robbieruff
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 3,709
- Reaction score
- 5,108
My assumption was if they were full time then those other good points you make would be more readily implemented (as they do in ump training in baseball, which I'm sure you know is very extensive)...and yeah, if the league won't spring for full-time refs (or even have the audacity to give us "replacements" at one point), I agree that they'd be prone to cut corners in every other aspect of referee "readiness"...either way you slice it the whole thing undermines their so-called commitment to the "integrity of the game" as they so often preach in every other situation (namely player discipline). Mark my words, this upcoming SB on Sunday will be marred by some historically bad call/officiating (likely to benefit the Falcons as a way for the Pats/Goddell conspiracies to flourish) and the league will just do its typical shoulder shrug "awe shucks" response.It goes beyond having full time refs. It goes into recruiting, training and continued training of these refs to find better referees.
And I really think if they had that going on for them, they wouldn't even need the refs to be full time.
Instead, you have almost zero recruitment of referees, obviously poor training and a VP of Officiating who has NEVER REFEREED A GAME ON ANY LEVEL (pro, semi-pro, college, high school or Pop Warner) and he is in charge of the refs and instead of getting rid of bad refs who make the wrong calls...he would rather just spin it to being the right call.
Full time refs won't help a lick if the same clowns are running the show.
YR