Skip to content

Mike Pereira: Get ready for more replays, longer games

Mike Pereira, FOX NFL Sunday AP

Mike Pereira, the former NFL V.P. of Officiating who now works as an analyst for FOX, has a warning for football fans regarding the new instant replay rules of 2011: Get ready for longer games.

This year’s new replay rule takes challenges out of the hands of coaches on scoring plays and dictates that every scoring play is automatically reviewed by the replay assistant, who will then buzz the referee if it’s a close enough call that it merits a full review. That will presumably mean that more scoring plays will be reviewed, and Pereira notes in his latest column for FOXSports.com that delays are the down side of that.

“Sounds good, but there will be an unintended consequence,” Pereira writes. “There will be a lot more replay stoppages in 2011, and the length of games will increase. Neither of those is good for the game.”

Until we see the new replay rules in action, we won’t really know how much longer they’ll make the games. If the replay assistants are conservative about when to buzz the referee to get a play reviewed, the games won’t be delayed very much — but if they’re too conservative they’ll probably fail to review some plays that should be reviewed. If the replay assistants are quick to buzz the referees, they’ll surely correct some game-altering mistakes. But also make the games noticeably longer.

Permalink 100 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Rumor Mill, Sprint Football Live - Rumors, Top Stories
100 Responses to “Mike Pereira: Get ready for more replays, longer games”
  1. dwntwnbadboy19 says: Jul 18, 2011 3:21 PM

    I don’t mind longer games, keeps the women away for that much longer, and ups my booze consumption.

  2. glac1 says: Jul 18, 2011 3:21 PM

    Just get it right. It shouldn’t take as long as it does to review these things anyway.

  3. biggerballz says: Jul 18, 2011 3:21 PM

    good so big ben can’t steal more games like he does women’s dignity

  4. rcali says: Jul 18, 2011 3:22 PM

    Yes, and the never ending amount of commercials has nothing to do with the lengths of games.

  5. Dean Keaton says: Jul 18, 2011 3:24 PM

    Low impact – commercial breaks usually follow a score anyway, so the only replays that will take longer are the ones that were controversial anyway. The real change will be that the coaches will have the ability to use their challenges on all other plays, so replay #s will go up on those plays. Still small impact though, I’d be surprised if this adds more than 3-5 mins to the average game.

  6. marvsleezy says: Jul 18, 2011 3:24 PM

    You know what REALLY increases the length of the game? The number of minutes spent on commercials. No matter what, even if the game you are watching is flying by, they slow it down in the second half with commercials.

    Can some blogger do the research on how many minutes of the broadcast were spent in commercial last year as compared to 10, 15, & 20 years ago. It increases whenever they sign a new TV contract Ill tell you that.

    I guarantee its increased.

  7. schmitty2 says: Jul 18, 2011 3:26 PM

    This will add many more beer consumptions and trips to the bathroom for me. YESSSS!

  8. virger says: Jul 18, 2011 3:27 PM

    oh so we have to watch more football, ok

  9. ratbastardshanahandjob says: Jul 18, 2011 3:29 PM

    No-one ever bitches about how long a College game lasts. I don’t see anyone walking away or turning off the TV on a great 4 hour College game. So the pros last a few more minutes because of replay. Who cares. As many bad calls as these deaf, dumb and blind zebras make. More replay is needed…….

    If the NFL is really concerned about the length of games get rid of some damn commercials. That’s what the NFL game really needs……

  10. themage78 says: Jul 18, 2011 3:29 PM

    How else is the NFL going to pay for the new CBA? More commercials.

  11. Soulman45 says: Jul 18, 2011 3:29 PM

    When they take the field they will be judge until then play ball.
    With the lawyers in the room when will it happen?

  12. bmitchelf says: Jul 18, 2011 3:30 PM

    What about non-scoring plays? Still starting with two challenges, I see. Why don’t they just increase coach’s challenges to three with a fourth if all are right instead?

  13. isphet71 says: Jul 18, 2011 3:30 PM

    After every score is a TV timeout. Will replays during this timeout really add much more than 30 seconds or so per score?

    The only difference is that the extra point kick will be after commercials instead of before.

  14. P_Willy says: Jul 18, 2011 3:30 PM

    glac1 says:
    Jul 18, 2011 3:21 PM
    Just get it right. It shouldn’t take as long as it does to review these things anyway.

    ——————————

    Amen; get the call right in the first place and skip the damn commercials and it won’t take 10 minutes… mind you these replay’s are good to take a piss and refilling the beer.

  15. mvp43 says: Jul 18, 2011 3:31 PM

    I have no problem with the extra time for replay, as long as they get the call right.

    What really bothers me are pass interference calls. Like holding, its a judgement call, but in a close game with time running down, a bad call can turn into a 20, 30 penalty…and that just blows. What they should do is make it a flat 15 yarder and leave it at that and scrap the spot of the foul rule.

    If they want to eliminate game changing mistakes, then they have to look at all game changing penalties.

  16. superdanlp says: Jul 18, 2011 3:31 PM

    i mean honestly MOST scoring plays are pretty clear. I don’t see many more being reviewed this year that wouldn’t have been challenged by coaches in years prior anyways.

  17. dwntwnbadboy19 says: Jul 18, 2011 3:31 PM

    biggerballz says:
    Jul 18, 2011 3:21 PM
    good so big ben can’t steal more games like he does women’s dignity

    lmao, awesome!

  18. profootballwalk says: Jul 18, 2011 3:32 PM

    dwntwnbadboy19 says: Jul 18, 2011 3:21 PM

    “I don’t mind longer games, keeps the women away for that much longer…”.

    **************************************

    Somehow, I doubt that’s a big problem for you. ;-)

  19. buflo66 says: Jul 18, 2011 3:32 PM

    No NFL fan cares about the length of games. Just get it right.

  20. thephantomstranger says: Jul 18, 2011 3:33 PM

    I don’t care how long it takes as long as they get the call right. If this rule were in place last year, the Vikings would have beaten the Packers and the Packers would not have made the playoffs. While they’re at it, could they make some kind of change that ensures that they get the call right when they review it?

  21. hobartbaker says: Jul 18, 2011 3:33 PM

    “It ain’t over till the fat guys in the booth call down to the field!”.

  22. bmwaldrop says: Jul 18, 2011 3:35 PM

    Well instead of going to a commercial during these reviews or sticking around and making us watch the replay 50 times, they should cut to another game and let us watch a play or two until the decision comes down.

  23. prior0knowledge says: Jul 18, 2011 3:35 PM

    after a score, they have to change teams and line up for the kickoff, so there is some built-in delay anyway. should not lengthen the games much

  24. johnabis says: Jul 18, 2011 3:36 PM

    Fox still has this guy? haven’t they learned nobody likes him?

  25. 2011to2020lions says: Jul 18, 2011 3:37 PM

    NO PROBLEM HERE!!! It’s better than what we have dealt with the last 100 days or so

  26. Burritto says: Jul 18, 2011 3:37 PM

    So did Mike Pereira dissuade officials to never huddle together to make sure they got a ruling right? I mean, that also makes the game longer in the name of accuracy, amiright?

  27. erikinhell says: Jul 18, 2011 3:40 PM

    Just change the rule so the coach can challenge as long as he has timeouts. If you lose a challenge, you lose a timeout. If you win a challenge, you keep the timeout. Instant replay is a good idea gone bad by too much tweeking of the rules.

  28. packfntk says: Jul 18, 2011 3:43 PM

    I love more time for games. I would watch if they were 5 hours long.

    And for those of you saying about the ads, HEY! I sell those darn things, gotta feed the baby somehow! HAHA!

  29. cshearing says: Jul 18, 2011 3:43 PM

    Get it right…I’ll wait.

  30. johnnyb216 says: Jul 18, 2011 3:43 PM

    I honestly don’t mind a longer game. It only comes once a week anyways. More time watching football on Sundays=good. More Sundays playing football so each game counts that much less or maybe just having to wait that much longer to see playoff football=bad.

  31. doob187 says: Jul 18, 2011 3:44 PM

    Miami would have beaten the steelers last year then

  32. danimalk82 says: Jul 18, 2011 3:44 PM

    I would gladly take more zebra-under-the-hood time than seeing the same beer commercial 20+ times a game. Hopefully they choose to show replays of the play in question rather than cutting to commercials.

  33. gbabb2000 says: Jul 18, 2011 3:48 PM

    Why not have a commerical after every score before the PAT, then, no commercial after the PAT and go straight to kickoff? That will give time to review without wasting as much time.

  34. robf2010 says: Jul 18, 2011 3:48 PM

    Just be decisive in the booth. You don’t need to look at a play 8 times from 5 different angles. Look at it once or twice, just like the fans at home, and make the call. If you don’t see anything right away or if it’s so close that you have to look at it 8 times from 5 different angles, then the play stands as called. I don’t care if a guy is an eighth of an inch short or three quarters of an inch out of bounds.

  35. kqole25 says: Jul 18, 2011 3:49 PM

    Take away this scenario that occurs after every score.

    Extra point, COMMERCIAL, kickoff, COMMERCIAL

    MNF is the worst at this!

  36. bennprince says: Jul 18, 2011 3:49 PM

    If they would move the replay up to a replay official sitting in a booth with a bunch of 60″ LCD HDTV’s it would speed the whole process up tremendously. It seems so antiquated to have on field referees walk over to the sideline and look into a little box for 3 minutes when a decision could be made within seconds.

  37. robf2010 says: Jul 18, 2011 3:50 PM

    Commercials are the money. You’re dreaming if you think those will be reduced.

  38. zerored78 says: Jul 18, 2011 3:51 PM

    Wow, missed this somehow. I’m fine with all scoring plays being reviewed but many non-scoring plays are just as important. Is this going to be like college where it seems some things are reviewed and others not at the whim of the guy in the booth? Also, the challenges were an added element of coaching and added a bit to things. Awful decision by the league.

  39. homelanddefense says: Jul 18, 2011 3:52 PM

    Id trade a few replays for a few commercials any day of the week.

    Kickoff..commercial. 3 and out followed by punt…commercial. team scores on quick 5 play drive, extra point…commercial. Kickoff commercial.

    I understand they need to make money, but Id rather watch 1 extra commercial per break than have constant breaks.

    On the rare occasion I have to DVR a game because Im not home for kickoff it ends up almost being a blessing because I can fast forward the commercials.

  40. hystoracle says: Jul 18, 2011 3:52 PM

    It’s not that hard.. Just have the Video review guy upstairs – make the determination – Like in the NHL and college football.. He/She could be reviewing the video as soon as the play is over quickening the process. Some of these NFL referees seem to refuse to overturn any call they or their crews make unless it is so blantantly obvious they can’t fall back on the not enough evidence to overturn excuse.

  41. dolphindad says: Jul 18, 2011 3:52 PM

    how is longer games bad for the game? wouldnt that be more TV revenue becasue there will be more commercials? more time to sell $10 beer and $5 rat dogs in the stadims too. your average nfl fan craves more football not less.

  42. wheresmyjuice says: Jul 18, 2011 3:52 PM

    “I’d be okay with more booth review if it meant that they would get more right.”- Calvin Johnson

  43. goodguyjohn says: Jul 18, 2011 3:54 PM

    Why are longer games necessarily bad? I don’t mind a 10-20 minute longer game plus it gives the networks time to sell a few more ads.

    Of course I watch all NFL games from the West Coast which means I never have to stay up late to watch prime time games. It rules!

  44. destructicus says: Jul 18, 2011 3:54 PM

    After a TD they go to commercial anyway.

    I imagine that most times a TD is scored they’ll come back from ads and things will go to the kickoff. If there’s a problem with the play it’ll be overturned by the time they get back.

    This is just an old school football guy not liking replays and blowing hard about it.

    I’m all for this. Anything that makes the result of the game more about what actually happens on the field and less about what the ref thinks he sees is good for the sport, imho.

  45. gobolts4lyfe says: Jul 18, 2011 3:54 PM

    Oh no , more football! They owe us that for making us wonder if there was going to be football this season.. add another hour to each game and I’m fine with that

  46. Patriot42 says: Jul 18, 2011 3:55 PM

    Lets regulate the game even more. Maybe a democrat is in charge of the officiating.

  47. steelerfan77 says: Jul 18, 2011 3:56 PM

    biggerballz says:Jul 18, 2011 3:21 PM

    good so big ben can’t steal more games like he does women’s dignity

    —————————————————–
    Really? This is for serious comments and not for jealous, sissy, backhanded idiots like yourself.

    Have a nice day:)

    GO STEELERS

  48. batfreight says: Jul 18, 2011 3:56 PM

    Yes, I’m sure we’d all agree that we would rather have our team screwed out of a victory on a botched call that to add five or ten minutes to the game.

  49. fresh2deafbill says: Jul 18, 2011 3:56 PM

    that’s not true…college football has the same rule and their games last just as long as NFL games

  50. bigbeefyd says: Jul 18, 2011 3:58 PM

    marvsleezy says:
    Jul 18, 2011 3:24 PM
    You know what REALLY increases the length of the game? The number of minutes spent on commercials. No matter what, even if the game you are watching is flying by, they slow it down in the second half with commercials.

    Can some blogger do the research on how many minutes of the broadcast were spent in commercial last year as compared to 10, 15, & 20 years ago. It increases whenever they sign a new TV contract Ill tell you that.

    I guarantee its increased.
    ************
    News flash, genius. TV networks make their money from advertising. ONLY advertising. If they need to pay the league billions, it has to come from…wait for it…advertising. Of course there will be commercials.

  51. Davo says: Jul 18, 2011 3:58 PM

    The real question is whether Coaches get to keep the same number of challenges.

    If that’s the case, they’ll use them on non-scoring plays, knowing they won’t have to save any for score reviews. That’ll make the game drag!

  52. southpaw2k says: Jul 18, 2011 3:59 PM

    I get that the overall goal here is to make sure the call on the field is correct as much as possible, but it seems to me that the new rule’s side effect would be to save coach’s challenges for non-scoring plays during games. I’d be curious to know how many coach’s challenges were used on scoring plays versus other plays throughout the game to date. I’d assume the majority of challenges were on scoring plays, which thanks to this rule, would be saved for other cases like whether a catch was made in bounds or not.

    Though what this rule doesn’t explicitly state is whether the review will include just whether the player was in bounds with both feet while scoring or if something else caused the player to be down prior to scoring. Suppose a kickoff return is brought back for a touchdown. The returner ran down the sidelines, but may have stepped out of bounds back at the 40 yard line before running it back all the way and the reviewer didn’t catch it. The refs call the TD – can a coach still challenge whether the player stepped out of bounds?

  53. manderson367 says: Jul 18, 2011 4:00 PM

    If they want to speed up the game quit having commercials AFTER every kickoff. We just come back from a bunch of commercials, they kickoff and they go back to more commercials. That’s a much bigger waste of time than replays. Heck, I wouldn’t mind if they had a few more commercials before the kickoff, but going back to commercials after about 15 seconds of gametime is maddening.

  54. nmking26 says: Jul 18, 2011 4:00 PM

    Longer football >>> No football

  55. 8drinkminimum says: Jul 18, 2011 4:01 PM

    Waste of time if it’s the same idiots that ruled Big Ben fumbled into the end zone vs Miami but couldn’t take a stand when Alama-Francis came out of the pile with the ball.

  56. fringetastic says: Jul 18, 2011 4:02 PM

    I’d rather a game be 10 minutes longer than a stupid call not getting overturned.

  57. ubummer says: Jul 18, 2011 4:02 PM

    Let us watch the exact same thing that’s showing on the replay assistant’s screen, and they can take all the time that they want as often as they want.

  58. mdpickles says: Jul 18, 2011 4:03 PM

    I thought technology could be used to speed up these types of processes, not slow it.

  59. lostsok says: Jul 18, 2011 4:04 PM

    They should do the commercial break immediately after the score…while it is being reviewed…and do the extra point after the break. Obviously, producers/announcers could always elect to stay with coverage if the play appears close.

  60. Deb says: Jul 18, 2011 4:05 PM

    NCAA games have automatic booth review and they don’t run as long as NFL games do now–even stopping the clock on every first down. Let me guess … the NFL is going to implement this in the most complicated, convoluted way possible in order to get in a few more commercial breaks per game.

  61. pftstory says: Jul 18, 2011 4:09 PM

    You consider watching a reply as watching more football?
    They go to commercial after every score anyway, well after the kick. The reply delays the kick. I guess you could call that more time to go do something before the next kickoff if you leave after the scare and ignore the replay and the kick.
    BTW..Why do so many of you want more time to go do something during the game? Why do so many of you want the 1 oclock games to overlap the kick of the 4 oclock games?

    Replay should be unlimited challenges. But you can only be wrong twice per half (or per game). This way a team is not screwed if the ref truly sucks and blows three calls. As it stands if the Ref blows two calls in the 3rd quarter and the team challenges and wins, if the ref screws up again in the 4th, its tough pig pies, “the coach should have saved a challenge.” He’s supposed to save them under the assumption the ref will screw up yet again?
    Or is he supposed to use them to correct the Refs mistakes? As its stands its a strategical tool to be used only on plays that may or may not be more important then a play at a later time.

    I know they have some rule where if you challenge twice and win both you get a third. Well the above still applies.

    We’ve all seen it where a coach cant challenge because he used his allotment and each time he did he was right. I just dont see the logic.

  62. Deb says: Jul 18, 2011 4:11 PM

    biggerballz says:
    good so big ben can’t steal more games like he does women’s dignity

    dwntwnbadboy19 says:
    I don’t mind longer games, keeps the women away for that much longer, and ups my booze consumption.

    ———————————————-

    Wonder how many guys giving a thumbs-up to that first comment also gave a thumbs-up to the second one. Yeah … you lil boys are real concerned about women :roll:

    ROFL

  63. winkeroni says: Jul 18, 2011 4:12 PM

    It depends on how thorough they want these reviews. Is having to wait 2 minutes after a TD for the PAT going to make me hat the NFL? No. Call me a bum but Sunday I’m sitting on my bum watching 3 games (1pm,4pm, and 8pm).

  64. thephantomstranger says: Jul 18, 2011 4:12 PM

    To all of you complaining about the commercials in games, just DVR the game and start watching it 30 minutes later so you can fast forward through them. (This is what is known in my house as “family time.”) I know Wisconsin doesn’t have that technology yet, but it should work for the rest of the country.

  65. batfreight says: Jul 18, 2011 4:14 PM

    Every season they try to cram a couple more commercials into a three hour time period. At some point in the future Goodell will go to a running clock to make room for more ads.

  66. edukator4 says: Jul 18, 2011 4:15 PM

    you people realize that this longer game scenario is not acutally “more” football. just longer sitting watching nothing happen situations.
    sundays with the ticket noy so bad but bloody hell are monday gamrs going to get frustrating

  67. madrid517 says: Jul 18, 2011 4:17 PM

    Longer games= more commercials which= more money. Smart

  68. biggerballz says: Jul 18, 2011 4:21 PM

    @steelerfan77

    can’t handle the truth huh? It must hurt to know your team is turning in to your city. Haha sounds like you’re the kind of guy who visits college bar restrooms to meet women.

    steelers suck, like you do grown men steelerfan77

  69. goawayeverybody says: Jul 18, 2011 4:22 PM

    This is fine with me except for two things:

    1. The TV screen they use to review the plays should be at least as good as my home TV.

    2. The reviews should be limited to no more than 3 minutes in length. If you can’t find enough to overturn the ruling on the field in 3 minutes time, you’re never going to find enough to overturn the ruling.

  70. bluvayner says: Jul 18, 2011 4:27 PM

    There will definately be more replays. If the coaches know that all scoring plays will be reviewed, they will then be much more likely to use their challenges on generic plays, rather than save them for more meaningful scoring plays.

  71. watermelon1 says: Jul 18, 2011 4:31 PM

    Considering Mike Pereira was wrong on just about every single one of his “official reviews” on NFL Network… are we to assume he is wrong about the 2011 replay rules too?

  72. schmitty2 says: Jul 18, 2011 4:32 PM

    thephantomstranger says:
    Jul 18, 2011 3:33 PM
    I don’t care how long it takes as long as they get the call right. If this rule were in place last year, the Vikings would have beaten the Packers and the Packers would not have made the playoffs

    And had the Vikes won that game they would have ended up 3rd in the division. DARN IT!

  73. rando74 says: Jul 18, 2011 4:32 PM

    Who cares what Perriera says anyway? Funny how when he was employed by the NFL he would go on NFL Network and tow the company line. I never once heard him say that any calls were wrong. It was always “well, according to the rule..”
    Yet now that hes got a cushy job with fox he’s all over calling it like it is. He’s a hypocritical chump.

    As far as longer games go, long as they get the calls right who cares.

  74. nevermore52 says: Jul 18, 2011 4:38 PM

    Fox is going to have to give him his own hour long show each week, just to explain all the shi**y calls that will invariably be made by the dozens.

  75. marinofreakout says: Jul 18, 2011 4:42 PM

    just get better officials.

    that big ben fumble into the endzone in the pittsburgh/miami game was a pathetic joke. more embarassing to the game than this labor mess.

  76. laeaglefan says: Jul 18, 2011 4:47 PM

    They can offset any delays caused by the replays by cutting down on TV timeouts. Seriously. For example, if there is a replay, have the scheduled timeout then, instead of after the next change of possession.

  77. buflo66 says: Jul 18, 2011 4:49 PM

    Lots of commercial talk. Best solution, on Sundays lock yourself in your house and turn off your TV, phone and computer. Wait until 12:00 midnight and then watch each game in 26 minutes on DirecTV Short Cuts. It comes with Sunday Ticket.

    Every play from whistle to whistle, with the occasional replay of a score or amazing play. Just don’t peek at the ticker!

  78. anarchopurplism says: Jul 18, 2011 4:52 PM

    Okay, so in order to avoid commercials and fluff pieces at halftime……………I have to adjust my Tivo from a 40 minute delay to catchup before the last 2 minutes to a full hour.

    Got it.

    Thanks.

  79. tinytim4115 says: Jul 18, 2011 4:56 PM

    They should move instant replay to the NHL system. where there is one office that looks at all the calls for all the games in real time. rule enforcement will be more consistent, and reviews/challenges will be much quicker.

  80. largent80 says: Jul 18, 2011 5:05 PM

    As the Senior VP-Marketing in charge of broadcast content for a major beverage company, I approve of this decision.

  81. stairwayto7 says: Jul 18, 2011 5:24 PM

    So its going to just as long as a Yankee- RedSox 9 inning game???

  82. wetpaperbag2 says: Jul 18, 2011 5:29 PM

    I have no problem with the NFL spending an extra 90 seconds for each score for the purpose of getting a play/call on the field right.

    However, I DO have a problem with the interruption of a game SOLELY for the purpose of a commercial (aka TV Timeouts).

  83. jebdamone says: Jul 18, 2011 5:32 PM

    really not a big deal, a game almost always goes to commercial break after a TD so, in most instances, the dilemma should be solved by the time play is supposed to resume.

  84. endzonezombie says: Jul 18, 2011 5:46 PM

    “There will be a lot more replay stoppages in 2011…”

    Can’t be any worse than the league-induced stoppage.

  85. jakek2 says: Jul 18, 2011 5:52 PM

    Makes it easier to FIX GAMES is all.

  86. osnap305 says: Jul 18, 2011 6:05 PM

    I don’t mind at all. Just get the calls right.

  87. dwntwnbadboy19 says: Jul 18, 2011 6:15 PM

    Deb says:
    Jul 18, 2011 4:11 PM
    biggerballz says:
    good so big ben can’t steal more games like he does women’s dignity

    dwntwnbadboy19 says:
    I don’t mind longer games, keeps the women away for that much longer, and ups my booze consumption.

    ———————————————-

    Wonder how many guys giving a thumbs-up to that first comment also gave a thumbs-up to the second one. Yeah … you lil boys are real concerned about women

    ROFL

    —————————————
    you seem to be only one laughing, is there not a Martha stewart talk.com for you to go post at?

  88. thephantomstranger says: Jul 18, 2011 6:19 PM

    schmitty2 says:
    Jul 18, 2011 4:32 PM
    thephantomstranger says:
    Jul 18, 2011 3:33 PM
    I don’t care how long it takes as long as they get the call right. If this rule were in place last year, the Vikings would have beaten the Packers and the Packers would not have made the playoffs

    And had the Vikes won that game they would have ended up 3rd in the division. DARN IT!
    ______________

    I know! And I wouldn’t have to listen to Lions fans brag about finishing ahead of us when both teams had the same record but the Lions had more net points in conference games played in months with an R in them.

  89. Deb says: Jul 18, 2011 6:43 PM

    @dwntwnbadboy19 …

    Awww, sugar, that’s a pitiful effort. Expect I know a lot more about the game than you do and have been dodging much harder hits from the other boys since long before you showed up. And imagine I’ll still be posting after you give up and slink away.

    By the way … I’m sure the women in your life (assuming you actually have any) will be celebrating the extra time off, too. ;)

  90. mogogo1 says: Jul 18, 2011 6:45 PM

    I’ve always found the beauty of the NFL challenge system to be that play was only stopped when the coaches were really concerned. If it’s a blowout and neither coach really cares if the ball carrier truly got in or just came pretty close, why stop the game? I’d be much more into giving the coaches another challenge or two per game than requiring several minutes be wasted on every obvious touchdown, which is what will happen.

    And if the NFL was REALLY worried about not lengthening games, the replay reviews could take place during the post-score commercial break. You wouldn’t even need to know they’d happened unless it was overturned or close enough to warrant discussion. Now, my suspicion is they won’t do it that way, but will instead stick in a second commercial block all in the name of “getting it right.”

  91. Deb says: Jul 18, 2011 6:47 PM

    @Moderators … think you missed one:

    biggerballz says:
    Jul 18, 2011 4:21 PM
    @steelerfan77

    can’t handle the truth huh? It must hurt to know your team is turning in to your city. Haha sounds like you’re the kind of guy who visits college bar restrooms to meet women.

    steelers suck, like you do grown men steelerfan77

  92. realitypolice says: Jul 18, 2011 6:57 PM

    I didn’t read all of the posts so I apologize if I am stealing someone’s idea.

    The problem isn’t the amount of replays or who determines when to have one.

    The solution lies, as it often does in cases like this, in the enforcement of a rule that is already on the books.

    Referee’s are supposed to have NO MORE than 90 seconds to review a play. Has anyone ever seen a replay review that took 90 seconds?

    Here’s the solution: Have the official push a button on the monitor when he begins the review, and have the monitor shut off after 90 seconds.

    If you can’t find enough evidence after 90 seconds of watching a 7 second play to reverse it, then the play stands.

    See how easy that was?

  93. harmcityhomer says: Jul 18, 2011 7:00 PM

    Just get the calls right. I do not care if the game lasts longer.

    I also prefer the college system of booth review of anything.

  94. nofunleague says: Jul 18, 2011 7:07 PM

    Adopt the college method and move on with it. Takes the old men called refs five minutes to get to the voting booth. Move on for gods sake.

  95. finsfrontofficeisajoke says: Jul 18, 2011 7:09 PM

    Pereira is full of it. I remember when replay went away for a while, and the first season without it, they did a study on the length of the game with replay vs. the length without and GUESS WHAT? The average length of a game WENT UP by 3+ minutes. I’m not sure of the seconds, something like 3:14, but the point is that the games were 3+ minutes LONGER WITHOUT REPLAY.

    Get it right, every time, and nobody is going to care about the length of the game.

  96. nofunleague says: Jul 18, 2011 7:17 PM

    I get that the overall goal here is to make sure the call on the field is correct as much as possible,

    Actually the overall goal is to not make the zebras look bad.

  97. pigeonpea says: Jul 18, 2011 9:12 PM

    nofunleague says:
    I get that the overall goal here is to make sure the call on the field is correct as much as possible,

    Actually the overall goal is to not make the zebras look bad.

    The problem is that dimwits like Ed Hochuli make ridiculous calls that cost teams games. If the NFL was smart, it would hire full-time officials with IQs higher than golf shoes and make them accountable for the on-field calls they make. Until then, Hochuli’s brand of stupidity will have to be kept in check by endless reviews and four and a half hour games.

  98. skinsfaninnebraska says: Jul 18, 2011 9:18 PM

    The college football replay system is, and always has been, far better than any of the ridiculously complicated, Rube Goldberg-y things the NFL has been able to draw up so far.

    I wonder what it is about these obvious things that the NFL finds so hard to understand? Look how long it took the NFL Rules Committee to decide that having a two-point conversion was a good idea. The NCAA had that for decades before.

  99. qb19 says: Jul 18, 2011 9:21 PM

    What as arrogabt ass Pereira is. Who is he to say what is good for the game?

    Doesn’t it make since that, for the integrity fo the game, they have to get the calls right?

    With the replay system, the NFL has lagged behind college.

  100. axespray says: Jul 18, 2011 10:15 PM

    thanks Brad Childress…. now we can spend more time seeing refs run around instead of Players playing the game….

    freaking Crybaby

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!