Replacement Refs: Yay or Nay?

[gtexan02]

I posted this in another thread, but I think it deserves its own thread.

After watching game 1, how do you feel about the replacement refs? Personally I thought they did a fine job.

Here is Goodell's stance:

NFL commissioner Roger Goodell said he was pleased with Wednesday night's season opener, the first time the league has used replacement referees in a regular-season game since the first week of the 2001 season.

"I think our officials did a more than adequate job last night and I think that we've proven that we can train them and get them up to NFL standards," said Goodell, at the Bloomberg Sports Business Summit, an event which took place in Manhattan on Thursday afternoon.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/83...ment-officials

Of course he had to say that though.

Heres the most interesting thing to me:

Goodell said that the current divide between the league and the referees is about $50 million to $70 million on a five- to seven-year deal. The offer the league has on the table would bump the average official's salary from $150,000 to $200,000.

Holy crap. $150k for a part time job? I don't get it. What do the cheerleaders get paid again?

[The Pencil Neck]

Originally Posted by gtexan02

Holy crap. $150k for a part time job? I don't get it. What do the cheerleaders get paid again?

The last thing you want is an official who's living paycheck to paycheck and struggling to make rent. You want them to be well-paid to reduce the possibility of tampering.

An official making $200,000 for working is not a problem in my book. Especially when the game itself is worth billions.

[Rey]

The money aspect is really not an issue for me. I don't care.

What I care about is the product on the field, and last night I don't think the refs took away from the game. And I think as they get more reps they'll get better.

The regular refs are going to have to give some ground because the league obviously is moving forward without them. Don't want to wait too long and these guys actually show they are decent.

[Dutchrudder]

I would love to be an NFL ref, where do you apply? I have 20-20 vision, I'm in good shape, I could do it!

[ChampionTexan]

While I would absolutely choose to have the regular refs back if it was solely up to me, I'm one of the few who doesn't view a week or two (or a few more) of the replacement refs as the end of the world.

They made mistakes in preseason, but so do real refs (how many times in previous preseasons have you heard the comment "Preseason's not just for the players" right after a bad call?). I do think improvement had been shown and will continue to be shown.

It's a level playing field - it's not like some teams are getting NFL refs and some are getting replacement refs, and there's always replay for some of the things they may get wrong.

I honestly believe the uproar in the preseason was a product of group-think as much as anything. A few folks, some objective, some with a hidden agenda, predict NFL armageddon, and analysts, commentators, journalists and ex-players who are in a position to spout off about it jump on the bandwagon (not to mention all those tweeters). I also believe that there's a significant faction out there that due to the handling of bounty-gate, the changing/enforcement of the rules in the name of player safety, or the discipline imposed on certain players (mostly for on field actions) believe the NFL/Roger Goodell is satan, and want very much for the replacement officials to fail miserably. While I have both agreements and disagreements with those folks, even if I concede they're 100% correct, there's not really a cause and effect relationship between the NFL being satan and the replacement refs sucking.

I'm not really taking sides on the dispute It will eventually be resolved, and I don't care who wins - I'm just happy to have real NFL football back regardless of who's officiating games.

[disaacks3]

The replacement refs, for the most part, let them play. It was painful to watch receivers getting mugged all night though. The more aggressively a team tries to take things, the better off they will be with replacement refs. Finesse teams will get clobbered until the "real" refs come back.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

[gtexan02]

Originally Posted by The Pencil Neck

The last thing you want is an official who's living paycheck to paycheck and struggling to make rent. You want them to be well-paid to reduce the possibility of tampering.

An official making $200,000 for working is not a problem in my book. Especially when the game itself is worth billions.

In America, unfortunately, salary seems to have nothing to do with living paycheck to paycheck. That said, you can easily live on $100k a year. Very comfortably. You can easily live on $75k a year. I can't believe they could make $200k for a part time job.

[The Pencil Neck]

Originally Posted by gtexan02

In America, unfortunately, salary seems to have nothing to do with living paycheck to paycheck. That said, you can easily live on $100k a year. Very comfortably. You can easily live on $75k a year. I can't believe they could make $200k for a part time job.

It's an important job. Whether it's part-time or not is irrelevant. $200k's not THAT much.

[Rey]

Originally Posted by The Pencil Neck

It's an important job. Whether it's part-time or not is irrelevant. $200k's not THAT much.

1 million isn't that much either.

[gtexan02]

Originally Posted by The Pencil Neck

It's an important job. Whether it's part-time or not is irrelevant. $200k's not THAT much.

To whom? The median household income in the US is somewhere around $45,000 a year. $200k alone would put you in the 97% percentile for all earners in the US. If you assume they have a second job that puts them into the top 1% of all earners.

I agree that athletes deserve the high salaries they get--because they are unique. And because they sacrifice physically. But what does a ref do that's so unique?
They don't spend anywhere near the amount of time or risk their bodies the way the players do.

A ref theoretically works 17-19 games a year correct? For something that basically anyone could be trained to do? It doesn't require any truly unique ability or intelligence.

Why does a cheerleader earn $100 a game or something of that nature? They at least have unique physical attributes that lowers the amount of people who could qualify.

Im not trying to make this into a class warfare issue-- because NFL players are so unique they deserve a huge share of the revenue they create. But the refs? eh

Really it doesn't matter. Just guess I'm surprised that they are risking losing their jobs over a $50k pay bump when they are already getting paid pretty handsomely...

[The Pencil Neck]

Originally Posted by Rey

1 million isn't that much either.

Yeah, but a million here and a million there and pretty soon, you're talking about real money. (To paraphrase Senator Dirksen.)

[The Pencil Neck]

Originally Posted by gtexan02

To whom? The median household income in the US is somewhere around $45,000 a year. $200k alone would put you in the 97% percentile for all earners in the US. If you assume they have a second job that puts them into the top 1% of all earners.

I agree that athletes deserve the high salaries they get--because they are unique. And because they sacrifice physically. But what does a ref do that's so unique?
They don't spend anywhere near the amount of time or risk their bodies the way the players do.

A ref theoretically works 17-19 games a year correct? For something that basically anyone could be trained to do? It doesn't require any truly unique ability or intelligence.

Why does a cheerleader earn $100 a game or something of that nature? They at least have unique physical attributes that lowers the amount of people who could qualify.

Im not trying to make this into a class warfare issue-- because NFL players are so unique they deserve a huge share of the revenue they create. But the refs? eh

Really it doesn't matter. Just guess I'm surprised that they are risking losing their jobs over a $50k pay bump when they are already getting paid pretty handsomely...

Are you seriously comparing the importance of a referee to the importance of a cheerleader? Not even all teams HAVE cheerleaders. They're not important to the game at all.

But the refs are PLAYERS in the game. They are a part of the game. Without them, the game turns into the WWF or WWE or whatever it's called. Not everyone can do what they do. It's a hard job. And it's not just what happens on the field.

Those refs are supposed to be the best of the best.

As part of the game, they deserve to benefit from the popularity of the sport and they deserve to get paid relative to that popularity. Personally, I'd prefer if they were full-time officials and I'd prefer that they get paid double. I'd expect them to make at least what a minimum-wage vet makes.

[gtexan02]

Originally Posted by The Pencil Neck

Are you seriously comparing the importance of a referee to the importance of a cheerleader? Not even all teams HAVE cheerleaders. They're not important to the game at all.

But the refs are PLAYERS in the game. They are a part of the game. Without them, the game turns into the WWF or WWE or whatever it's called. Not everyone can do what they do. It's a hard job. And it's not just what happens on the field.

I'm not comparing them by saying that they should have the same salary-- I'm just using the cheerleader example to illustrate the fact that not everything associated with the team needs to make an elite salary.
The players and the owners deserve the money they earn. They are the ones that risk themselves financially and physically.

I'd put refs a very distant 3rd in terms of importance. As we saw last night, all you need is a semi-competent replacement and your fine. The head ref has been a ref for arena league 2 and small colleges and he stepped in admirably. Give him a full 16 game season and he'd be good to go.

Originally Posted by The Pencil Neck

As part of the game, they deserve to benefit from the popularity of the sport and they deserve to get paid relative to that popularity. Personally, I'd prefer if they were full-time officials and I'd prefer that they get paid double. I'd expect them to make at least what a minimum-wage vet makes.

I just don't agree. They are too easily replaceable. a minimum wage vet is worth a lot more to the game because of his unique ability than a ref. You take all the currently employed NFL players out of the league and put in replacements and you have a totally different experience. You take all the currently employed refs out and replace them and the result is almost the same as it was before. In a few weeks it could be exactly the same

I just don't see anything unique about our current referees except experience. I put them just a notch above the guys who take care of the fields and the equipment. They are instrumental to the game but really almost anyone could do the job if they were given the proper training and experience. You can't say that about a vet earning the minimum

Serious question: IF the NFL never reaches a deal with the current refs do you think next year would be quantifiably (is that a word?) different than 2011? When the replacements would have had a full year of experience

[Rey]

Originally Posted by gtexan02

I just don't see anything unique about our current referees except experience. I put them just a notch above the guys who take care of the fields and the equipment. They are instrumental to the game but really almost anyone could do the job if they were given the proper training and experience. You can't say that about a vet earning the minimum

Serious question: IF the NFL never reaches a deal with the current refs do you think next year would be quantifiably (is that a word?) different than 2011? When the replacements would have had a full year of experience

I like the way cak put it in another thread when he said "normal".

Replace all the players and it's going to take a lot longer for the game to feel normal again.

Replace the refs and not many people outside of die hard football fans even notice.

My grandmother watches all the texans games and if Andre or Arian weren't out there shed ask me what happened to them. If Ed hockley isn't out there she's not going to notice or care.

Refs are overplaying their hand trying to hold out like the players did. I'm not going to comment on what I think they should earn as I just don't know and really don't care, but they need to realize that out of all the elements that have to do with the actual game they are the most replaceable.

[The Pencil Neck]

Originally Posted by gtexan02

Serious question: IF the NFL never reaches a deal with the current refs do you think next year would be quantifiably (is that a word?) different than 2011? When the replacements would have had a full year of experience

Yes, 'quantifiably' is a word.

I believe we're going to have problems THIS YEAR with these refs. We are going to have more poorly officiated games. I believe several games will be decided by screw-ups by the refs.

I believe that if we continue to use these refs, they will improve. In time, they'll be just as good as the old guys.

BUT... they're also going to be getting paid that same amount that you don't agree with. These guys are not going to be paid $20,000 a year for a part-time job of officiating, their salary is going to increase up to that $100,000-$200,000/year range and maybe more.

[The Pencil Neck]

Originally Posted by Rey

I like the way cak put it in another thread when he said "normal".

Replace all the players and it's going to take a lot longer for the game to feel normal again.

Replace the refs and not many people outside of die hard football fans even notice.

My grandmother watches all the texans games and if Andre or Arian weren't out there shed ask me what happened to them. If Ed hockley isn't out there she's not going to notice or care.

Refs are overplaying their hand trying to hold out like the players did. I'm not going to comment on what I think they should earn as I just don't know and really don't care, but they need to realize that out of all the elements that have to do with the actual game they are the most replaceable.

And I agree with all of this.

The refs are not in a position of strength and they're overplaying their hand. They make less money than an undrafted free agent rookie. In the grand scheme of things, they're not that important and they are replaceable.

They're hoping for some real stinker mistakes and some fan outrage.

[EllisUnit]

Dont cheerleaders only make like 50 bucks per game. I think NFL cheerleaders use the NFL as a gateway to bigger and better things anyways. But the contribute more that refs anyways

[b0ng]

There was like hugely blatant holding by both offensive lines all night Wednesday, and that was the "best" crew they have. Sunday afternoon games are going to be wretched in terms of officiating performance and that is not hyperbole.

[eriadoc]

As long as their mistakes are comparable to the regular refs' mistakes, I don't care. Subjectivity leads to lots of calls that people complain about. That's one thing. When you make basic rules and procedures mistakes, it's pretty clear you just don't know your job.

Couldn't care less about the money. If you can get it, good for you. I find it hypocritical to ***** about the money the refs are making while ignoring what the people who pay the refs are making.

[HOU-TEX]

I thought the refs sucked the other night. It was like a sumo match in the trenches. All the grabbing and even tackling to the ground type holding. A "clipping" (are we in little league) on the kickoff that was just a block in the back after watching the replay.

That said, they were not a factor in the outcome of the game. Which is fine by me