to dodge people twice their size on every play and hope they survive to see another day.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Absolutely. It's mind-boggling that a league making more than $10 billion in revenue doesn't employ full time referees.

 

[Ogsponge]

Without a doubt. I saw the same ump cam the poster above and I played football as well. The view on the field is so much more chaotic than what we see on tv.

 

[Dirty Sanchez]

Would full time refs do any better? The bad calls are spread evenly throughout the league (even though a team running around in purple pajamas last night thinks differently). I don't know the right answer.

DS

 

[El Guapo]

I think that they should be employed full-time just on it's own. The job requires a lot of studying, practice, and review. Refs could be deployed to help teams practice during the season just as they are often paid to do in training camp. However, I do not think that employing them full-time will change the number of missed calls. That is just a part of a very fast-paced game. Rarely do I see a ref not knowing the correct call. Probably 95% it's just not being in the perfect spot to see the foul (last night's final play for instance) or just the play happening so fast that you can be staring at it but still not make the correct call. They are all humans.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Would full time refs do any better? The bad calls are spread evenly throughout the league (even though a team running around in purple pajamas last night thinks differently). I don't know the right answer.DS

I guess the answer to me is a question back. Would part time players produce as good of a product as we see on the field every Sunday? What if players had other jobs, flew into the City the night before the game and suited up. I know this is an extreme example and refs don't require nearly the conditioning, team time, etc. that players do, but I would think full time refs, paid strictly to be refs, would dedicate much more time to polishing their craft then some CEO who has a weekend job.

Also, bad calls "Spreading out evenly" don't negate the fact that they were bad calls. No excuse for a bad call, it is what it is and if it can be corrected by better officiating then it should be.

While I don't want to see the game slowed down a lot more, I would be fine with more "refs" in the booth, taking advantage of modern technology by taking closer looks at every play, watching the time clock, etc. to make sure the calls are correct.

 

[Mondio]

More refs, more scrutiny? I c ant imagine it would do anything good for the game. I could dissect every play in the NFL and find something g wrong. They'll never do that, so then despite having a in booth ref dedicated to every single player in the field, they'll still have to let certain things go and all that extra will still leave us with controversy.

 

[JBlood]

NFL football is the only major US professional sport that uses part time officials. It's a joke when the game is the fastest, roughest, and involves the greatest number of players competing on the field of play. No sport is more difficult to officiate.

But maybe the players should quit cheating on every play by holding, etc. Go back to where the o linemen can't use their hands; defensive backs can't use their hands, etc. If that isn't enough institute a rule that limits the number of penalties allowed by a player, as in basketball. If a player gets more than, say, 3 penalties he's out of the game.

Something needs to be done. The flow of the game has been ruined by stoppages due to penalties and reviews on virtually every play. And that's without the commercials. As it stands, the game has about 11 minutes of actual action out of 3.5 hours of tv time. It's become only watchable with a DVR.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I've actually been more impressed with some of the college officiating in the replay department lately then at the Pro Level. While a lot of posters are correct, there will never be a perfectly called game, mistakes are going to be made. However, it seems like they have done away with limiting challenges to just a coach's decision and put more of those decisions in the hands of officials in the booth at the college level.

Anyone know what changes were made at the college level? Maybe I don't watch enough football, but it seems to me the coaches aren't the ones having to challenge plays like in the pros and then possibly running out of challenges in doing so? Maybe they have the same rules as in the pros, but it appears to be different.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

However, I do not think that employing them full-time will change the number of missed calls. That is just a part of a very fast-paced game. Rarely do I see a ref not knowing the correct call. Probably 95% it's just not being in the perfect spot to see the foul (last night's final play for instance) or just the play happening so fast that you can be staring at it but still not make the correct call. They are all humans.

While I agree that full-tine referees would still miss some calls I expect the number of those would be reduced.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

While I agree that full-tine referees would still miss some calls I expect the number of those would be reduced.

I agree with that and also think the consistency between crews would be better. How many times do you hear "this group really calls holding a lot more then others" or some other type of penalty. Not sure if mixing up members of each officiating crew would change that, but maybe more time spent as a collective group, going over game film and discussing things would bring some consistency to each game and each crew. As it is, I am sure coaches spend some time before each game "scouting the refs" and trying to decide what to alert the team of that this particular group will be extra critical or lackadaisical of.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I've actually been more impressed with some of the college officiating in the replay department lately then at the Pro Level. While a lot of posters are correct, there will never be a perfectly called game, mistakes are going to be made. However, it seems like they have done away with limiting challenges to just a coach's decision and put more of those decisions in the hands of officials in the booth at the college level.

Anyone know what changes were made at the college level? Maybe I don't watch enough football, but it seems to me the coaches aren't the ones having to challenge plays like in the pros and then possibly running out of challenges in doing so? Maybe they have the same rules as in the pros, but it appears to be different.

In college football a replay official handles most of these decisions. The rules allow a head coach to call a timeout and challenge the ruling on the previous play once per game.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Not sure if mixing up members of each officiating crew would change that, but maybe more time spent as a collective group, going over game film and discussing things would bring some consistency to each game and each crew.

The NFL currently mixes up official crews for the playoffs. I don't believe that has resulted in games being officiated more consistantly.

 

[yooperpackfan]

I wonder how many current NFL refs would take a full time job.
It seems that many are already business professionals, doctors, lawyers etc.and may make more in their day job.
If it came to full time refs, where do they get them, what would be the qualifications?
There is no minor league, like MLB, where they can work their way up the ladder.

I'm all for full time refs but these are some questions I have.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I wonder how many current NFL refs would take a full time job.
It seems that many are already business professionals, doctors, lawyers etc.and may make more in their day job.
If it came to full time refs, where do they get them, what would be the qualifications?
There is no minor league, like MLB, where they can work their way up the ladder.

I'm all for full time refs but these are some questions I have.

I am sure there are quite a few experienced refs who would do it full time. If not, you start now, building a pool of people willing to take it on as a full time job more then a hobby.

 

[yooperpackfan]

I am sure there are quite a few experienced refs who would do it full time. If not, you start now, building a pool of people willing to take it on as a full time job more then a hobby.

Yeah, I think this would be a multi year proposition before it could be fully implemented.

 

[Matt39]

From what I understand the current pool of refs doesn't want to be full time for the most part, so I don't see anything changing.

I also believe you wouldn't necessarily see any improvement if they were full time, there is very very rarely a rule that is misapplied or mistaken during a game, almost all errors are no calls or phantom calls that have to do with what they see, don't see or think they saw on the field. The rest of the errors are complexity of the way they have to apply the rules such as the catch rule that the most experienced refs seem to often disagree while watching the same reply as each other because the rule is written to complicated for anyone to get right 100% at live speed.

 

[Forget Favre]

Yes, I think they should be full time refs.
But I'm not sure how much it would really change the game.
Like that hit to the helmet on Vikings Bradford during the 2 pt. conv.
We saw it because of multiple camera angels and the ref didn't see it from his POV.
So, even a full time pro. ref. might have missed it as well.

We all want the game to be 100% fair and perfect. But it's like life. Not everything is always going to be 100% fair and perfect all the time since the game is part of life.
The refs are only human and they will always miss calls weather they are full or part timers.

 

[Forget Favre]

If they can fine a player who makes a mistake or wore the wrong shoes or made a late hit that was unintentional etc, then I think they should start fining refs who blow calls or make the wrong one especially in game changing situations that show the other team would have won.
Like the Fail Mary in Seattle.
With that incentive, I think we would see a big difference in the outcomes and less of, "The ref. got it wrong," way after the game.

 

[Dirty Sanchez]

I guess the answer to me is a question back. Would part time players produce as good of a product as we see on the field every Sunday? What if players had other jobs, flew into the City the night before the game and suited up. I know this is an extreme example and refs don't require nearly the conditioning, team time, etc. that players do, but I would think full time refs, paid strictly to be refs, would dedicate much more time to polishing their craft then some CEO who has a weekend job.

Also, bad calls "Spreading out evenly" don't negate the fact that they were bad calls. No excuse for a bad call, it is what it is and if it can be corrected by better officiating then it should be.

While I don't want to see the game slowed down a lot more, I would be fine with more "refs" in the booth, taking advantage of modern technology by taking closer looks at every play, watching the time clock, etc. to make sure the calls are correct.

PB2000,
I have to say I agree with you on the part time players, as the Packers secondary is filled with them, and they are not good. Calls are going to missed with full time ref's as well. And, they will be spread out throughout the league as well.
So, we can beat this horse all we want but missed calls, bad calls are always going to be there.

DS

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

PB2000,
I have to say I agree with you on the part time players, as the Packers secondary is filled with them, and they are not good. Calls are going to missed with full time ref's as well. And, they will be spread out throughout the league as well.
So, we can beat this horse all we want but missed calls, bad calls are always going to be there.

DS

Oh I agree, there are going to be missed calls in either case. However, I think consistency of calls is lacking, as well as interpretation of calls. I think that aspect could be cleaned up, with more time devoted to non game work by refs. I'm not going to pretend to know how much time Refs have to put in during the season, but just the notion that they are "part time" in a billion dollar industry, where their calls can decide whether a team wins or loses just on the surface sounds crazy.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Like that hit to the helmet on Vikings Bradford during the 2 pt. conv.
We saw it because of multiple camera angels and the ref didn't see it from his POV.
So, even a full time pro. ref. might have missed it as well.

You are right, but a trained official up in the booth with replay would have seen it and could have buzzed down and gotten the call right. This is most likely what would have happened in a college game.

To me its all about getting the call right, without having to nitpick every aspect of the game in a timely manner. Whether that is having full time refs or just more up in the booths, an improvement could be made IMO.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Like the Fail Mary in Seattle.

Remember, those were fill in refs......so "really" part time

 

[Sky King]

Well, I'm going to take the opposite stand that there should not be full-time refs:

First, as somebody has so aptly pointed out already, there rarely are any mistakes made in the interpretation of the rules. But refs will see what they see and make the calls. Regardless whether they are full or part-time it will always come down to what the refs see. While taking a backseat to the overriding purpose of selling more commercial airtime for additional revenue, booth reviews are meant to help verify the close calls. Since some fans still aren't happy with the results of booth reviews even now, consider that to be a precursor of continued dissatisfaction no matter if done by full or part-time refs. Unfortunately, somebody is always going to claim that their team got hosed and that the NFL has it in for them. Kind of like now.

Second, baseball and basketball refs work 5-7 games per week, so the comparison is not valid. Purely out of necessity caused by scheduling logistics, MLB and NBA refs must be full-time. NFL refs officiate only one lousy game a week. Hardly a tough workload that calls for making them full-time.

Finally, the call for full-time refs sounds more as though it's being driven by old fashioned union dogma rather than something driven by any practical need. And how are the full-time refs going to fill the other six days of the week (plus the roughly six months of total nothingness) studying the rule book (that they get right almost 100% of the time, anyway), watching video (which they now do, as well), and munching on carrots at the same time to improve their vision?

Full-time refs will do little if anything to improve the game's officiating. Their effect would probably be inconsequential and a poor ROI. There will always be calls that go against teams and their fans will object to any such calls. Cry me a river. Full-time refs would amount to nothing more than to satisfy a short-lived panacea. Then it will be back to dissatisfaction, as usual.