Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Thursday, August 30, 2012

OT: Sept 2012 Regular Season NFL Football Thread

New season, new threads.

First game is next Wed., on Sept. 5th, Cowboys vs Giants at Metlife Stadium in New York.

Tripon Posted: August 30, 2012 at 07:32 PM | 591 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: football

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 3 of 6 pages  < 1 2 3 4 5 6 > 
   201. Joey B.: posting for the kids of northeast Ohio Posted: September 24, 2012 at 10:18 PM (#4244735)
87 total yards on 27 plays for the Pack in that 1st half. You don't see that too much anymore in the new video game NFL era.
   202. zenbitz Posted: September 24, 2012 at 10:57 PM (#4244753)
I do not think it's a coincidence that the pass happy teams have come back to earth -- and in many cases starting running the ball -- in the era of replacement refs. While I don't think they really blow that many (more) critical plays [ I mean other than the well documented time out and crowd control shenanigans ], I do think they are "letting them play" and in particular DBs are "mauling" receivers (in video game era sense).

I also would not be surprised to see that holding on the OL on running plays is not getting called so much, but I think that they are calling it on the (more obvious) passing plays.

I sort of assume this is just an accident and not Pete Goodell Secret Enforcement Order.
   203. President of the David Eckstein Fan Club Posted: September 24, 2012 at 11:46 PM (#4244785)
That looked like an interception to me.
   204. NTNgod Posted: September 24, 2012 at 11:50 PM (#4244787)
Goodbye, replacement refs.
   205. Dog on the sidewalk Posted: September 24, 2012 at 11:50 PM (#4244788)
I don't know if I've ever seen a group of referees ruin a game like they did this one.
   206. Tom Nawrocki Posted: September 24, 2012 at 11:56 PM (#4244792)
The rule is that if a defensive and offensive player both have equal control of a ball, possession goes to the offense. It sure looked like the defensive player had more of the ball than the receiver, though.

It seems to me that since penalty calls are pretty much random now, it's led to players basically doing whatever they want and hoping they get away with it. Sometimes they do get away with it, sometimes they don't, and sometimes they get flagged for doing nothing, so you might as well go for broke. It sure makes for sloppy football.
   207. Every Inge Counts Posted: September 24, 2012 at 11:59 PM (#4244794)
This is the end of the replacement refs is very true...
   208. President of the David Eckstein Fan Club Posted: September 25, 2012 at 12:01 AM (#4244798)
They let Tate get away with offensive PI on the last play too
   209. DA Baracus Posted: September 25, 2012 at 12:05 AM (#4244802)
$20 says there's still replacement refs next week.
   210. Gaelan Posted: September 25, 2012 at 12:11 AM (#4244808)
Good thing they had instant replay. Otherwise the NFL would get the calls wrong.
   211. Chip Posted: September 25, 2012 at 12:31 AM (#4244815)
Money was heavy on Green Bay tonight in Vegas, reportedly. And, one presumes, with the illegal books as well. The house made out like bandits with this result. Hmmm.
   212. steagles Posted: September 25, 2012 at 12:36 AM (#4244821)
Goodbye, replacement refs.
i doubt it.


the referees have no leverage. people are ######## about the replacements, yeah, but they're still buying tickets. they're still watching games on television. they're still writing about it on the internet and talking about it at the office the next day.

going back to last year, going back to the players' lockout, the NFL was willing to kill the entire season right up until the point where it would have cost them money. with the referees, there's no such penalty. the league is making more money than ever, so, really, what incentive is there for the league to cave on any of the referees demands?
   213. Random Transaction Generator Posted: September 25, 2012 at 12:42 AM (#4244824)
It's open revolt about the replacement refs on Twitter from players, media, and fans.
The MNF crew was openly mocking the final ruling.
   214. Dr. Vaux Posted: September 25, 2012 at 12:48 AM (#4244827)
And I continue to not follow the NFL because it employes Michael Vick.
   215. TerpNats Posted: September 25, 2012 at 12:48 AM (#4244828)
Stop using the euphemism "replacement" and call them what they really are -- non-union or scab refs. (Of course, this comes from someone who makes it a point to call those games in August "exhibition" games, not the silly term "preseason." Could you imagine MLB trying that?)

These dreadful officials distort the 2012 season every bit as much as the non-union players who were in three games that counted distorted the 1987 season.
   216. zenbitz Posted: September 25, 2012 at 12:52 AM (#4244830)
Steagles has a point... it's actually become kind of an entertaining sideshow.
It was a 4 point spread, too, so GB was poised to cover.

At first I thought calling a TD instead of INT made sense because "scoring plays are reviewable"... but inside 2 minutes all plays are reviewable on the booth's decision.

@206 - the other thing is that every single incomplete pass results in a receiver making a beef about "where's the flag?" QBs have been doing this for a couple of years now in the "15 yard penalty... Touching the Brady" era, and WRs did it a bit, but not all the time.

   217. Gamingboy Posted: September 25, 2012 at 12:55 AM (#4244833)
That was the most bizarre thing in sports I have seen in my life. And even in my relatively short life, I have seen many bizarre things.
   218. Jay Z Posted: September 25, 2012 at 12:57 AM (#4244834)
$20 says there's still replacement refs next week.


If there are, I'm not watching.
   219. Ray (RDP) Posted: September 25, 2012 at 01:10 AM (#4244842)
Why are people acting as if the regular refs are any good? The two ref camps seem the same to me.
   220. Kiko Sakata Posted: September 25, 2012 at 01:12 AM (#4244843)
At first I thought calling a TD instead of INT made sense because "scoring plays are reviewable"... but inside 2 minutes all plays are reviewable on the booth's decision.


I thought somebody (ex-ref?) on ESPN said that the actual possession question wasn't reviewable - that is, the booth couldn't change the call from catch to interception. All that was reviewable was whether the ball hit the ground (and, of course, it didn't, because it was nestled safely against Jennings' chest). Which is incredibly stupid if true. What's the point of reviewing the play if you're limited in how "right" you can get the play? I think I agree with Gamingboy - probably the most bizarre thing in sports I've seen: if not the play itself, certainly the aftermath, where the ENTIRE postgame conversation focused on the obvious wrongness of the final play.
   221. Gamingboy Posted: September 25, 2012 at 01:17 AM (#4244844)
The only thing that I can remember that was even close to this bizarre (and involved refs) was the 1972 Olympics. I wasn't around then, though.
   222. Ray (RDP) Posted: September 25, 2012 at 01:21 AM (#4244846)
What was so "bizarre" about this ending?

Gruden himself said that the refs never call the push-off from the offensive player on the game-ending hail marys. So that can't be a replacement ref issue.

And as for the interception, I agree it was an interception - though it wasn't THAT clear, especially with the naked eye - but what makes people think the regular refs wouldn't have screwed it up?
   223. zenbitz Posted: September 25, 2012 at 01:23 AM (#4244847)
If you were a replacement ref, what incentive do you have to NOT consort with gamblers and fix games?

You'll never work for the NFL again? Is it actually criminal? I guess you could be subject to a civil suit.

But how could you ever prove anything? It's all judgement calls... and what if you just said "Yeah, I blew that call. My bad." I guess all you have to do is document payoffs by a gambling interest - doesn't matter what actions you take/don't take during game.

   224. Ray (RDP) Posted: September 25, 2012 at 01:25 AM (#4244848)
Is there a reason Steve Young looks 30 instead of 50?
   225. Tulo's Fishy Mullet (mrams) Posted: September 25, 2012 at 01:26 AM (#4244849)
a true WWF moment. My favorites, the two refs making opposite calls standing two feet from one another. Then following the review, Pete Carroll acting like Jimmy Hart, sans the megaphone after the Ref announced the ruling on the field was a TD.
   226. zenbitz Posted: September 25, 2012 at 01:29 AM (#4244850)
Ray, I think it would be hard to argue on a judgement call (i.e, PI, holding, some fouls and spots) basis that replacements are *empirically* worse. I do think they are getting intimidated by coaches and players, and they are screwing up "easy stuff" like number of timeouts, and edge-case rules.

And they do seem subjectively worse - i.e, more calls seem just pure randomness - but it's extremely hard to be objective about it. It's even worse in situations like this Monday Night Game where the ESPN announcers just rip into them.

Normally - I just assume the announcers are wrong and ignore them, but they can be persuasive in an emotional sense.
   227. zenbitz Posted: September 25, 2012 at 01:30 AM (#4244852)
@225.. it was so WWF I am beginning to wonder if that isn't the NFLs intent. "Are you not entertained???"
   228. Ray (RDP) Posted: September 25, 2012 at 01:43 AM (#4244854)
What I'm wondering is whether the replacement refs are actually worse, or whether the spotlight is on them so people are complaining more.

Because the regular refs suck ass as it is.
   229. Every Inge Counts Posted: September 25, 2012 at 01:49 AM (#4244855)
The replacement refs are just making so many little mistakes about the rules. Lions-Titans game they mark off a penalty wrong (from the Detroit 44 instead of the Titans 44), spotting the ball in bad places, not knowing how many timeouts teams have, etc. Apparently if Aaron Rodgers was to be believed they gave him the kicking ball during the 2 point conversion. Things like that are not good. The judgement calls, eh whatever I agree-some of the regular refs are not much better. But they don't know the basics....
   230. Random Transaction Generator Posted: September 25, 2012 at 01:54 AM (#4244857)
What I'm wondering is whether the replacement refs are actually worse, or whether the spotlight is on them so people are complaining more.


Well, to give you an idea of the quality of refs that are acting as replacements right now, I'll point out that some of them had been fired before for incompetence...

...by the Lingerie Football League.
   231. Tripon Posted: September 25, 2012 at 01:55 AM (#4244858)
Isn't that an example that the rules as is is actually too complicated?
   232. zenbitz Posted: September 25, 2012 at 02:00 AM (#4244859)
I think your natural iconclasm is good in this instance Ray. I *think* the replacements have been worse. They *seem* worse to me. I am a pretty objective sports viewer... but I am not sure that I can untangle my knowledge that the refs are inexperienced, and the constant harping from the fans, players, and media - from my (as unbiased as possible) observations.

What's interesting is that with the all-22 (Coaches) film this year - some really bored person COULD go back and document all instances of holding/PI etc on every play this year... but ironically there's no film available from last year to compare it! I suppose you could make do with the regular TV feed (if you had all 256 games), but I think you couldn't possibly make an inference of all the NON calls that could occurring, and that might leave 1/2 the data or more "on the field".

I actually have not thought the regular NFL refs were particularly bad. I mean, they made some mistakes for sure. I don't think MLB umpires are in general really bad- although I think that robots should call balls and strikes (affirmative action just for you, Ray)
   233. Ray (RDP) Posted: September 25, 2012 at 02:02 AM (#4244860)
Heh.
   234. zenbitz Posted: September 25, 2012 at 02:04 AM (#4244861)
@230 is a great example. Deadspin has been SHREDDING the replacements unmercifully. And in an entertaining manner.

Would they get as many hits writing articles like "Replacement refs not really that bad". I don't think so. I think they feed of the (perceived) failure.

Like I said - I cannot objectively tell whether the refs are worse. And if there is such a thing as a self-fulfilling prophecy, it would look just like this. But how can you tell?
   235. Tripon Posted: September 25, 2012 at 02:07 AM (#4244862)
Stefan Fatsis@stefanfatsis
Ref who signaled TD does JUCO football and basketball in California. One who didn't has reffed Big 12, arena and NFL Europe.
   236. Jay Z Posted: September 25, 2012 at 02:34 AM (#4244867)
@230 is a great example. Deadspin has been SHREDDING the replacements unmercifully. And in an entertaining manner.

Would they get as many hits writing articles like "Replacement refs not really that bad". I don't think so. I think they feed of the (perceived) failure.

Like I said - I cannot objectively tell whether the refs are worse. And if there is such a thing as a self-fulfilling prophecy, it would look just like this. But how can you tell?


Things in the scab refs disfavor:

People are now aware of the poor resumes of some of them.

The procedural errors (awarding too many timeouts) that would be big news even once with the regular crew.

Replacement authority figures are treated differently than other sorts of replacements.

The NFL has chosen to keep them nameless on screen. Trying to protect them I guess, but it reduces sympathy if they are just anonymous. Real refs have names.

I'm surprised they've lost the broadcasters. Hard to do. I did not watch the 1987 scab games, but I don't think they lost the broadcasters back then. Of course that was a strike and you had players crossing, different situation. This is a lockout, plus with this particular group of guys (refs) all of them have full time jobs anyway, so they are not going to be missing the paycheck all that much.
   237. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: September 25, 2012 at 05:52 AM (#4244887)
it doesn't seem that far-fetches to me if the current officials say to h8ck with it

unless the league has promised something extraordinary why take all the abuse?
   238. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: September 25, 2012 at 06:05 AM (#4244889)
green bay should have scored more points
   239. Weekly Journalist_ Posted: September 25, 2012 at 06:05 AM (#4244890)
#### the NFL owners. They want to destroy the pension plan for the players, and beating the officials is just laying the groundwork. They can take their 401k proposals and shove them up their asses.
   240. Weekly Journalist_ Posted: September 25, 2012 at 06:09 AM (#4244892)
Reffing the Big 12 and NFL Europe seems to pretty much make you qualified in my book. That's about as good as non NFL experience gets.
   241. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: September 25, 2012 at 06:13 AM (#4244894)
if the info is accurate several of the refs on the field had been fired by the pac 10 which is infamous for its low reffing quality
   242. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: September 25, 2012 at 06:30 AM (#4244895)
Any one of these calls could have occurred with the old refs. Folks remember Hochuli screwing up the overtime coin toss. It''s the consistently nonsensical calls, the total lack of control of the game, the fact that the outcome of any reasonably close game is no longer being determined by what happens on the field, that has rendered the NFL unwatchable. Time to take a stand and turn it off.
   243. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: September 25, 2012 at 06:36 AM (#4244897)
the qb roughing call on walden that nullified an interception was curious

the pass interference that got the seahawks out of first and forever was odd
   244. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: September 25, 2012 at 06:38 AM (#4244898)
the league has an advantage here in that the packers don't have a single owner of note capable of complaining and folks noticing
   245. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: September 25, 2012 at 07:09 AM (#4244900)
Not a football fan here but gotta weigh in after seeing the highlights. Just venting and forgive me if this ground has been covered;

1. I thought instant replay fixed everything. I'm confused.

2. I don't know who TJ Lang is but if I were a guard on a team that allowed my quarterback to get sacked 8 times in the first half I think I'd keep my trap shut about anyone else not doing their job properly.
   246. Ray (RDP) Posted: September 25, 2012 at 08:18 AM (#4244918)
The one real effect may be that even if these refs aren't significantly worse, they don't have the respect of the players/coaches, and so chaos has ensued.
   247. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: September 25, 2012 at 08:20 AM (#4244921)
jose

don't know if point 1 was sarcasm or not but on that last play they are not allowed to determine possession.

by my count neither lang nor sitton were responsible for any sacks. 3 were clearly on bulaga who was going against a rookie who only has a single move which is to fly off the edge. bulaga was destroyed last night and i think should have been benched briefly to get his head back in the game. 3 were on rodgers desperate to pass the ball deep which in that setting was dumb but that is how he is coached. one on newhouse. one on john kuhn the fullback.

last night you saw the best and worst of mccarthy.

mccarthy is ridiculously stubborn and desperate for big plays so in the first half despite the offensive line getting whipped, the seattle defense playing at fever pitch and the noise not helping the packers kept trying to throw the deep ball when every defense so far has put their safeties 20 yards down field and dare green bay to run the ball and/or dink and dunk.

mccarthy, after 10 quarters of being embarrassed, finally woke up the packers did what was needed and drove the ball down the field in the second half. but instead of scoring 17 points they got 12.

the green bay defense whipped the seattle offense most of the night as the seattle offensive line was overmatched in pass protection. their guys are good run blockers but can't move their feet in pass blocking. shame on dom capers only rushing three at the end and double shame on the one green bay guy for playing pattycake versus really rushing
   248. BDC Posted: September 25, 2012 at 08:42 AM (#4244929)
Not allowing for review of who has the ball on a scoring play in football is inexplicable. I mean, either have video review or don't, but don't prevent it from actually determining something important. Apologies for posting the bloody obvious :)
   249. zonk Posted: September 25, 2012 at 08:49 AM (#4244932)
I'm not especially a Packer fan, nor for that matter -- much of an NFL fan either... and 8 sacks in the first half certainly didn't help - but it's hard for me to see how that wasn't one of the most horrendous hose jobs in NFL history. It was more than just the last play, there were multiple critical calls that looked terribly blown.

I don't buy any grand conspiracies, but it sure seemed like the Packers were playing against the Seahawks AND the officials for most of the 4th quarter.

At this point, why bother with the regular season? Between NFL parity and the 'officiating' wildcard, might as well just draw 12 teams out of a hat, then have them roll dice to determine who plays in the Superbowl.
   250. My name is Votto, and I love to get blotto Posted: September 25, 2012 at 08:49 AM (#4244933)
The one real effect may be that even if these refs aren't significantly worse, they don't have the respect of the players/coaches, and so chaos has ensued.


That's it, in a nutshell. They also seem unsure of themselves, and the reviews are more frequent, and taking longer.
   251. Edmundo got dem ol' Kozma blues again mama Posted: September 25, 2012 at 08:55 AM (#4244938)
At this point, why bother with the regular season?

So Andy Reid can call enough pass plays to insure that Michael Vick will never walk past the age of 40.
   252. Conor Posted: September 25, 2012 at 09:00 AM (#4244943)
Why are people acting as if the regular refs are any good? The two ref camps seem the same to me.


I have to disagree on that. I think the last play was a tougher call than many people are giving the refs credit for (well not the offensive pass interference, but the catch decision), but there have been multiple instances this year where the refs have marked off penalties from the wrong yardline. They told John Fox he couldn't challenge a too many men on the field penalty (at least they eventually got that one right). They gave the Niners 2 additional challenges yesterday. And, as you point out later on, they seem to have no control over any of the games and the players/coaches have no respect for them.

Edit: Oh yeah, I forgot the play in the Skins game on Sunday where they tried to give a 10 second run off after an offensive penalty with the clock stopped that would've ended the game, only to have Kyle Shanahan vehemently tell them they were wrong, which lead to, of course, an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty on Shanahan.

Like I said, the play at the end of the game seemed a little tougher (to me, at least) than a lot of people are saying, but there have been too many instances where they simply are getting rules wrong or enforcing penalties incorrectly. (I believe Gruden mentioned there was one last night as well but I don't recall the details right now).
   253. zonk Posted: September 25, 2012 at 09:06 AM (#4244946)
I have to disagree on that. I think the last play was a tougher call than many people are giving the refs credit for (well not the offensive pass interference, but the catch decision), but there have been multiple instances this year where the refs have marked off penalties from the wrong yardline. They told John Fox he couldn't challenge a too many men on the field penalty (at least they eventually got that one right). They gave the Niners 2 additional challenges yesterday. And, as you point out later on, they seem to have no control over any of the games and the players/coaches have no respect for them.


Definitely agree on the last point... There were multiple shoving matches that escalated right in front of officials last night. Sure, that happens on occasion - you've got a bunch of big, testosterone-laden guys hitting each other for 3 hours so such things are inevitable... but there just seems to be a ton more of this sort of thing than I can recall seeing before and no one seems all that interested in being the cooler head. I'll be mildly surprised if we don't see an uber-brawl at some point soon.
   254. bunyon Posted: September 25, 2012 at 09:22 AM (#4244960)
So Andy Reid can call enough pass plays to insure that Michael Vick will never walk past the age of 40.

I think I speak for everyone when I say, I'm down with that.


With all the talk of lawsuits against the NFL on the concussion issue, I'd think using refs that everyone in the game says suck during a lockout - that is, when the real refs are available and willing - might open you up to something bad: lawyers?


Since I'm not in anyway a football or NFL fan, can someone sum up the labor issue involved? It seems like a lot of bad PR when there just isn't that much money involved. But googling, at this point, just turns up lots of ranting and raving about how terrible the scabs are.
   255. Chip Posted: September 25, 2012 at 09:24 AM (#4244962)
As much as $250M in bets were swung by last night's call. 85% of the money at Mandalay Bay was on the Packers. Lots and lots of incentive to slip a few bucks to rejected Lingerie Bowl officials for a favorable call.
   256. dlf Posted: September 25, 2012 at 09:32 AM (#4244970)
Is there a summary of the issues in the labor dispute with the refs? How much money is being fought over by the sides and what are the non-monetary items involved?
   257. zonk Posted: September 25, 2012 at 09:33 AM (#4244973)

Since I'm not in anyway a football or NFL fan, can someone sum up the labor issue involved? It seems like a lot of bad PR when there just isn't that much money involved. But googling, at this point, just turns up lots of ranting and raving about how terrible the scabs are.


My understanding is that is that the biggest hinge is on pensions... the NFL wants to convert them to 401(k)s and the officials have balked. It should be noted though - I've seen it misreported in several places - the officials aren't striking, it's a lockout by the owners. There are additional items - pay, of course, and the NFL would also like to make at least a portion of them full-time, but I think the benefits package restructuring is the biggest sticking point.
   258. bunyon Posted: September 25, 2012 at 09:46 AM (#4244988)
Thanks, zonk. I've always been shocked that NFL refs aren't full-time.
   259. Joey B.: posting for the kids of northeast Ohio Posted: September 25, 2012 at 09:48 AM (#4244993)
So Andy Reid can call enough pass plays to insure that Michael Vick will never walk past the age of 40.

The time is fast approaching when Vick will be thrown to the dogs.
   260. stanmvp48 Posted: September 25, 2012 at 09:52 AM (#4244998)
1)Do I understand correctly that GB was a 3 or 4 point favorite? I wonder if people will bet less on these games if they believe the results will turn on random officiating decisions.

2) Clearly GB was right to go for 2 when the TD made it 12 to 7; however, consider their last possession, when they had to punt from their own 4 yard line. If the score had been 13 to 7, they could have taken a deliberate safety and the free kick, with much better field position. An unlikely outcome which doesn't change the calculations about going for two but a thought.
   261. WillYoung Posted: September 25, 2012 at 09:54 AM (#4245003)
Has anybody mentioned the play where Browner just completely decked Greg Jennings in the endzone last night? I believe Rodgers had thrown a check-down and suddenly Browner launched himself at Jennings's head about twenty-five yards from the action. If the Commish isn't a complete jackhole, Browner shouldn't be allowed to play next week.
   262. WillYoung Posted: September 25, 2012 at 09:56 AM (#4245006)
Is there a summary of the issues in the labor dispute with the refs? How much money is being fought over by the sides and what are the non-monetary items involved?

What would it take to end the officials' lockout? My colleague Peter King wrote today that the gap between what officials want and what the NFL is offering is around $3.3 million per season.

Gosh. That is a big number, isn't it? I don't know how the NFL is supposed to come up with $3.3 million every year ... hey, wait, I just stumbled upon this little news item: The NFL recently signed nine-year agreements with Fox, NBC and CBS that are worth $3 billion a year.

I'm no accountant, but I do have a calculator on my computer. It looks to me like the NFL could settle this dispute for the cost of 0.11 percent of its annual TV take. That is an outrageously high number, of course. I don't think the NFL should completely cave -- this is, after all, a negotiation.

The NFL can start by generously offering 0.04 percent of its annual TV revenue, then bump it up to 0.06 percent of its annual TV revenue, and can probably get an agreement for close to 0.085 percent of its annual TV revenue.

I'm guessing there, but I mean, the officials want to work. I don't think they will be stubborn and insist on that entire, enormous 0.11 percent of the NFL's annual TV revenue. I think they could walk away from this with that 0.085 percent of the NFL's annual TV revenue and feel pretty good about themselves.

And then, if the NFL can somehow find a way to sell a few jerseys and tickets and beers and hot dogs and parking spots ... well, the officials wouldn't get a dime of that. Then maybe the NFL could finally turn a profit. What a relief that would be.


Link.
   263. Shredder Posted: September 25, 2012 at 10:09 AM (#4245026)
My understanding is that is that the biggest hinge is on pensions... the NFL wants to convert them to 401(k)s and the officials have balked.
In addition, the NFL wants to make this change not because it's costing them too much money, but because, well, times are changing and most Americans don't have defined benefit pension programs any more, so why should the refs? Seriously, that's the NFL's argument.
"From the owners' standpoint, right now they're funding a pension program that is a defined benefit program," said Goodell, who was in Washington on Wednesday attending a luncheon hosted by Politico's Playbook. "About ten percent of the country has that. Yours truly doesn't have that. It's something that doesn’t really exist anymore and that I think is going away steadily."

"What we agreed to do and offer as ownership," he added, "is that they would have a defined contribution plan, in the form of 401(k), so they'll still have a pension plan but the risk, like [for] most of us, would be on individuals."
By that logic, since a significantly lower number than 10% of the country makes less than $20MM, then maybe Roger Goodell shouldn't make $20MM per year either.
   264. Conor Posted: September 25, 2012 at 10:10 AM (#4245030)
Has anybody mentioned the play where Browner just completely decked Greg Jennings in the endzone last night? I believe Rodgers had thrown a check-down and suddenly Browner launched himself at Jennings's head about twenty-five yards from the action. If the Commish isn't a complete jackhole, Browner shouldn't be allowed to play next week.


I don't think its been mentioned, but my God did that seem like a dirty play.
   265. Eddo Posted: September 25, 2012 at 10:14 AM (#4245035)
The one real effect may be that even if these refs aren't significantly worse, they don't have the respect of the players/coaches, and so chaos has ensued.

This is it.

I don't really think the accuracy of calls has dropped significantly. If regular refs get calls right 95% of the time(*), these refs are getting them right 93% (completely made-up numbers).

The issue is the lack of control, on two fronts.

One is that they take forever to make calls, and do so with very little conviction. This has led to players and coaches trying to intimidate the refs more, which has largely worked - teams are getting extra timeouts, more late flags come in after a player has asked for one, etc.

The other control issue is with player safety and behavior. It's clear that the replacements have no idea how to quickly stop chippy behavior, such as fights and dirty play.

So even though I think the same call gets made on the final play of last night's Seahawks-Packers game if regular refs were in place, if it winds up being the last straw to give leverage to the regular refs, I'm all for it.

(*) And before you cut down my estimate, remember just how many calls are made. Yes, one or two incorrect decisions might be made per game, on average, but there are literally hundreds of calls (and non-calls) refs make in a given game.
   266. Tom Nawrocki Posted: September 25, 2012 at 10:15 AM (#4245036)
In addition, the NFL wants to make this change not because it's costing them too much money, but because, well, times are changing and most Americans don't have defined benefit pension programs any more, so why should the refs? Seriously, that's the NFL's argument.


The actual, unstated position seems to be that NFL owners hate unions more than they love the integrity of the game.
   267. Fat Al Posted: September 25, 2012 at 10:25 AM (#4245046)
I don't buy any grand conspiracies, but it sure seemed like the Packers were playing against the Seahawks AND the officials for most of the 4th quarter.


I wasn't watching very closely, but I'm pretty sure that when GB was behind it was the recipient of a very questionable interference or roughing call that kept the scoring drive alive. The questionable calls went both ways.
   268. Ray (RDP) Posted: September 25, 2012 at 10:37 AM (#4245054)
And, as you point out later on, they seem to have no control over any of the games and the players/coaches have no respect for them.


Yeah, also, if players/coaches think penalties are random (*), then they might decide to just sell out and play ultra-aggressively on every play.

(*) Well, more random than regular penalties, I guess. As I keep pointing out, the calls and non-calls from the regular refs are pretty bleeping random also. Now, I'm open to the idea that the replacement refs are worse, and/or are screwing up the actual rules, which I agree I _don't_ see from the regular refs a whole lot. So, yes, I can see that perhaps they are worse.
----------

OT slightly, but WTF was up with the field goal at the end of the Pats-Ravens game. Why do the goalposts not extend higher than a human being can possibly kick the ball? It seems so simple. Same question for foul poles in baseball.
   269. DA Baracus Posted: September 25, 2012 at 10:46 AM (#4245060)
the referees have no leverage. people are ######## about the replacements, yeah, but they're still buying tickets. they're still watching games on television. they're still writing about it on the internet and talking about it at the office the next day.


When Steve Young made this point last week he used the word "inelastic" and Stuart Scott and Trent Dilfer looked at him like he was speaking Chinese.
   270. DA Baracus Posted: September 25, 2012 at 10:48 AM (#4245062)
What I'm wondering is whether the replacement refs are actually worse, or whether the spotlight is on them so people are complaining more.


It is unquestionably worse because they don't understand the rules. This has been shown week after week.
   271. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: September 25, 2012 at 10:54 AM (#4245070)

With all the talk of lawsuits against the NFL on the concussion issue, I'd think using refs that everyone in the game says suck during a lockout - that is, when the real refs are available and willing - might open you up to something bad: lawyers?


This was discussed a bit on "Hang up and Listen" but I believe replacement refs don't directly cause an inherently more dangerous workplace than regular refs. I suppose it could be litigated, but I don't see it being successful.

Folks remember Hochuli screwing up the overtime coin toss.


I will not have you sully the good name of Ed "Too Strong" Hochuli. It was Phil Luckett who screwed up the coin toss.

Why are people acting as if the regular refs are any good? The two ref camps seem the same to me.


I always thought the NFL had the best officials of any sport. Mostly because they review plays after games and are held somewhat accountable. I'd probably rank em (1) NFL (2) MLB (although they have been dreadful the last two years) (3) college basketball (4) college football (5) NBA (6) MLS. I don't watch enough NHL to say about that.

As much as $250M in bets were swung by last night's call. 85% of the money at Mandalay Bay was on the Packers. Lots and lots of incentive to slip a few bucks to rejected Lingerie Bowl officials for a favorable call.


I won $5 on the Seahawks, so thanks scabs!
   272. zonk Posted: September 25, 2012 at 10:58 AM (#4245074)

I wasn't watching very closely, but I'm pretty sure that when GB was behind it was the recipient of a very questionable interference or roughing call that kept the scoring drive alive. The questionable calls went both ways.


IIRC, I think it was a roughing the passer call... I think it was a hit at/below the knees (or whatever the rule is regarding where you can't hit a QB) -- again, by no means a Packer fan, and no, it didn't seem like a malicious hit, but my (limited, admittedly) understanding of the rule is that it was actually the proper call.

That said, there were certainly some other "whaaaaatttt" calls in the game that did go against SEA.

As Michael Rosenberg wrote about the Ravens-Patriots Sunday night game --

But I watched the Ravens-Patriots game Sunday night, and I mean this sincerely: I have no idea what the score would have been with the real refs. It could have been 38-31 Patriots or 24-20 Ravens or 27-all heading into overtime ... I mean, I have no idea.


While the focus on the 4th quarter probably tints my view of who should have won last night, that's probably a pretty good synopsis of the state of things. Seattle's D/GB playcalling was absolutely burying the Pack in the 1st half, but Seattle's offense wasn't exactly lighting things up either. I suppose that, on one hand, you could say it was a toss-up game - and thus, a toss-up call (to be charitable) might have been an appropriate ending... but I do really think there's this sense of the scores not quite lining up with the play by a pretty good margin.
   273. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: September 25, 2012 at 10:58 AM (#4245075)
The actual, unstated position seems to be that NFL owners hate unions more than they love the integrity of the game.


This. The owners have, as Steve Young pointed out after the Falcons-Broncos MNF game last week, a product with an inelastic demand curve. (Watching Stu Scott try to follow Young discussing inelasticity in demand was worth the price of admission, which is listening to Jon Gruden talk.) As such, they have no real concern about 1) the integrity of the play on the field, or 2) player safety, or 3) anything else they might jackoff to the media about. They have a product that's going to sell tickets regardless. They have $3billion guaranteed from the TV rights. They could give a flying #### about how bad the scab refs are. There *only* interest is in breaking the officials' union, and their only interest in that is blind, ideological hatred of unions by a bunch of billionaires living off of publicly funded stadiums and various other forms of the corporate-welfare dole.
   274. SoSH U at work Posted: September 25, 2012 at 11:12 AM (#4245087)

I will not have you sully the good name of Ed "Too Strong" Hochuli. It was Phil Luckett who screwed up the coin toss.


Wasn't it Hochuli who made a major screw-up up that affected the outcome of a Broncos-Chargers contest?


   275. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: September 25, 2012 at 11:14 AM (#4245092)

Wasn't it Hochuli who made a major screw-up up that affected the outcome of a Broncos-Chargers contest?


Yea, something like a forward pass that wasn't a forward pass. But don't say it too loudly or he will beat us up.
   276. Ray (RDP) Posted: September 25, 2012 at 11:17 AM (#4245097)
With all the talk of lawsuits against the NFL on the concussion issue, I'd think using refs that everyone in the game says suck during a lockout - that is, when the real refs are available and willing - might open you up to something bad: lawyers?


I've only spent 30 seconds thinking about it but I can't see how.
   277. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: September 25, 2012 at 11:24 AM (#4245103)
This. The owners have, as Steve Young pointed out after the Falcons-Broncos MNF game last week, a product with an inelastic demand curve. (Watching Stu Scott try to follow Young discussing inelasticity in demand was worth the price of admission, which is listening to Jon Gruden talk.) As such, they have no real concern about 1) the integrity of the play on the field, or 2) player safety, or 3) anything else they might jackoff to the media about. They have a product that's going to sell tickets regardless. They have $3billion guaranteed from the TV rights. They could give a flying #### about how bad the scab refs are. There *only* interest is in breaking the officials' union, and their only interest in that is blind, ideological hatred of unions by a bunch of billionaires living off of publicly funded stadiums and various other forms of the corporate-welfare dole.
The thing I'd add is that this speaks to the terribleness of American football fans. MLB tried to use scab players in 1995, and baseball fans simply weren't going to attend the games. The owners had to call it off. The scab games in the 80s in the NFL drew well enough on tv and in the stadiums that the players' union had to give in.

Football fans have only themselves to blame for this.

{whistles, walks off.)
   278. spycake Posted: September 25, 2012 at 11:24 AM (#4245104)
"From the owners' standpoint, right now they're funding a pension program that is a defined benefit program," said Goodell, who was in Washington on Wednesday attending a luncheon hosted by Politico's Playbook. "About ten percent of the country has that. Yours truly doesn't have that. It's something that doesn’t really exist anymore and that I think is going away steadily."


The NFL should eliminate Goodell's employer-provided health insurance too. Then they could eliminate that for the refs as well, because hey, if the CEO doesn't have it, logically the employees shouldn't have it, right? They might have to increase Goodell's salary by $1 million or so, but if they could save another $2 million on the refs, they'd come out ahead.

Although I'm trying to imagine what a defined-benefit pension program would look like for an "employee" like Goodell, who reportedly makes $20 million annually.
   279. Ray (RDP) Posted: September 25, 2012 at 11:28 AM (#4245111)
The actual, unstated position seems to be that NFL owners hate unions more than they love the integrity of the game.


---

This. The owners have, as Steve Young pointed out after the Falcons-Broncos MNF game last week, a product with an inelastic demand curve. (Watching Stu Scott try to follow Young discussing inelasticity in demand was worth the price of admission, which is listening to Jon Gruden talk.) As such, they have no real concern about 1) the integrity of the play on the field, or 2) player safety, or 3) anything else they might jackoff to the media about. They have a product that's going to sell tickets regardless. They have $3billion guaranteed from the TV rights. They could give a flying #### about how bad the scab refs are. There *only* interest is in breaking the officials' union, and their only interest in that is blind, ideological hatred of unions by a bunch of billionaires living off of publicly funded stadiums and various other forms of the corporate-welfare dole.


---

The thing I'd add is that this speaks to the terribleness of American football fans. MLB tried to use scab players in 1995, and baseball fans simply weren't going to attend the games. The owners had to call it off. The scab games in the 80s in the NFL drew well enough on tv and in the stadiums that the players' union had to give in.

Football fans have only themselves to blame for this.

{whistles, walks off.)


---

I'll refrain from commenting substantively at this juncture, since people here are interested in discussing football and the usual suspects are intent on spewing their political BS about unions.
   280. stanmvp48 Posted: September 25, 2012 at 11:29 AM (#4245112)
Do you guys think there is a point where the fans actually start watching less? Perhaps gamblers will start betting less.
   281. Fat Al Posted: September 25, 2012 at 11:31 AM (#4245114)
While the focus on the 4th quarter probably tints my view of who should have won last night, that's probably a pretty good synopsis of the state of things. Seattle's D/GB playcalling was absolutely burying the Pack in the 1st half, but Seattle's offense wasn't exactly lighting things up either. I suppose that, on one hand, you could say it was a toss-up game - and thus, a toss-up call (to be charitable) might have been an appropriate ending... but I do really think there's this sense of the scores not quite lining up with the play by a pretty good margin.


Well sure, but that's inherent in football. Teams that get outplayed win all the time. See, e.g., the NY Jets this week (not that the Dolphins didn't do everything they could to earn that loss).
   282. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: September 25, 2012 at 11:34 AM (#4245118)
I haven't followed this thread, but is anyone here actually siding with the NFL in their showdown with the regular refs, to the point where they think that the NFL should just hold tight and keep sending out these clueless replacements just to save a few dollars? Is that ANYBODY'S position here?

If it's not, then I apologize for the implication.
   283. Shredder Posted: September 25, 2012 at 11:36 AM (#4245119)
It is unquestionably worse because they don't understand the rules. This has been shown week after week.
In contrast, the real NFL refs spend quite a bit of time going over the minutia in the rules every week, including during the off-season:
Ed Hochuli suffers from what he calls the sickness. In a typical year, around mid-May, the NFL heralds its upcoming season by mailing to game officials an arcane, hundred-question rules test, including such queries as: On an onside kick from the A35, A1 is the first to touch the kick at the A42, and A2 then recovers the kick at the A46. During the kick, B1 blocks A3 below the waist at the A44. What's the call and why?

But this year, well before the NFL Referees Association's collective bargaining agreement was set to expire on May 31, the zebras learned that no exam would be forthcoming. And so Hochuli, the NFLRA's famously mesomorphic elder statesman, preempted his union's impending—and now ongoing—lockout in the nerdiest way imaginable. For three months now, the 22-year veteran has been e-mailing his 120 fellow officials his own weekly test, replete with video clips.

What's more, on each of the past eight Mondays, always at 9:30 p.m. EDT, the 61-year-old has moderated a voluntary hour-long conference call in which participants dissect the test's thorniest questions. On Aug. 13, for example, 95 officials devoted 30 minutes to discussing the fouls that require a 10-second clock runoff.


   284. hokieneer Posted: September 25, 2012 at 11:40 AM (#4245122)
The NFL has no reason to concede much of anything to the union. As #273 points out, they are going to make money regardless of the quality of officials.

Not saying I agree with it, but them are the facts.
   285. Shredder Posted: September 25, 2012 at 11:42 AM (#4245123)
I always thought the NFL had the best officials of any sport. Mostly because they review plays after games and are held somewhat accountable. I'd probably rank em (1) NFL (2) MLB (although they have been dreadful the last two years) (3) college basketball (4) college football (5) NBA (6) MLS. I don't watch enough NHL to say about that.
One thing to note is that when it comes to the major sports, the NFL not only arguably has the best refs, but it also has the most anonymous refs. Hochuli is obviously recognizable, and I don't know if Johnny Grier is still around, but those are the only two guys I can name off the top of my head, and that's because they're the guys who announce the calls. Yet we can name a boatload of MLB umps, and I'm sure hockey fans and basketball fans can do the same for their sports, though it's gotten tougher since hockey doubled the number of refs, and they all wear helmets now. I don't know if the correlation is meaningful, but the NFL seems like a place where the refs feel like they actually take to heart the idea that they're at their best when you don't notice that they're there. Can anyone say that about major league umps? Half of those guys have egos just as large as any of the players, and chips on their shoulders to boot. How many times have you seen an NFL linesman getting berated by a coach during a game without so much as giving the coach a warning? But if you look at an ump a little funny, you could get tossed.
   286. Eddo Posted: September 25, 2012 at 11:43 AM (#4245124)
The thing I'd add is that this speaks to the terribleness of American football fans. MLB tried to use scab players in 1995, and baseball fans simply weren't going to attend the games. The owners had to call it off. The scab games in the 80s in the NFL drew well enough on tv and in the stadiums that the players' union had to give in.

Football fans have only themselves to blame for this.

Scab players are not the same as scab referees. You really think that baseball fans wouldn't watch MLB games if there were scab umpires working?
   287. Dale Sams Posted: September 25, 2012 at 11:44 AM (#4245127)
Can someone explain something to me. I was thinking about that stupid "Calvin Johnson rule". Is that still in play? What if he slid out of the endzone? OR, since he 'hasn't completed the play'...surely that means, a defender can pop the #### out of him to keep him from 'completing the play'?

edit: I'm referring to the guy who a couple years back, caught the ball, palmed it, took a couple of steps and released it and they called it incomplete.
   288. Eddo Posted: September 25, 2012 at 11:45 AM (#4245130)
One thing to note is that when it comes to the major sports, the NFL not only arguably has the best refs, but it also has the most anonymous refs. Hochuli is obviously recognizable, and I don't know if Johnny Grier is still around, but those are the only two guys I can name off the top of my head, and that's because they're the guys who announce the calls. Yet we can name a boatload of MLB umps, and I'm sure hockey fans and basketball fans can do the same for their sports, though it's gotten tougher since hockey doubled the number of refs, and they all wear helmets now. I don't know if the correlation is meaningful, but the NFL seems like a place where the refs feel like they actually take to heart the idea that they're at their best when you don't notice that they're there. Can anyone say that about major league umps? Half of those guys have egos just as large as any of the players, and chips on their shoulders to boot. How many times have you seen an NFL linesman getting berated by a coach during a game without so much as giving the coach a warning? But if you look at an ump a little funny, you could get tossed.

My experience is the opposite. I know I can certainly name many more head referees than baseball umpires. We're on a baseball discussion site, of course people here will know more umpires. But among equivalent NFL fans, you'll find the refs are fairly well-known, along with their crews' tendencies (more likely to call holding? DPI? etc.).
   289. Ray (RDP) Posted: September 25, 2012 at 11:47 AM (#4245133)
I haven't followed this thread, but is anyone here actually siding with the NFL in their showdown with the regular refs, to the point where they think that the NFL should just hold tight and keep sending out these clueless replacements just to save a few dollars? Is that ANYBODY'S position here?


It might be my position. Not being adequately informed as to the specific issues involved in the negotiation, I can't say. If you know what the issues are, Andy, please explain.

Otherwise, I don't see what's legitimate or serious about "Oh, the NFL has a lot of money, they should just pay employees more than they think the employees are worth." Clearly the NFL, at least to this point, thinks the demands being made by the union are too much such that it's worth suffering with replacement refs.
   290. PepTech Posted: September 25, 2012 at 11:48 AM (#4245135)
Bad calls abounded all night long. It's too bad, because it was a heck of a game otherwise, if you like defense. Calls that made you go "huh?", just off the top of my head:

1) Clemons sack in the first half that was disallowed because of a face mask penalty. Clemons did have the upper shelf of the helmet (up around Rodgers' forehead), whatever that's called, but not the mask itself. It's entirely possible that grabbing that shelf is the same as grabbing the mask, I have no idea.

2) Browner decking Jennings

3) PI called on the Seahawks on a short five yard dump on the TD drive, got there simultaneously

4) Roughing on the interception - with the proviso mentioned above about the below-the-knee thing. If that's the reasoning, good call, I guess.

5) K ball used for the 2 pointer

6) PI called on GB after Sidney Rice mugged the defender on 1st and 30

7) No PI called against Woodson after he mugged the TE on the last drive

8) No PI called on Tate on the last play

9) Everything else about the last play

- The two guys didn't confer
- Making opposing signals
- Referee not conferring prior to going to replay
- XP fiasco

They did get some stuff right - Jennings going out of bounds and not scoring, then the Rodgers mark on the next play. But PI was a mess all night long on both sides, and holding is the same thing. They might as well be playing sandlot call-your-own-fouls out there.
   291. Eddo Posted: September 25, 2012 at 11:48 AM (#4245136)
Can someone explain something to me. I was thinking about that stupid "Calvin Johnson rule". Is that still in play? What if he slid out of the endzone? OR, since he 'hasn't completed the play'...surely that means, a defender can pop the #### out of him to keep him from 'completing the play'?

Yes, and it was in play long before Calvin Johnson played his first NFL snap, too.

In regards to the final play of Packers-Seahawks, it does matter. In order for it to be an interception, Jennings had to maintain possession all the way to the ground. That is where the window opened up for Tate to also possess the ball(*).

But once he's landed, no, another player can't come and push him out of the end zone or "pop the #### out of him"(**). The play is complete once he's on the ground.

(*) I'm not sure that simultaneous possession was the correct call, but it's not as obviously wrong as most people are claiming. I probably would have called it an interception, but in realtime, it looked like a tossup.

(**) To be fair, they certainly could do those things, but they would likely be penalized for a late hit.
   292. Don Geovany Soto (chris h.) Posted: September 25, 2012 at 11:55 AM (#4245146)
Well, it certainly is true that pensions are a rarity nowadays; Goodell's not wrong there. And when organizations try to cut costs, one thing they do is look at their benefit programs and compare them to the "market" to see if they can get away with cutting something. So it's no surprise that the NFL wants to cut the pensions.

Of course, there's no comparable market, exactly, for NFL refs, and in any case it should also be no surprise that the refs don't want to give the pensions up.

My experience with labor negotiations in other industries is that it goes something like this: management says they've made a tremendous offer that is incredibly generous compared to the rest of the market. Union says the offer is misleading, terrible, and says that management isn't negotiating in good faith. Management throws up its collective hands and says they're trying but the union just won't come to the table. Union says they'll come to the table when management gets serious about a legitimate offer. Acrimonious back-and-forth press releases continue right up until the day an agreement is reached, whereupon management trumpets its dedication to organized labor and taking care of its employees, and union trumpets the incredible gains they were able to make for their members.

It's a bit different in this situation thanks to the lockout and monopoly, but the song remains the same.
   293. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: September 25, 2012 at 11:59 AM (#4245151)
Why do the goalposts not extend higher than a human being can possibly kick the ball? It seems so simple. Same question for foul poles in baseball.


I think it's just unrealistic to make them that high. They would have to be a LOT higher than they are now so you'd run into general engineering issues where you'd need a change of materials which would probably cost significant money. Also, if you watch any football game the poles bend and sway. I think if they got to high the bending would actually change what is or is not a good field goal.

It seems that there would be some technology to deal with this (e.g. a chip in the ball, a camera on top of the pole) but I think what you suggest, while it sounds logical, is probably pretty challenging.
   294. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: September 25, 2012 at 12:01 PM (#4245153)
Some Bettors Get Relief on Game Decided by Botched Call

One sports betting Web site was refunding wagers on the Packers, who appeared to be robbed of a victory after the league’s crew of replacement officials botched the final play of the game, ruling an apparent Green Bay interception in the end zone to be a Seattle touchdown instead.

The site, Sportsbook.com, sent e-mails to bettors who had put money on Green Bay, alerting them to the unusual decision that their bets would be refunded in the form of a free play on the site. At least one bettor, writing on a Twitter account said to be that of the Canadian journalist Glen McGregor, posted a picture of his computer screen showing the message and quoted the Web site’s head oddsmaker, Russ Candler, as saying, “I can’t stand winning unfairly.”
   295. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: September 25, 2012 at 12:02 PM (#4245154)

Do you guys think there is a point where the fans actually start watching less?


I think we've reached that point now. My gut feeling is a 5% drop this weekend, slowly building to a fall in ratings by say 20% in a few weeks.
   296. TerpNats Posted: September 25, 2012 at 12:09 PM (#4245164)
It's amazing to see the comments from players on this, with many of them (incorrectly) noting in this situation, "the tie goes to the runner." A baseball figure of speech regarding football rules; I'm sure Goodell loved that.
   297. Kiko Sakata Posted: September 25, 2012 at 12:10 PM (#4245166)
That is where the window opened up for Tate to also possess the ball(*).

(*) I'm not sure that simultaneous possession was the correct call, but it's not as obviously wrong as most people are claiming.


According to the talking heads I heard last night, simultaneous possession requires simultaneous INITIAL possession. If player A catches it first and then B comes in afterward, that can't be simultaneous possession. So, I don't think there was a window open for Tate to also possess the ball, once Jennings caught the ball.
   298. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: September 25, 2012 at 12:11 PM (#4245168)
Did MLB ever use replacement umps? I seem to remember a labor strife with them a decade or so ago, but I can't recall the details.
   299. hokieneer Posted: September 25, 2012 at 12:11 PM (#4245170)
I think we've reached that point now. My gut feeling is a 5% drop this weekend, slowly building to a fall in ratings by say 20% in a few weeks.


If that does happen, in combination with decreased gate revenue, and the continued media backlash; then the owners will come back to the table. I'm not too optimistic that will occur.

It doesn't matter how many John Claytons, Steve Youngs, or Peter Kings continue to harp about the problems, I don't think the owners will budge until it manifests itself in the bottom line.
   300. DA Baracus Posted: September 25, 2012 at 12:13 PM (#4245177)
My gut feeling is a 5% drop this weekend


Next MNF game is Bears vs Cowboys. Ratings will not suffer.
Page 3 of 6 pages  < 1 2 3 4 5 6 > 

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Edmundo got dem ol' Kozma blues again mama
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogTrevor Hoffman's Hall of Fame induction seems inevitable
(1 - 1:07am, Sep 02)
Last: Moeball

NewsblogHBT: Jorge Soler with an extra-base hit in each of his first five games
(2 - 1:02am, Sep 02)
Last: madvillain

NewsblogOT: Politics, September, 2014: ESPN honors Daily Worker sports editor Lester Rodney
(28 - 1:00am, Sep 02)
Last: Ray (RDP)

NewsblogRobothal: Changed [Manny] Ramirez enjoyed helping Cubs prospects grow
(12 - 12:48am, Sep 02)
Last: Cargo Cultist

NewsblogPhoto of the day: Bill Murray, indy league ticket-taker
(102 - 12:27am, Sep 02)
Last: Bunny Vincennes

NewsblogNitkowski: Wanted: Major League manager...sort of.
(7 - 12:23am, Sep 02)
Last: steagles

NewsblogRon Roenicke rips into home-plate umpire
(17 - 12:18am, Sep 02)
Last: Bunny Vincennes

NewsblogAstros Fire Bo Porter
(54 - 12:16am, Sep 02)
Last: Zach

NewsblogBlue Jays Acquire Mayberry Jr.
(7 - 12:10am, Sep 02)
Last: Infinite Joost (Voxter)

NewsblogAthletics Acquire Adam Dunn
(43 - 11:46pm, Sep 01)
Last: Pasta-diving Jeter (jmac66)

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread August, 2014
(986 - 11:25pm, Sep 01)
Last: The Clarence Thomas of BBTF (scott)

NewsblogOT:  2014 College Football pre-season thread
(101 - 11:17pm, Sep 01)
Last: Lance Reddick! Lance him!

NewsblogNo-hitter! Four Phillies pitchers combine to blank the Braves
(10 - 11:12pm, Sep 01)
Last: Best Regards, President of Comfort, Esq.

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - September 2014
(5 - 11:07pm, Sep 01)
Last: DanO

NewsblogTigers' Miguel Cabrera appears to re-injure ankle, leaves game
(19 - 9:53pm, Sep 01)
Last: AJMcCringleberry

Page rendered in 0.8980 seconds
52 querie(s) executed