Posted on: September 25, 2012 12:56 am

Green Bay/Seattle Ending

Replacement refs?  I'm tired of hearing about them.  Every call is scrutinized.  If it's right, the announcers let it go.  If it's wrong, they harp about it.  If it's right, but 'picky'- they still complain that they should 'let them play'.  The media circus surrounding the whole situation is worse than the officiating.  
Case in point:  Near the end of the game, pass interference was called on Green Bay, when it was apparent that the receiver pushed the defender.  Nevermind that the defender pushed as well- the announcers were looking for something to nit-pick the officiating on.  During all the yammering about poor officiating- Gruden and Tirico failed to notice on the replay that the Green Bay player had a handful of Seattle jersey- without a doubt, THAT is what the official called. 
As far as the end play- I probably would have ruled for Green Bay.  That being said, I can make a compelling argument against it.  ESPN called in Austin (former official) who insisted possession belonged to Green Bay because the defender held the ball to his chest.  Really?  An official of 27 years uses that as a possession guage?  My faith in the replacements has been restored.  If you watch the replay (without bias for team or officials) clearly, Tate catches the ball with BOTH hands (again, Austin harps about only seeing one ARM on the ball-maybe he has only one good eye, I don't know) at the same time Jennings does.  As any good replacement official knows (I guess Austin doesn't), you may possess the ball without having it against your body.  The technical mistake Tate makes is he adjusts his grip on the ball momentarily- thus giving up possession to Jennings who never loosened his grip on the ball.  Austin ends up being right about the call being bad- but not for the reason he believes.  So much for having 27 years experience.

I can live with replacement officials.  That being said: I'm hoping for a quick resolution just so I can quit hearing all the bitching.
Oh, by the way:  when the 'real' refs start blowing calls- I'm not going to cut them any slack. 
Posted on: October 25, 2008 3:25 pm

NFL Drug Testing

It looks like we're going to have a few suspensions coming to the NFL.  Apparently, we've got a few players who thought they could beat the system by using diuretics.  In my opinion, the NFL should throw the book at these guys.  If we look at the mess that steroids has caused MLB, the NFL should be taking a hard-line stand against steroids.

Older NFL veterans have enough crippling medical problems from playing the game the way it has been, that to compound those issues with steroid side-effects is ludicrous.  If they don't take a stand on the issue, I could see a future floodgate open on lawsuits against the NFL for 'looking the other way'- whether from direct use of steroids, or a life-long injury occurring from a player who used steroids.  MLB has basically only the power home-run issue to deal with, concerning the integrity of records.  Virtually no discussion has happened concerning potential injuries inflicted by a person artificially bulked up by steroids.

One can argue that 'most' players do them anyway- why make an example of the few who get caught?  My answer to that is simple:  Because of the ones who don't.  Non-prescribed steroid use is illegal for a reason.  There are unpredictable side effects.  Roid-rage.  Sterility.  Brain-damage.  These are only the celebrated ones- there are many more that don't get press coverage such as liver damage, prostate enlargement, cholesterol problems, and so on.  Maybe some players are willing to take the risks involved in using steroid, but many well-informed people aren't.  These are the people who need protecting- the ones who don't want to assume the risks, but without steroids, couldn't physically compete with those who do.  In this multi-million dollar career, it's too hard to pass up.

There are ultimately a few wacko fans who like to see 22 non-green incredible hulks beating on each other.  To them I say this:  I don't see you on the field, risking life-long disability to either play the game you love, or to make a great living at something you're good at.  This game is just as exciting without steroids- why do we have to accept them as 'part of the game'? 
Category: NFL
Tags: drug, NFL, Steroids
The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or