Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

These refs have got to go


  • Please log in to reply
159 replies to this topic

#106 Jase

Jase

    Kuechold Fantasies

  • Administrators
  • 17,495 posts
  • LocationMatthews, NC

Posted 25 September 2012 - 07:19 AM

people need to boycott the games. The only way Goodell is going to pay attention is if the seats are empty.


I recommend this course of action to all falcons fans immediately.

#107 JawnyBlaze

JawnyBlaze

    Senior Member

  • ALL-PRO
  • 7,051 posts

Posted 25 September 2012 - 07:22 AM

The NFL is not your average business. In most businesses parts are eventually interchangable and can be replaced if the owner is willing to invest enough time and money into training and development. Not the case here. The officials have shown themselves to be a unique commodity who aren't replaceable. Also not sure what business owner wants to knowingly expose his product to ridicule and on a national stage all in the name of proving a point.


I disagree. If anything, the refs are far more replaceable with enough time and money into training and development than the players or any other group involved. The problem with what we have right now, the replacement officials, is the league didn't have enough time to invest the money into training and development. One of the sticking points is that the refs don't want to allow the NFL to be able to invest the time and money into developing a "minor league" of officials that the league can call up replacements from.

#108 usmcpanthers

usmcpanthers

    Professional Lurker

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,929 posts
  • LocationTampa, FL

Posted 25 September 2012 - 07:42 AM

The last time I was a blunder that bad was an old steeler game were Jerome bettis called heads on the OT coin toss. The coins landed on heads and the refs gae the ball to the other team. Jerome was liek WTF!. The other team won first possesion sudden deaf ot.

#109 R0CKnR0LLA

R0CKnR0LLA

    Drunk Posting

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,692 posts
  • LocationLas Vegas, NV

Posted 25 September 2012 - 07:51 AM

I'm sure the Packers are pissed.

Would hate to be the team that plays them next week.

#110 coralreefer_1

coralreefer_1

    Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 389 posts

Posted 25 September 2012 - 08:00 AM

Im gonna say the same thing I said on DWill's latest facebook posting making fun of the replacement refs...

" I wish folks would stop complaining about the replacement refs...if people don't like the way games are currently officiated, blame the regular refs and league who cant work out a deal..not these guys who are just filling in...without them the damn season would be cancelled!! Yes they make alot of mistakes, but that is to be expected of them. Most would not expect a "back-up" player to play as well as a starter (hence the reason he isn't a starter) so why expect a backup ref to be as good as the regular refs?"

#111 Falcons1stPanthers2nd

Falcons1stPanthers2nd

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,990 posts

Posted 25 September 2012 - 08:07 AM

My point is that the regular refs weren't that much better other than speed of the game. Arizona Pitt? Seattle vs Pitt? Anyone remember those super bowls? Denver and SD a few years back? Everyone's memory is so short and they are so quick to jump on the replacement refs like the regular ones were so good. This is how we got here because we were all bitching that the refs suck and have their pet teams. The regular refs can take their demands and shove them up their ass.

#112 pantherclaw

pantherclaw

    Wise Ass

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,833 posts
  • LocationGalveston

Posted 25 September 2012 - 08:08 AM

One more time. The call on the field was a touchdown. The review process cannot overturn the call on the field.



#113 JawnyBlaze

JawnyBlaze

    Senior Member

  • ALL-PRO
  • 7,051 posts

Posted 25 September 2012 - 08:10 AM

One more time. The call on the field was a touchdown. The review process cannot overturn the call on the field.


Say what? The entire point of the review process is to see if a call on the field needs overturning...It was under 2 minutes, meaning refs can decide to review it...it was called a TD, meaning refs MUST review it.

#114 thatlookseasy

thatlookseasy

    Death to pennies

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,950 posts

Posted 25 September 2012 - 08:11 AM

I disagree. If anything, the refs are far more replaceable with enough time and money into training and development than the players or any other group involved. The problem with what we have right now, the replacement officials, is the league didn't have enough time to invest the money into training and development. One of the sticking points is that the refs don't want to allow the NFL to be able to invest the time and money into developing a "minor league" of officials that the league can call up replacements from.


You can claim the refs are easily replaceable, but we seem to be watching overwhelming evidence to the contrary. You cant just pick up some random high school/ small college refs and throw them into the fuging NFL.

If this ref lockout was about improving the quality of officiating, then they have failed miserably. If you wanted to do that, you have to go out and pay top dollar for some experienced D-1 refs, not hire some clueless idiots.

#115 thatlookseasy

thatlookseasy

    Death to pennies

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,950 posts

Posted 25 September 2012 - 08:14 AM

The NFL clearly fuged this situation up, and should have at the very least taken some steps to mitigate the terrible officiating that they knew was coming. Why not do something like expanded replay where more calls can be made in the booth (you would need a quicker way to talk to the guys on the field though). At least make some effort so it looks like you care about the quality of the product on the field

#116 JawnyBlaze

JawnyBlaze

    Senior Member

  • ALL-PRO
  • 7,051 posts

Posted 25 September 2012 - 08:15 AM

You can say the same thing about players, coaches, anything. Put some random high school/small college players in there with only a few months to prepare and see how it goes. The ref lockout was never about improving the quality of officiating in the short term, obviously. I believe it will in the long term, though. That is, if the league doesn't end up caving to the ref's demands. The league wants more accountability and more competition for referees. The obvious outcome of more accountability and more competition is better quality.

The reason they didn't get experienced D-1 refs is not because they didn't want to spend the money, it's because the NCAA (or whoever) told the D-1 refs if they took the replacement jobs, they wouldn't have jobs waiting for them when the lockout ended.

#117 thatlookseasy

thatlookseasy

    Death to pennies

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,950 posts

Posted 25 September 2012 - 08:18 AM

You can say the same thing about players, coaches, anything. Put some random high school/small college players in there with only a few months to prepare and see how it goes. The ref lockout was never about improving the quality of officiating in the short term, obviously. I believe it will in the long term, though. That is, if the league doesn't end up caving to the ref's demands. The league wants more accountability and more competition for referees. The obvious outcome of more accountability and more competition is better quality.

The reason they didn't get experienced D-1 refs is not because they didn't want to spend the money, it's because the NCAA (or whoever) told the D-1 refs if they took the replacement jobs, they wouldn't have jobs waiting for them when the lockout ended.


May have been the intent, but they failed. If this was about accountability, then why are you lowballing the refs on money? Why not give them an offer that exceeds their demands AND requires more accountability? Make that public, put pressure on the union.

Because right now I cant tell the difference between an NFL that is trying to make refs more accountable and an NFL that is trying to save a few bucks by low-balling their refs and destroying the quality of their product

#118 Marc Anthony

Marc Anthony

    FORUM VET

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,233 posts

Posted 25 September 2012 - 08:24 AM

I'm sure the Packers are pissed.

Would hate to be the team that plays them next week.


Which would be the Saints....LOL!!!

#119 Falcons1stPanthers2nd

Falcons1stPanthers2nd

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,990 posts

Posted 25 September 2012 - 08:26 AM

May have been the intent, but they failed. If this was about accountability, then why are you lowballing the refs on money? Why not give them an offer that exceeds their demands AND requires more accountability? Make that public, put pressure on the union.

Because right now I cant tell the difference between an NFL that is trying to make refs more accountable and an NFL that is trying to save a few bucks by low-balling their refs and destroying the quality of their product

Because the refs want NO accountability and won't budge.

#120 MadHatter

MadHatter

    The Only Voice of Reason

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,506 posts
  • LocationDark Side of the Moon

Posted 25 September 2012 - 08:26 AM

Just cost the Packers the game. Soooo many bogus calls. Id be sick if that happened against us


People are forgetting that the Instant Replay Referee in the booth is NOT a replacement ref.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com