Is Officiating a Problem in the NFL?

It seems every week officiating becomes a point of emphasis surrounding the outcome of several games throughout the league. This week was no different. In post-game press conferences, several coaches had complaints about the officiating in their games. Many thought the outcomes of the games could have been different had the officiating been better. This raises the question, is the quality of the officials a problem in the NFL? And what can be done to improve upon this?

Let’s begin with how officials are handled. Individual officials are all graded for their performance each week. The NFL reviews each official in each game on every single play. This means each play is reviewed seven times, once from the perspective of each of the seven officiating positions. The NFL then determines if the call was correct or incorrect, and if anything was missed such as a potential penalty. In the end, each official gets a grade for their performance that falls into one of three tiers. Tier one is for those officials who exhibit a high enough quality to work the super bowl. Tier two is for officials who could be fill in officials for the playoffs, but are not among the top selected for playoff crews. Tier three officials are not able to work in the playoffs and could be up for employment review. 

Jason Bridge-USA TODAY Sports

So what are the results of the NFL reviewing the officials each game? The result is that the officials are actually very good. The average NFL game runs over 150 plays from scrimmage. In 2015, with over 40,000 plays run, it was found that the officials were correct approximately 96% of the time. This means only 4% of the time there was a miscall, a missed penalty, or a called penalty that should not have been called. That being said, if the referees are only wrong 4% of the time, why is there always so much backlash after the games? It is because the players, the coaches, and the fans expect perfection. It is impossible for the officials to be perfect. Even with a 96% success rate, at over 150 plays per game, this means there is an average of about six calls per game that could have gone differently. Those six calls are what stand out to the players, coaches, and fans, rather than the 150+ calls that were made correctly.

The instant replay system is in place to help overturn the egregious mistakes, and for the most part replay has been very effective. The problem is, many of these missed calls are not reviewable. Penalties are not reviewable. Other plays where there is a whistle blown on a mistake call, the outcome of the play could not be determined by review. For example, in the Monday Night game this week between the Texans and Raiders, DeAndre Hopkins was ruled out of bounds while running up the sideline, and the play was blown dead. The play would have resulted in a touchdown for the Texans had the whistle not blown, but once the play was blown dead, there is no way to award the touchdown. Once the whistle blows, the play stops and players stop, so the outcome is then in question. If the play was allowed to be played out, there would be an automatic review if there was a score, and the ability to challenge whether Hopkins was out of bounds if there was not a score.  

So how can the officials be better? With a 96% success rate, it seems like a silly question, but those 5 or 6 calls per game that are in question can have a large impact on the outcome of the game. Many are advocating for full time officials, thinking the part time status of officials results in lower quality. The truth is, these plays happen so fast, and the officials need to make a split-second decision, and there are going to be times they are wrong.

The best way to improve upon the officiating is to expand instant replay. If penalties such as a pass interference or a roughing the passer were reviewable, the officials would have more time to look the play over from several angles to make the right call. In certain situations, such as Hopkins potential touchdown that was ruled out of bounds, the officials need to be trained to have a slower whistle on these sorts of plays, knowing they have the backup of instant replay if they are wrong. This is not to say every play should be reviewed. Coaches should still only have two challenges per game, and awarded a third if they are correct on the first two. What expanded replay would do is simply give the coaches the opportunity to have the officials take a second look at a play that they think is going to have enough of an impact that it is worth challenging.

What are your thoughts? Is the officiating a problem? Does the NFL need to do anything to improve upon it? Comment and let us know. Stay tuned for more current sports stories. Don't forget to follow us on social media. You can find us on Facebook, Instagram @beyondthemetrics, and Twitter @byondthemetrics.