Not saying this happens but if we had a legal document that all teams signed that agreed to a four year championship ban if it was proven they or if boosters they had control over paid referees.

Require regular financial audits of referees.

Make it a binding contract they all have to agree to.

Too much money flying around not to look at the books of referees and schools regularly and have penalties all agree to for non compliance.


It has to happen.

No need to approach it from this angle which invites controversy and negativity. I'd rather propose a professional and national group of college referees. Maybe affiliate with the NFL system somehow. Make it a coveted occupation with performance standards, high pay and benefits. Insist on correct calls and have a transparent progression system that rewards competence.

Would you be tempted to make calls to favor a team if were at risk of losing a $250,000 job for doing it? Maybe, maybe not.

https://www.outkick.com/sports/social-media-referees-targeting-texas-peach-bowl-arizona-st

BigSneezy said:

---

Not saying this happens but if we had a legal document that all teams signed that agreed to a four year championship ban if it was proven they or if boosters they had control over paid referees.

Require regular financial audits of referees.

Make it a binding contract they all have to agree to.

Too much money flying around not to look at the books of referees and schools regularly and have penalties all agree to for non compliance.


It has to happen.

---

Yep, especially when most of them are attorneys out to just have fun and relax like Kissinger the replay booth attorney for Sip "fixed" game

AlexNguyen said:

---

No need to approach it from this angle which invites controversy and negativity. I'd rather propose a professional and national group of college referees. Maybe affiliate with the NFL system somehow. Make it a coveted occupation with performance standards, high pay and benefits. Insist on correct calls and have a transparent progression system that rewards competence.

Would you be tempted to make calls to favor a team if were at risk of losing a $250,000 job for doing it? Maybe, maybe not.

---

You realize that
1) they would still miss calls because Refs are human and humans aren't perfect (also see MLB and NBA which has full time officials and still miss calls.) and
2) people would still say the refs are biased because they don't agree with a number of their calls.

Kansas Kid said:

---

AlexNguyen said:

---

No need to approach it from this angle which invites controversy and negativity. I'd rather propose a professional and national group of college referees. Maybe affiliate with the NFL system somehow. Make it a coveted occupation with performance standards, high pay and benefits. Insist on correct calls and have a transparent progression system that rewards competence.

Would you be tempted to make calls to favor a team if were at risk of losing a $250,000 job for doing it? Maybe, maybe not.

---

You realize that
1) they would still miss calls because Refs are human and humans aren't perfect (also see MLB and NBA which has full time officials and still miss calls.) and
2) people would still say the refs are biased because they don't agree with a number of their calls.

---

Sure, I understand that. I do think there is value in professionalizing the referees in college football though. Gambling will only get bigger in the future and it is a good thing to remove as much as possible any potential corruption in the game.

Game fixing is already a felony. I guess we could add a slap on the wrist as well if it would make you feel better. I'll take it up at the next meeting.

I think it would be fair to have 2 things:

1: A referee with a direct tie to a school or to that schools rival does not get to officiate that game

2: Refs must have public financial disclosures

Gyles Marrett said:

---

I think it would be fair to have 2 things:

1: A referee with a direct tie to a school or to that schools rival does not get to officiate that game

2: Refs must have public financial disclosures

---

And how do you think the financial disclosures would actually show if one of the refs is on the take? If you think they need to disclose to the public the details of every financial transaction they have in a year, you are living in La La land.

Like said above, if the basic tenant of being an official isn't enough to keep someone from throwing the game, the thought of serious jail time would keep them from doing it.

The direct tie to a school barring an official these days is a thing in D1 and most lower level football although in High School that isn't always possible because otherwise you won't have officials for games.

Great article talking about officiating errors and philosophy on making calls. Most officials I know would rather have a no call be wrong than throw a flag and be wrong. The only exception are the safety fouls. I know our assigners agree with that.

https://247sports.com/article/how-many-calls-are-missed-in-a-college-football-game-big-ten-ref-dan-capron--143645515/amp/

dixichkn said:

---

Philip J Fry said:

---

I expect the replay booth to get it right 100% of the time

---

This. Especially something THAT obvious

---

Not saying it was the case here, but when you have replay booths controlled by officials with ties to universities involved they will knowingly get it wrong if it favors the result they want. They aren't getting it wrong on accident.

Gyles Marrett said:

---

dixichkn said:

---

Philip J Fry said:

---

I expect the replay booth to get it right 100% of the time

---

This. Especially something THAT obvious

---

Not saying it was the case here, but when you have replay booths controlled by officials with ties to universities involved they will knowingly get it wrong if it favors the result they want. They aren't getting it wrong on accident.

---

I was surprised that neither booth initiated targeting review resulted in a flag. I thought both would get the flag and ejection since both hits were on defenseless receivers.

Gyles Marrett said:

---

dixichkn said:

---

Philip J Fry said:

---

I expect the replay booth to get it right 100% of the time

---

This. Especially something THAT obvious

---

Not saying it was the case here, but when you have replay booths controlled by officials with ties to universities involved they will knowingly get it wrong if it favors the result they want. They aren't getting it wrong on accident.

---

Having "your guy" in the replay booth is a subtle yet absolute advantage. It's clear dishonest men like Jon Bible and Eugene Semko will make self-serving partisan decisions, benefiting the school they cheer for, rather than objective calls based on concise video evidence. Regardless of which conference officiating crew is on the field, corrupt replay officials can uphold bad calls and negate correct calls to influence the game during crucial moments, as they see fit.

Ozamataz Buckshank 01 said:

---

BigSneezy said:

---

Not saying this happens but if we had a legal document that all teams signed that agreed to a four year championship ban if it was proven they or if boosters they had control over paid referees.

Require regular financial audits of referees.

Make it a binding contract they all have to agree to.

Too much money flying around not to look at the books of referees and schools regularly and have penalties all agree to for non compliance.


It has to happen.

---

I think the NCAA wanted blue bloods being in the final four, and the brackets were set up so that the remainder of the teams were enhancement talents to get stomped. The internet is buzzing over the no-call on the targeting hit. It really exposed that the NCAA was doing everything they could to get tu in the semi finals.

---

NCAA didn't want control the CFP…

Kansas Kid said:

---

Great article talking about officiating errors and philosophy on making calls. Most officials I know would rather have a no call be wrong than throw a flag and be wrong. The only exception are the safety fouls. I know our assigners agree with that.

https://247sports.com/article/how-many-calls-are-missed-in-a-college-football-game-big-ten-ref-dan-capron--143645515/amp/

---

Lol. That article says in average game, refs miss 4 calls. I would say it's more like 50 or 60. If they called every penalty, the game would be so boring because of constant play stoppages. There is someone holding on nearly every play, both on offense and defense. There is tons of uncalled PI. Most plays have something missed, but the game is actually better when they do ignore stuff that doesn't really matter.

Not sure if you see it, CFB is being slowly turned into WWE

Who can blame them in the end? WWE makes a heckuva lot more ROI than CFB

AustinAg2K said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

Great article talking about officiating errors and philosophy on making calls. Most officials I know would rather have a no call be wrong than throw a flag and be wrong. The only exception are the safety fouls. I know our assigners agree with that.

https://247sports.com/article/how-many-calls-are-missed-in-a-college-football-game-big-ten-ref-dan-capron--143645515/amp/

---

Lol. That article says in average game, refs miss 4 calls. I would say it's more like 50 or 60. If they called every penalty, the game would be so boring because of constant play stoppages. There is someone holding on nearly every play, both on offense and defense. There is tons of uncalled PI. Most plays have something missed, but the game is actually better when they do ignore stuff that doesn't really matter.

---

For example with holding and many other calls, there has to be a clear advantage gained by the foul. Merely holding but not materially affecting the play would be an incorrect call if flagged for the reasons you mention. There needs to be a restriction, take down, turn, etc at the point of attack on a run or on a pass play, it needs to be on a rusher that has a good chance to get the sack. For double teams, unless the defender gets through it and is taken down, it is essentially never called.

It must be miserable going through life convinced that the officiating in the sport you love is rigged.

I think this comes from not really knowing the rules. I would suggest signing up to become a football official so that you can learn the rules of the game and learn to apply them equally to both teams.

I've know many refs at the high school and college level and have never known one who tried to bias a game one way or the other.

Kansas Kid said:

---

Great article talking about officiating errors and philosophy on making calls. Most officials I know would rather have a no call be wrong than throw a flag and be wrong. The only exception are the safety fouls. I know our assigners agree with that.

https://247sports.com/article/how-many-calls-are-missed-in-a-college-football-game-big-ten-ref-dan-capron--143645515/amp/

---

Thanks for posting that. Yes, IF there is any bias, it is a bias towards a no call as opposed to an overturned call. It's much easier to argue "I couldn't see that" vs "I saw that and made a mistake".

AustinAg2K said:

---

Lol. That article says in average game, refs miss 4 calls. I would say it's more like 50 or 60.

---

And do you believe 45-55 are against your team? If so, you have identified the problem.

fc2112 said:

---

AustinAg2K said:

---

Lol. That article says in average game, refs miss 4 calls. I would say it's more like 50 or 60.

---

And do you believe 45-55 are against your team? If so, you have identified the problem.

---

Put differently, how many times can you remember when a call helped your team win vs the ones where they cost your team a win. I know I am guilty on that one. I will never forget the LSU non turnover call a few years ago at the end of the game.

This was blatant as there was not a single flag thrown for targeting. 9/10 a flag is thrown and they go to replay.

This is why financial disclosures a.d family ties should be on the table.

Ozamataz Buckshank 01 said:

---

BigSneezy said:

---

Not saying this happens but if we had a legal document that all teams signed that agreed to a four year championship ban if it was proven they or if boosters they had control over paid referees.

Require regular financial audits of referees.

Make it a binding contract they all have to agree to.

Too much money flying around not to look at the books of referees and schools regularly and have penalties all agree to for non compliance.


It has to happen.

---

I think the NCAA wanted blue bloods being in the final four, and the brackets were set up so that the remainder of the teams were enhancement talents to get stomped. The internet is buzzing over the no-call on the targeting hit. It really exposed that the NCAA was doing everything they could to get tu in the semi finals.

---

The NCAA has nothing to do with the playoffs.

What a lot of you are struggling with is that targeting is a subjective penalty and y'all are applying objective criteria to what you saw. From the rulebook:

Quote:

---

Targeting means that a player takes aim at an opponent for purposes of attacking with forcible contact that goes beyond making a legal tackle or a legal block or playing the ball.

---

Read closely. The official is throwing a flag based on the intent of the tackler. Is the tackler trying to create forcible contact that goes beyond that required to make a legal tackle?

So it is up to the mind reading capability of the officials. Some officials call targeting on ANY helmet to helmet contact. Some realize the offensive player may lower his head and initiate it, thus not being the defenders fault. Some just let the boys play. But it is a SUBJECTIVE call - not OBJECTIVE.

So if you cry about helmet to helmet or launching or any other objective criteria - you just are proving you don't understand the rules.

And yes - it is a HORRIBLE rule. But football is struggling with how to react to CTE, which has the potential to straight up completely kill the game with lawsuits.

It is shocking to me, actually, how many calls that the officials get right. Many times, when watching live, I'll think "that's wrong for sure", only to see slow motion replays and realize that the officials were right on the money.

The problem comes on the more subjective calls, primarily holding, pass interference, and targeting. Holding and PI could, for all practical purposes, be called on every play, and so those calls lend themselves to the usual accusations of biased refs and corrupt officials. But those calls aren't reviewed (at least I don't recall it).

Since targeting is always reviewed six ways to sunday, the call should never be wrong. But the announcers and their rules experts" get their opinions wrong on whether a particular instance "is" or "isn't" targeting, ALL OF THE TIME. It is, apparently, so subjective that good clean hits can be called targeting on replay, and plays that look like textbook examples of the rule can be declared "not targeting". And with something so subjective, it is not out of the realm of possibility that officials (not wanting a bunch of bottles on the field) would side with Texas.

Lol, a defenseless receiver got blasted turning around and was possibly knocked out and almost certainly got a concussion. If its not targeting for that then the rule is pointless.

All the "indicators" and legalese in the rule just adds minutiae to get lost in and ultimate just protects refs with some sliver of doubt that 0.5% can cling to no matter what call they make or how blatantly wrong it is.

Exactly

The true missed targeting call of the game. Dude literally lunged to the head/neck of Isaiah Bond. pic.twitter.com/r3iYp9Z4cC

— J❌red. (@SerJaredd) January 2, 2025

But I have been told on Texags that it was a totally clean hit. I felt there were two calls that went in favor of both teams (the others being pulling the runner over the goal in OT and the Texas punt return where a blindside block wasn't called on Texas. In other words, zero bias shown over the whole game.

It was an equally called game determined by the players on the field. As a fan of football, that's what you want. Not determined by the refs. Name one college school that does not think they get screwed by the refs. There is no conspiracy. They might not win it all but the bottom line is that Texas is in the semi's again.