Replacement Hindsight, Three Things

[Jamalisms]

How did we get here? Could anything have been done to prevent this?Few will argue that the replacement refs are inconsequential at this point. The NFL can spew out words like “admirable” all they want. The real word is “inadequate.”

Once upon a time, I felt as a man screaming at the world from a lonely and insignificant mountaintop named my twitter account. These days my voice is joined by a chorus of others who likely lack the self-control necessary to boycott the NFL and force it to change course.

Nobody expects perfection. The real officials have been known to mess things up repeatedly. There is, after all, a reason the replay challenge was instituted. At issue is a return to a semblance of predictability and consistency. At issue is the current absence of quality.

Fans expect the NFL to be a Ferrari, instead they are given a used Fiero. This is not the worst thing in the world, but it sort of feels that way and the state of the game isn’t nearly as good as it should be.

For a league that loves to talk about the shield and integrity, this is a joke. Instead of continuing to harp on the absence of qualified individuals officiating NFL games, let’s look at three possible things the NFL could (should?) have done differently even if a deal hadn't been reached.

1. The NFL should have brought these officials in earlier.

This would not have created a situation where replacement officials would be on par with the normal guys, but it would have made things markedly better.

First of all, there is a sense that this was a last minute, ill-conceived band-aid. This is supported by the fact that the NFL did not have these guys signed-on and preparing for games until very close to their debut in the preseason. It isn’t like the NFL was blindsided by the possibility of the NFLRA not agreeing to terms. Bringing replacement refs in earlier would have exhibited foresight and portrayed a stronger sense of preparedness. Fans would have respected that, at least a little.

By bringing these replacements in during, say, February after the Super Bowl, there would have been a much longer and more pronounced acclimation to the speed of the game. Officials would be more apt to notice the little things if they spent time rotating through mini-camps and training camps.

What’s more, there’s a good chance that drilling these guys with the actual rules would have prevented some of the confusion we’ve seen. Having to remember that a team must have a time out in order to challenge a play is difficult stuff, apparently, but I feel confident that they could have learned this rule by week three had they been studying it for months.

Perhaps the most obvious result from bringing these replacements in earlier is that it would have been a clear sign to the NFLRA that the league wasn’t playing around. Who knows how much it would have impacted negotiations, but that it would have had an effect is undoubtable.

2. The NFL should have been more transparent and upfront with fans about the differences between parties, and why they are as meaningful as the NFL must feel they are.

If you want fan sentiment to be on your side, don’t take them for granted. Yes, there are reasons that negotiating parties don’t always share full details, but they usually try to at least present a case to the public. On this issue, the NFL did a downright poor job of swaying the public. I’m not even certain they really tried.

There is a pronounced air of conceit that the NFL exudes at all times. Whether with retirees, Bounty Gate, the lockout last year, or with cable providers this arrogance is unmistakable. Perhaps they are right to be confident. Fans are addicted to their product and ratings are unlikely to suffer regardless of unrest among the masses.

Nevertheless, fan sentiment is not a trifling matter. Sentiment affects a wide variety of things, including sales of merchandise and association/transfer of negativity to corporate sponsors. If the NFL had made a remotely compelling case to fans that delineated the what’s and why’s of their refusal to budge on what appears to be a rather insignificant amount of money, (relatively speaking), fans would be far more supportive of their stance.

Even now, a rare few still wonder if it is not the NFLRA who is being unreasonable. Had the NFL done a better job of getting fans on their side before this all went down, many more fans would feel this way. Instead, most fans now side with the NFLRA or simply feel that the NFL needs to "fix" things at whatever cost.

It didn’t have to be this way.

3. The NFL should have avoided replacement refs all together.

The NFL should have, from the outset, stood behind their tagline that quality, integrity, and player safety are too important to risk for any reason. They should have made it clear to fans and officials alike that the NFL would be forced to (regrettably) cancel games in the absence of a new deal with the NFLRA.

It wouldn’t have been universally popular because people would almost rather have a flawed product than no product, but it would be the credible stance because, well, it is true. Integrity, quality, and player safety

are

important. From where I sit, the NFL could use a bit of credibility these days.

It'd be a tough pill to swallow but the propaganda would go something like this:

“Seasons are too short to allow for officiating shenanigans, and quality/integrity/safety are paramount. Without quality, we are nothing.”

Admittedly this is a risky proposition, especially after a lockout last year (though that lockout didn’t cost fans regular season games). I’m not convinced this would have been a better option than what the NFL ultimately decided, but there’s good reason to consider it.

Let’s work backwards. At the outset of the season, I was alone on @Jamalisms mountaintop. What has changed? These replacement officials have undeniably

changed

the outcomes of games.

Scores, records, standings, tie-breakers, playoff opportunities - that is what has changed. The proof is in the pudding, and the regular guys knew it would be.

Think about it. Regular officials have ruined games before. They knew how hard it would be to officiate in the NFL, and so did the NFL. Woefully under-qualified guys going out and putting on a clown show is exactly the strongest weapon the NFLRA had. They have been sitting back like the 1972 Dolphins with a bottle of champagne, waiting for this moment to arrive.

Always take away your enemies’ weapons. Always.

Click here to view the article

[begooode]

If the NFL had brought in replacements early in the process, especially as the league was still introducing new terms (bench of officials proposed in July), wouldn't that be seen as not bargaining in good faith?

[Jamalisms]

If so, the late proposals of new terms is point number four. Set yourself up for success. Plan ahead. Be proactive.

[abenjami]

How would bringing in the replacement refs in Febuary help anything? Were they going to officiate games against holograms or something to get acclimated to the game speed? While there have been problems for the most part the issues are overblown. Regular refs make mistakes all the time but now when a play is botched it is all because of the replcement guys. Even the Packers screw job wasn't a horrible call when you watch the play at regular speed. The replay guys botched that one. My guess if they brought the regular officials back it would be a few weeks before they got in a groove again.

Bringing them in earlier probably wouldn't help much with game speed but it could have helped in other areas.

For example, I think it's pretty obvious the replacements are struggling with knowing the rules and sometimes flat out get it wrong.

[Jamalisms]

Yeah, I think mini camps and training camps would have helped some. I think a lot of the little things like PI, holding, etc could have been worked on then and to me that has a lot to do with the speed (and nature, I suppose) of the game. As @abenjami mentioned, the other big part of my point was the fact that these guys don't even have the familiarity with rules and situations. Giving SF essentially two TOs is inexcusable, and I think running through scenarios and just more time studying or in seminars would have gone a long way towards fixing those things.

I don't think any of these solutions would have "fixed" the game. Not coming to an agreement with the NFLRA is a negative no matter what.