NFL Refs?

[Chokan]

Where r u? :(

[MrSparkle001]

Sitting at home laughing their asses off and going cha-ching!

[Raavak]

They could start demanding more. The villagers with their pitchforks will be at Goodell's door soon.

[Kevlar]

The old refs weren't much better. How quickly everyone seems to forget that.

[Holey]

LMFAO shit they're better than the ones from Green bay game

[Grahm]

people over reacting as fuck. it wasnt an easy call to make and why you really can't be pissed at them is cus the rules say they can't review that play and take it back/make the right call.

people seem 2 forget fucking GREEN BAY was playing SEATTLE and it was a 12-7 game. thread should be "wtf greenbay?" human error is part of every sport pretty much, remember the ump who called an out when the outfielder didnt even have the fucking ball.

[Hailto]

The ref that made the call had previous experience reffing junior college games, enough said. No excuse to have refs that under-qualified in the NFL, the closeness of the game prior to the fuck-up has zero to do with it.

Its not a matter of "people make mistakes" its the fact that these guys had no business reffing the game to begin with.

[Knuckle]

this lockout shows that the pro refs are really effecting a national past time, problem is they are making 6 figures already, instead of giving refs more money, lets pay the players less and lower cost of tickets per game to help fill stands. I'm sure a football player could make do on a 1 million a year salary instead of 3 million.

[Kevlar]

The big problem with the lockout is the NFL wants to field more teams of refs, and have control over disciplining, even terminating the underperforming ones.

The referee union won't have any of that. So your stuck with the same shitty refs.

Should have kept the replacements and got rid of the unionized refs for good.

[Sirken]

actually, the problem was the billionaire owners wanted to steal the referee pension fund.

same thing integrys is doing with Peoples Gas in chicago. they bought the company for the billion dollar petition fund, and will deplete it paying out pensions to employees that work for other companies under the integrys umbrella. meanwhile, they are buying out the oldtimers' contracts, and starting new hires on 401k instead of Pension+401k.

eventually after enough oldtimers are retired or bought out, they will vote again, and all the new hire will say, why should i vote to keep their pension if i dont get one.


im getting off point. my point is that the NFL will start hiring new refs without a pension in their contract, and then buy out some of the older refs. when the numbers are in the leagues favor, they will simply vote out the pension.

its happening in a lot of union related jobs, not just the NFL

[azeth]

^ Yes and there's absolutely nothing wrong with this. The defined contribution style plan (pension) is a dinosaur, and is inherently designed around an up-market.

Its not to be expected that an entity would assume the gain/loss risk nowadays, and they therefore prefer the 401(k), or in the case of teachers the 403(b)(7).

If anyone wants to talk retirement vehicles, by all means you have my ear.

[Sirken]

^ Yes and there's absolutely nothing wrong with this. The defined contribution style plan (pension) is a dinosaur, and is inherently designed around an up-market.

Its not to be expected that an entity would assume the gain/loss risk nowadays, and they therefore prefer the 401(k), or in the case of teachers the 403(b)(7).

If anyone wants to talk retirement vehicles, by all means you have my ear.

slow down there pal. there is absolutely something wrong with that. the NFL gave the referees contracts when they were hired and those contracts were signed, sealed, and delivered. those contracts included pensions.

secondly, the total pension fund for the refs is less than 100million dollars. the NFL makes multi billions of dollars every year. so its not like they cant afford it. hell, the owners could misplace 100million and it would not effect their lives in the slightest. its the equivalent of u dropping 10 cents on the floor and leaving it there because you also do not need it.

that being said, i do agree with you that the economy sucks and pensions are not the best thing in a struggling but rising economy.

However, THEN DON'T MAKE THE REFS SIGN CONTRACTS. thats where the league fucked up. they hired those refs with the promise of a pension afterwards.

the league will have to do the same thing the gas company is doing. deplete the pension in a legal way (its illegal for a company to just take pension money, it must by law be paid out to employees in pensions, at least in IL, which again is why Integrys bought out Peoples Gas. to use the People Gas pension to pay out pensions to the other employees working under the Integrys umbrella).

new refs will not get pensions in their contracts. after the league depletes the pension somehow, and buys out some of the old timers contracts, the new refs will vote. and it will probably have some 401K perks to get the new guys to vote that way instead of for a pension.


you can bet your ass, the new guys at the gas company are fucked if they vote out the pension.

old guy: "you see that jack hammer?"
new guy: "yessir"
old guy: "that's designed to make breaking up the street much easier"
new guy: ~nods~
old guy: ~hands new guy a hammer and chisel~ "get to work kid"

the end.

[azeth]

Something kind of neat i caught on the radio yesterday in regard to the pension funds -

Mike Pereira the former VP of officiating was a phone-in guest for Felger & Mazz on 98.5.

His quote, "whenever we hired a new official I made two memorable phonecalls. One to the guy we were hiring, then one to his wife to let her know we'd be taking care of them even after he retires"

He was pretty upset at the NFL looking to deny what he personally promised.

[Ferok]

secondly, the total pension fund for the refs is less than 100million dollars. the NFL makes multi billions of dollars every year. so its not like they cant afford it. hell, the owners could misplace 100million and it would not effect their lives in the slightest. its the equivalent of u dropping 10 cents on the floor and leaving it there because you also do not need it.

Dumb argument. Also, the compensation for officials (who are part time employees) is pretty staggering given the job performed. I wouldn't be crying for them either.

[Sirken]

Dumb argument. Also, the compensation for officials (who are part time employees) is pretty staggering given the job performed. I wouldn't be crying for them either.

im sorry u feel its dumb, but its still very true. and on one is asking you to cry for them.

as far as them getting paid to much, thats the NFLs fault. it was the NFL that offered those contracts to the refs as they were hired with promise of a pension.

according to "http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2012/09/the-nfls-refpocalypse-is-over-did-anyone-win/262948/" the refs make $8,764 a game. and some of the refs pick up summer work as refs for NFL training camps, i couldnt find how much they get paid for training camp, i imagine less than an actual game.

if u let me work for u for 25 years under the promise of contract to give me a pension, and u try to take it from me at year 23, i'm going to put a bullet through your head and roll the dice on my chances in court. because both if u have enough money, you always have a chance to get away with it in this country, but also because you essentially just ruined the rest of my life anyways.

and btw, union contracts can not just be cancelled, they are nothing like NFL player contracts. real life union employees cant just get "cut" (fired) without reason. that's one of the main reasons that unions exist in the first place.



Something kind of neat i caught on the radio yesterday in regard to the pension funds -
Mike Pereira the former VP of officiating was a phone-in guest for Felger & Mazz on 98.5.
His quote, "whenever we hired a new official I made two memorable phonecalls. One to the guy we were hiring, then one to his wife to let her know we'd be taking care of them even after he retires"
He was pretty upset at the NFL looking to deny what he personally promised.

if i was Pereira i'd be pissed about it too, it makes him look like an asshole, regardless of it not being his fault. i know if i promised people post job security that didnt exist, id feel like an asshole too.

[Ferok]

im sorry u feel its dumb, but its still very true. and on one is asking you to cry for them.

Your comparison is off by several orders of magnitude, for starters. Second off, none of it matters. Therefore, that particular argument is both untrue and dumb.

As far as the nature of contracts, unions, etc - that's all fine and well. If they can maneuver legally to get out of those contracts/pay them out, then good for them. If not, sucks to be them. Either way, no one is breaking any laws here as far as I can tell.

Now, you may not like it - but that's irrelevant. If they don't want to hire any more union labor, that should be their prerogative. If they don't want to offer pensions to new employees, that too should be their prerogative. As long as they're not robbing employees of earned money, I don't see a problem.

Now, the free market dictates that perhaps their talent pool suffers by decreasing compensation. If this proves to be the case, then that's what they get. But I'm betting they'll find talent that is more-than-adequate for the offered compensation.

[Calvin]

Your comparison is off by several orders of magnitude, for starters. Second off, none of it matters. Therefore, that particular argument is both untrue and dumb.

As far as the nature of contracts, unions, etc - that's all fine and well. If they can maneuver legally to get out of those contracts/pay them out, then good for them. If not, sucks to be them. Either way, no one is breaking any laws here as far as I can tell.

Now, you may not like it - but that's irrelevant. If they don't want to hire any more union labor, that should be their prerogative. If they don't want to offer pensions to new employees, that too should be their prerogative. As long as they're not robbing employees of earned money, I don't see a problem.

Now, the free market dictates that perhaps their talent pool suffers by decreasing compensation. If this proves to be the case, then that's what they get. But I'm betting they'll find talent that is more-than-adequate for the offered compensation.

Dumb post. Straw men and red herrings make you look stupid.

[Ferok]

Dumb post. Straw men and red herrings make you look stupid.

Pointing out what $X means to Y is a red herring in the first place, so you're right; that was a dumb argument. Thanks for agreeing.

As for the perceived straw man, you'll have to point that out to me. I must be stupid. My only intention was, with the rest of my statement, to point out that if the contract is binding, it's binding. If it's not, it's not. If it says pensions, pensions. If they negotiate to give up pensions, probably not going to have pensions. The contracts, though not the same as the player's contracts, don't exist in a vacuum. It's up to the unions to be smart about their negotiation in order to make sure the officials get what they want; not the owners.

[Calvin]

Pointing out what $X means to Y is a red herring in the first place, so you're right; that was a dumb argument. Thanks for agreeing.

As for the perceived straw man, you'll have to point that out to me. I must be stupid. My only intention was, with the rest of my statement, to point out that if the contract is binding, it's binding. If it's not, it's not. If it says pensions, pensions. If they negotiate to give up pensions, probably not going to have pensions. The contracts, though not the same as the player's contracts, don't exist in a vacuum. It's up to the unions to be smart about their negotiation in order to make sure the officials get what they want; not the owners.

Another dumb argument. Also, I wouldn't be crying for the NFL owners.

[Ferok]

Another dumb argument. Also, I wouldn't be crying for the NFL owners.

Good one. You're winning.

[Sirken]

As far as the nature of contracts, unions, etc - that's all fine and well. If they can maneuver legally to get out of those contracts/pay them out, then good for them. If not, sucks to be them. Either way, no one is breaking any laws here as far as I can tell.

omfg,

im telling you that it is in fact illegal

:(

[Ferok]

omfg,

im telling you that it is in fact illegal

:(

Right, it's not legal to not live up to the contract - so they can't do that. They'd have to renegotiate terms, which is what this is all about.