T1B

I don't know whose 'side' I'm on, both are probably being greedy, but I've got a bad feeling about this. No telling when, or if, this dispute gets settled but it's going to suck if the outcome of games is determined by shoddy officiating.

I dislike the thought that a multi-billion dollar industry and my reason for rolling out of bed on a fall Sunday morning is going to be affected by some of the clowns I've seen calling pre-season games.

[TiC]I’m deece friends with one of the real refs. Enjoyed a couple beers w/him at happy hour on Friday, as a matter of fact[/TiC]. A month ago, he predicted they’d be there for the first week. Two weeks ago, he was getting pretty worried…. Ya’ know, that $8,000/game and a couple women in different cities is a hard thing to give up. Said that the refs nominated to represent them and negotiate are effing things up in his opinion. Last week, he said things seem to be moving along again and predicts that week 3 they’ll be back in biz.

I know he’s watching some of the exhibition games and I’m sure to text him when there is monumental fuck-up by the scabs. Generally replies back with a simple, “replacement refs. That is all.”

How predictably petty of a Roger Goodell-led ownership group to lockout the officials. I hope every game is decided by a monumental screw up by the officials.

As Kenny Britt said: FUCK YOU GODDELL

War Wagon wrote:it's going to suck if the outcome of games is determined by shoddy officiating.

Good thing that never happens with "real" officials calling the games. Oh, wait. Nevermind.

not as much chance of "real" officials being intimidated by players and coaches. I'm as concerned for the flags that don't get thrown as the ones that do.

War Wagon wrote:not as much chance of "real" officials being intimidated by players and coaches.

Says who? This whole thing is pathetically overblown. Fuck the refs, fuck their ridiculous overestimation of their importance to the game and fuck their greed.

This isn't rocket science. There is no such thing as an indispensible player let alone a ref. They can and will be replaced with ease if they don't take the offer on the table. They have no leverage at all.

Like I said, not taking sides here, just trying to understand the issues. But I seriously doubt they can be replaced with no repercussions. This isn't like 2001 where Div 1 collegiate refs stepped in. We're talking about arena league refs now. You say they have no leverage - we'll see if that's true after the scabs butcher a game or six.

The league has made officiating THE focal point of it's product, so it might seem logical for one to assume that the regular officials are a vitally important element in maintaining quality.

But this one makes no such assumption.


The product, and the league's focal point, had already become a parody, so replacements cause no real harm, imo.

A pile of shit remains a pile of shit.

poptart wrote:The league has made officiating THE focal point of it's product

that's absurd.

the last thing any pro sports league wants attention drawn to is the officiating.

Wagon wrote:that's absurd.

That's reality.

If you objectively performed an experiment, it would be clear to you.

Think of what I've said - that the league has made officiating THE focal point of it's product - and watch a MLB, NHL, and NBA game with it in mind.

Then watch an NFL game.


The officiating is GROSSLY over-emphasized and virtually anything important that happens on an NFL field has something to do with an official - or with waiting for an official to verify that it truly did happen.

And this trend has done nothing but accelerate dramatically over the past few decades.

It's just that you've been dumbed down over time and you've been conditioned toward acceptance of it as... normal.

It's NOT normal and it sucks unwashed Arab cock.


Do the experiment while watching some of the 1972 game that mvscal posted a while back.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=41335

How much of a focal point was the officiating there compared to what we see today?

NO comparison.

It was still football back then.

Right now the fan is always waiting for the officials to do something, or crying that they didn't do something, or waiting for their highness to verify something.

Sick shit.

It's going to be brutal. These azzhats were taking punts stopped at the 6 yard line and calling touchbacks. They are completely clueless.

War Wagon wrote:

poptart wrote:The league has made officiating THE focal point of it's product

that's absurd.

the last thing any pro sports league wants attention drawn to is the officiating.

'Tard is right. Officiating in the NFL has become extremely complex. The game is more regulated now than at any point in its history. Whether that is for better or for worse is for a different discussion, but there is no debating it is much more complex, especially as more and more rules are created to protect certain players.

no, he's not right.

If officiating were the focal point, the league would've caved to the refs long ago and there wouldn't be a lockout. This discussion would be moot.

I can't believe I had to type that.

The NFL never set out to turn the product into an over-officiated joke... because it's officials were so good.

It began to evolve that way and the league never took steps to put brakes to it.

Just the opposite.
They have chosen over the years to accelerate it into what we have today.

Dumping instant replay would cure many ills, but I'm not holding my breath.

That train left the station a long time ago.

What are the chances the officials go the same route as traffic controllers did via Regan a couple of decades ago?

I think its quite possible. I also think these replacement referees aren't a whole lot worse than the regulars. I've always been a fan of letting guys play, as opposed to a ton of flags, and judgement calls.

Rules that involve judgement = cluster fuck.

Agree with a lot of pops points. I believe a lot of these judgement rules on hitting the QB, & defenseless WRs, has to do with the league trying to cover its ass. Rules made to minimize future concussion law suits, I mean concussion injuries.

I still believe the helmet needs to be modified to absorb impact just like a bicycle helmet, but that would involve the league actually spending money for development & implementation. Hence it won't happen until after they're on the hook for millions in concussion settlements.

If the league was really serious about reducing head trauma, they'd lose the shoulder pads and go back to leather helmets.

mvscal wrote:If the league was really serious about reducing head trauma, they'd lose the shoulder pads and go back to leather helmets.

That wouldn't stop concussions from happening. My idea is similar to a combat helmet for a GI, in that the new helmet would have an inner shell. The outer shell would be collapsible similar to a bicycle helmet, and be replaceable as needed.

You're like a monkey fucking a football trying to reinvent the wheel. Take off the face masks, take off the shoulder pads and go back to leather helmets if you're serious about:

A. Reducing concussions dramatically.

B. Restoring the basic fundamentals of proper tackling.

Modern helmets and shoulder pads weaponize those body parts.

Using your reasoning we should all be riding horses and using candle light at home to reduce the amount of imported oil.

Leather helmets? Why not no helmets and touch football?

You appear to be pretty stupid so I'm going to attempt to dumb this down to a level you might be able to comprehend.

We are going to start with the basic premise that concussions are bad and we would like to see fewer of them. Are you still with me? Gooood.

Now the leading cause of concussions are violent collisions which most commonly occur when players lead with their helmets and/or leave their feet and launch into opposing players with their shoulder pads. They use these body parts as weapons because they can and we see numerous examples of that every single game and in your av for that matter. All the alleged improvements to player safety in equipment have done nothing except lead to more and greater injury because it enables the players to hit harder and faster.

I know you're pretty slow but, unfortunately, physics is necessary. The formula for kinetic energy is: E= 1/2 MV^2 where m is mass and v is velocity. This is a constant. No super helmet is going to stop your brain from sloshing around inside your skull and players certainly aren't going to shrink. That means the only thing you can do that will reduce the number and severity of concussions is to slow the game down. Take off the pads and get back to the fundamentals...that is if you're actually serious about limiting injuries.

Personally, I couldn't give shit less what happens to players after they retire. Nobody forced them to play football and anyone who claims they didn't know it carried a substantial risk of serious injury is a fucking liar.

Joe in PB wrote:Agree with a lot of pops points. I believe a lot of these judgement rules on hitting the QB, & defenseless WRs, has to do with the league trying to cover its ass. Rules made to minimize future concussion law suits, I mean concussion injuries.

Recent changes? Sure. But concussion lawsuits are a new concern and had nothing to do with the NFL starting to change the rules to protect players. That movement began with Darryl Stingley and continued into the early 80's because of all of the injured star QBs. The product on the field was complete dogshit with too many big name passers sitting injured on the sidelines due to mostly legal cheap shots and the NFL realized that no one was going to fork out $100 a seat or sit in front of their tv for three hours to watch some turd sandwich like Steve Deberg go 12-30 for 130yds for 8 games until the starter recovered from a cheap shot. So they started creating rules to protect their meal ticket. It started with rules banning helmet-to-helmet, "dumping" QBs during interception returns, "in the grasp", etc, and it's just grown from there.

Since then rule changes have generally been made following specific injuries to star players. Just as a couple of examples... Carson Palmer got his knee shredded against Pittsburgh after Kim Von Oelhoffen barrel-rolled into him, the Bengals promising playoff run died and we got the "no rolling into the knee rule" on QBs. T.O. was grabbed by the shoulder pads from behind, breaking his leg and the following year we have the horsecollar rule. Etc, etc.

If you've got some time to kill, this was an interesting read: http://nflhealthandsafety.com/commitment/evolution/

No super helmet is going to stop your brain from sloshing around inside your skull...

Not true, plain & simple. I had a serious bike crash, around 30 mph impact, my head hit another oncoming MT bike on the frame. My helmet collapsed on impact, & I was no worse for the wear, and didn't have a concussion. Helmet replaced, on to the next ride.

Dude you need to get laid, and get a life.......

Joe in PB wrote:I had a serious bike crash, around 30 mph impact, my head hit another oncoming MT bike on the frame. My helmet collapsed on impact, & I was no worse for the wear....

Positive?

Joe in PB wrote:

No super helmet is going to stop your brain from sloshing around inside your skull...

Not true, plain & simple. I had a serious bike crash, around 30 mph impact, my head hit another oncoming MT bike on the frame. My helmet collapsed on impact, & I was no worse for the wear, and didn't have a concussion. Helmet replaced, on to the next ride.

Dude you need to get laid, and get a life.......

With all due respect, you can't possibly be seriously comparing a mountain biking wipe out with getting lit the fuck up by a 250 lb NFL linebacker moving at top speed. Mohamed Massaquoi WISHES he could have swapped out James Harrison for your pussy little mountain bike collision.

C'mon. Falling off a bicycle one time is just like a career of multiple violent collisions of far greater impact.

Of course that picture makes my point. If you aren't wearing a helmet, you don't tackle like that and that concussion never happens.

BSmack wrote:With all due respect, you can't possibly be seriously comparing a mountain biking wipe out with getting lit the fuck up by a 250 lb NFL linebacker moving at top speed. Mohamed Massaquoi WISHES he could have swapped out James Harrison for your pussy little mountain bike collision.

That's for adding your name to the list of those who are clueless, but still need to voice their asshat opinions.

BSmack wrote:With all due respect, you can't possibly be seriously comparing a mountain biking wipe out with getting lit the fuck up by a 250 lb NFL linebacker moving at top speed. Mohamed Massaquoi WISHES he could have swapped out James Harrison for your pussy little mountain bike collision.

BSmack ≠ Physics scholar

The replacement refs are an abomination. I saw three blatant false starts in the first half of the Packer game that weren’t called, because apparently it’s hard for a linesman to see a 300 lb left tackle moving. Holding and interference allowed by DBs. Allowing a challenge when Harbaugh clearly threw his red flag after the ball was snapped for the next play (he lost the challenge anyway, but WTF).

The refs didn’t cost Green Bay the game, but it’s only a matter of time before they start affecting the outcome in a close game.

Goober McTuber wrote:The replacement refs are an abomination. I saw three blatant false starts in the first half of the Packer game that weren’t called, because apparently it’s hard for a linesman to see a 300 lb left tackle moving. Holding and interference allowed by DBs. Allowing a challenge when Harbaugh clearly threw his red flag after the ball was snapped for the next play (he lost the challenge anyway, but WTF).

The refs didn’t cost Green Bay the game, but it’s only a matter of time before they start affecting the outcome in a close game.

The officiating was horrible the entire game. Couldn't tell by the crowd reaction but it seemed to go about equally both ways. On that one false start the OT would have had to run into the linesman to make it any more obvious. Pretty blatant illegal block on the punt return as well.

Ken wrote:

BSmack wrote:With all due respect, you can't possibly be seriously comparing a mountain biking wipe out with getting lit the fuck up by a 250 lb NFL linebacker moving at top speed. Mohamed Massaquoi WISHES he could have swapped out James Harrison for your pussy little mountain bike collision.

BSmack ≠ Physics scholar

Really? So you're arguing that much smaller mass transfers the same energy as a much larger mass?

BSmack wrote:

Ken wrote:

BSmack wrote:With all due respect, you can't possibly be seriously comparing a mountain biking wipe out with getting lit the fuck up by a 250 lb NFL linebacker moving at top speed. Mohamed Massaquoi WISHES he could have swapped out James Harrison for your pussy little mountain bike collision.

BSmack ≠ Physics scholar

Really? So you're arguing that much smaller mass transfers the same energy as a much larger mass?

What if the guy riding the other bike weighed 300 lbs?

Goober McTuber wrote:

BSmack wrote:What if the guy riding the other bike weighed 300 lbs?

Not bloody likely.

BSmack wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote:

BSmack wrote:What if the guy riding the other bike weighed 300 lbs?

Not bloody likely.

But likely bloody.

BSmack wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote:

BSmack wrote:What if the guy riding the other bike weighed 300 lbs?

Not bloody likely.

Could be Toddowen on his scooter carrying a 10 lb dildo in his ass back pocket.
That would add up to 300.

The most obvious are the pic plays the WR are running on the DBs - they would make Stockton and Malone proud

bwa..rack

BSmack wrote:

Ken wrote:

BSmack wrote:With all due respect, you can't possibly be seriously comparing a mountain biking wipe out with getting lit the fuck up by a 250 lb NFL linebacker moving at top speed. Mohamed Massaquoi WISHES he could have swapped out James Harrison for your pussy little mountain bike collision.

BSmack ≠ Physics scholar

Really? So you're arguing that much smaller mass transfers the same energy as a much larger mass?

Once again...

BSmack ≠ Basic physics

Have a quick look at the formula for force and then get back to me. You’ll see that you are completely ignoring acceleration… something that is directly proportional to the force applied to an object.

But, by your logic, just because a car has an inordinately larger mass than a baseball, if it hits you moving ½ mph it will do much more damage than a baseball to the head travelling 95mph.

Brilliant.

Ken wrote:
Have a quick look at the formula for force and then get back to me. You’ll see that you are completely ignoring acceleration… something that is directly proportional to the force applied to an object.

But, by your logic, just because a car has an inordinately larger mass than a baseball, if it hits you moving ½ mph it will do much more damage than a baseball to the head travelling 95mph.

Brilliant.

While your analogy is a pretty good one, you are also neglecting the relationship between force and surface area (pressure = force / surface area). The baseball hitting you in the head applies all of its force over a very small area resulting in a large instantaneous pressure. The force applied by your 1/2 mph car is applied over a much greater area.

Mikey wrote:

Ken wrote:
Have a quick look at the formula for force and then get back to me. You’ll see that you are completely ignoring acceleration… something that is directly proportional to the force applied to an object.

But, by your logic, just because a car has an inordinately larger mass than a baseball, if it hits you moving ½ mph it will do much more damage than a baseball to the head travelling 95mph.

Brilliant.

While your analogy is a pretty good one, you are also neglecting the relationship between force and surface area (pressure = force / surface area). The baseball hitting you in the head applies all of its force over a very small area resulting in a large instantaneous pressure. The force applied by your 1/2 mph car is applied over a much greater area.

I did consider the pressure aspect of it but essentially thought that with BSmack being out of his league on this one, I didn’t care and Bri-dumbed down the analogy as much as possible.

Regarding Harrison’s hit on Massoquoi (sp?) and Joe’s mtn. bike accident, pressure difference between the two examples is reasonably insignifcant as both examples are of a helmet to a similarly-sized object hit. The huge difference is the acceleration.

Joe said he was travelling about 30 mph and hit another rider head on who was presumably also moving… we’ll give the benefit of the doubt and say that the other rider was moving 15 mph. That’s a 45mph collision. Harrison was moving, what… 10 mph? Massoquoi moving 5mph? Bri just doesn’t get it.

As an aside, the ref whom I know (mentioned above), was the one who threw the flag on Harrison’s hit on Massoquoi.

Ken wrote:Joe said he was travelling about 30 mph and hit another rider head on who was presumably also moving… we’ll give the benefit of the doubt and say that the other rider was moving 15 mph. That’s a 45mph collision. Harrison was moving, what… 10 mph? Massoquoi moving 5mph? Bri just doesn’t get it.

As an aside, the ref whom I know (mentioned above), was the one who threw the flag on Harrison’s hit on Massoquoi.

For starters, unless Joe spends most of his working time in something called a peloton, I'm calling bs on his 30 mph claim. Reality says he was traveling closer to 20. Second, he and the other rider were likely decelerating at the moment of impact. So the speed was likely under 15 mph. Third, do you seriously for one second believe that Joe would have been worse off wearing a football helmet?