NFL referee lockout drags on: 4 issues keeping replacement refs on the field

Fans, coaches, and players keep grumbling, but replacement referees are still officiating in the NFL as the  regular officials remained locked out. . Here are the 4 factors keeping union refs and the NFL from reaching a deal – and leaving the replacements to botch calls through another weekend.

2. Salary

Paul Connors/AP/File
Arizona Cardinals tackle Adam Snyder, right, and Seattle Seahawks defensive back Jeron Johnson are separated by an official during the first half of their Sunday afternoon game in Glendale, Ariz.

There are 121 union referees in the NFL, and they share a total annual salary pool of $18 million. That shakes out to about $150,000 per year, on average – a number the NFL Referees’ Union would like to see increase. “The two sides have narrowed the gap on overall compensation. It is a gap that could be closed with some minor concessions by both sides,” Millis writes.

When the NFL and the referees’ union spoke two weeks ago before the regular season began, the NFL offered to add another $1 million to the refs’ salary pool, increasing average yearly pay to around $189,000 by 2016.

Making six figures to roam the sidelines at 16 or so football games per year might seem like a cushy gig, but watching the replacement refs on the field has proven it to be anything but. It’s tough. Skirmishes between plays have become a common sight in the season’s first two weeks; at  one point during the Monday night game in Atlanta, both the Bronco and Falcon benches cleared in what threatened to become a baseball-style brawl. We’d see a lot less of such behavior under the union refs, who are used to players and coaches yelling in their faces and threatening to get physical. They aren’t afraid of it; the replacements are.

What’s more, NFL referees spend years training before they take the field, and spend major chunks of their offseasons studying up on new rules, watching game film, and training (just like the players and coaches). “These professional game officials — noted until this season by the NFL as being 'the best in sports,' have spent years honing their skills, just like the athletes starring on the field,” Millis writes.

2 of 4

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.