The new labor deal between the NFL and the NFL Referees Association puts a premium on competition — and accountability.
Low-performing officials could be assigned to work in the UFL, as explained in a recent ESPN item that reviews the new elements of the latest Collective Bargaining Agreement for officials.
The UFL-NFL connection piqued our curiosity. We asked the NFL for more information as to how this would work, given that the UFL would have to make room for any of the relegated NFL officials. (And given that the UFL may not be particularly interested in officials deemed to be deficient by the NFL.)
Per an NFL spokesperson: “The details are still to be worked out. From a CBA perspective, we now have the ability to work more closely with underperforming officials, and one way we have is for them to get additional reps in a league like the UFL.”
A UFL source tells PFT that three or four NFL officials have worked in the UFL over the past two seasons. So the pipeline already exists, in general terms. The new CBA between the NFL and the NFLRA seems to contemplate something more formal and organized.
That could eventually be the case. For now, the specifics remain under construction.
With the NFL having no developmental league of its own, any connection between the NFL and the UFL could lead to more efforts by the NFL to tap into the opportunities created by the UFL.
Already, the league is relying on the UFL as a de facto device to help players develop. It could spread to other aspects of the overall NFL training experience, with players and officials potentially joined by coaches and executives to get valuable football experience beyond working for the 32 franchises of the NFL.
The new Collective Bargaining Agreement between the NFL and the NFL Referees Association emphasizes competition. And it carries fresh accountability for those who can’t compete.
As mentioned in the ESPN article that takes a close look at the nooks and crannies of the new CBA, underperforming officials can be assigned to the UFL.
The decision would come following a review of the officials “who underperformed during the season, and were not assigned” to a playoff game, NFL V.P. of officiating training and development Ramon George told ESPN. Those officials would work with their supervisors to review each of their calls and to identify any mistakes in mechanics and positioning. Following the review, George will assign officials to work in the UFL, “if necessary.”
It’s unclear how many officials could be assigned to work in the UFL. It’s also not known how that would impact existing UFL officials. Will the NFL officials who are relegated for extra work supplant UFL officials? Will the UFL be able to say, “thanks, but we’re good” and/or “no thanks; that guy sucks”?
Regardless, it’s the first clear connection between the NFL and the UFL, which has become the de facto developmental league for NFL players. Now, it will become the officiating equivalent of being sent to the minors.
It’s another reason for the NFL to have its own developmental league. That likely won’t happen, however, unless and until the NFL sees a way to generate sufficient profit from creating a way for players, officials, coaches, and executives to get real football experience.
Last month, the NFL and the NFL Referees Association avoided a potential Fail Mary reboot by working out a new Collective Bargaining Agreement. While the paperwork has yet to be officially signed, the deal has been ratified by the union.
ESPN has taken a close look at the new agreement, which aims to enhance performance by emphasizing competition.
“I think it is going to create competition amongst the officials from top to bottom,” NFL V.P. of officiating training and development Ramon George told ESPN.
The competition includes the creation of a “practice squad” that can have up to 12 officials. Per ESPN, members of the practice squad will be assigned to specific crews. They’ll travel to game sites. They’ll be available to step in, if one of the assigned officials is performing poorly or gets injured.
The latter point is an important one. When referee Adrian Hill suffered a leg injury during a Thursday night game between the Bills and the Texans, umpire Roy Ellison had to pull double duty. The absence of an immediate replacement for Hill (or Ellison) ready to go underscored a major flaw in the NFL’s overall officiating process.
As ESPN notes, the timing of the deal makes it unlikely that the 12-person practice squad will be fully staffed by the time the 2026 season begins. And, given the reality that the NFL didn’t fully implement aspects of the 2019 CBA (such as hiring 17 full-time officials and developing a training program), it’s fair to wonder when, or if, the practice squad will reach its 12-official limit.
Still, the ability to have a practice squad becomes, as ESPN notes, a “sharp change” to past practices and the most visible adjustment from prior deals.
“They can swing in and work for individuals who are struggling,” George told ESPN. “They are going to be embedded in a crew, learn how to become professionals and take care of their bodies. They will be able to learn the terminology, pace, speed, travel, as well as working those like NFL games.”
The shift nevertheless raises questions. From the perspective of the officials (as noted by ESPN), some of them could be “looking over their shoulders.” From the league’s perspective (as noted by ESPN), all players and coaches face the possibility of being replaced if they’re not performing at an acceptable level.
The overriding goal is to improve officiating. Which is admirable. It remains to be seen whether putting the officials on a tighter leash will accomplish that feat, or whether it will simply make the lesser-performing officials more anxious.
And, in turn, less effective.
And, eventually, replaced by other officials who will be afraid of their own shadows until they’re replaced by other officials who will feel the same way, creating an endless churning of on-field officials who aren’t getting the job done well enough.
On Sunday, multiple reports pushed the NFL’s version of the ongoing Collective Bargaining Agreement talks with the NFL Referees Association. The NFLRA has pushed back.
“Apparently ‘league sources’ are continuing to put out false and misleading information instead of wanting to meet at the negotiating table,” the NFL Referees Association said in a Sunday night statement to PFT. “The bottom line is our officials work for the wealthiest sports league in America, with profits that far exceed any of the others. That’s normally a point of pride for the NFL. However, our officials are substantially undercompensated when compared to baseball and basketball umpires and referees. Our officials also aren’t even provided the health care benefits that those at 345 Park Avenue have.
“As far as performance pay, we had ‘high-performing officials’ who worked this year’s Championship games and the Super Bowl who were paid less for those games than what they were paid for a regular-season game. That certainly isn’t rewarding performance, as the NFL claims is their goal.”
The real goal, in our view, is to win. To get the best possible terms. To get the NFLRA to cave. It worked against the NFLPA in 2011. It failed, ultimately, against the NFLRA in 2012 — thanks in large part to the Fail Mary.
Meanwhile, the NFL continues to lay the foundation for another round of replacement officials, augmented by an expanded replay system that has been far from perfected in its more limited form. On Sunday night, the league pushed to ESPN (of which the NFL owns 10 percent) the notion that, if/when replacement officials are hired on May 1 in anticipation of a potential lockout, “The opportunity to reach an agreement with our current union becomes a bigger challenge, just from simple economics.”
Why? Because the league will want to foist the expenses of its planning for the nuclear option onto the officials?
If, however, that’s a real deadline, the NFL needs to get the NFLRA to agree to that and to act accordingly. The NFL is a deadline-driven business. If the two sides agree that the deadline isn’t Week 1 but May 1, a deal could be done by May 1.
If, alternatively, the league is currently huffing and puffing with every intention of blowing the officials’ house down by locking them out until they cry uncle, the NFL plans to play Russian roulette with the integrity of the game.
Again.
When it comes to the labor fight between the NFL and its game officials, the NFL Referees Association is operating with one hand tied behind its back. In part because the league has its hands deep in the pockets of multiple major media outlets.
Earlier today, Adam Schefter of ESPN — which is now partially owned by the NFL — posted a tweet that shared the league’s one-sided characterization of the ongoing negotiations. On Sunday night, Tom Pelissero of NFL Network posted multiple tweets framing the controversy from the perspective of management.
“The NFL has offered its game officials a six-year labor deal with a 6.45% annual growth rate in compensation, while the NFLRA is insisting on 10% plus $2.5 million for marketing fees the league regards as worthless, sources say,” Pelissero tweeted. “The union also continues to resist changes the NFL is insisting upon, including shortening the ‘dark period’ after the Super Bowl, deploying underperforming officials to spring leagues for extra reps and ending a seniority-based system for playoff assignments. ‘We want to pay for performance,’ source said.”
As to the reality that the NFL needs full-time officials, Pelissero posted this: “The NFL has made a proposal to make some officials full-time, but have met ‘staunch resistance’ from the NFLRA, source said. In essence, from the league’s standpoint, the union wants officials to make substantially more money without any substantive changes to their jobs or hours and with a system that rewards seniority, not performance.”
There’s no indication that Pelissero sought a response from the NFLRA before presenting the information that clearly has come from the league. But that’s how things tend to work these days. Instead of seeking out the other side affirmatively, reporters will present one side and then wait for the other side to respond elsewhere.
There are always two sides to every story. But if the officials are somehow being so clearly unreasonable that they won’t engage in fair, evenhanded negotiations with the league in an effort to advance the best interests of the game of professional football, the NFL shouldn’t lock them out. It should get rid of them.
Most recently, the NFLRA said that the league sent to recent negotiation sessions officials without the authority to negotiate. The NFL has yet to respond to that contention. If the NFLRA’s position is accurate, who’s being clearly unreasonable?
Instead of playing ping-pong P.R., making selective leaks while telling all teams to say nothing, the NFL should focus on working this out. The NFLRA should, too. The integrity of the game is, or at least should be, paramount for both of them.
It seems that one side has been far more focused this weekend on finding ways to apply public pressure to the other.
When it comes to the American art of capitalism, the First Amendment often takes a back seat.
Via Adam Schefter of ESPN, the NFL has issued a memo to all teams prohibiting public comment on the Collective Bargaining Agreement negotiations with the NFL Referees Association.
It’s no surprise. With owners, coaches, and General Managers already interacting with reporters at the NFL’s annual meeting, it will be impossible to get a wide range of voices on the same page. The easiest approach is to tell everyone to zip it.
That gives everyone who will answer questions on the record an easy out: “Sorry, I can’t comment.”
Obviously, this won’t stop off-the-record conversations. And plenty of people in the NFL ecosystem already have strong opinions about the prospect of a sequel to 2012’s Fail Mary, thanks to the possible use of low-level replacement officials if/when the NFL locks out the officials.
An internal gag order regarding labor talks is nothing new for the NFL. Before the 2011 lockout of players, the league told teams to not talk about it. Along the way, the league fined Cowboys owner and G.M. Jerry Jones at least $100,000 for violating it.
The recent memo also contained predictable, one-sided propaganda regarding the CBA battle. From Schefter’s tweet: “The memo stressed that while the league has the highest regard for the game officials, officiating must improve, and that the NFL proposal would enhance the ability to hold the officials accountable for their performance while offering generous compensation packages. The union continues to resist those efforts while seeking raises almost double the rate realized by players over their last two collective bargaining agreements and millions in marketing fees.”
It’s no surprise that the league has fed this message to ESPN, since the NFL now owns 10 percent of ESPN. But, again, there are two sides to this. The NFL Referees Association has begun getting its story out, starting with last week’s claim that the NFL sent to the most recent negotiating session no one with the authority to actually negotiate. The league has not refuted that claim.
The rhetoric has ramped up in recent days between the NFL and NFL Referees Association. With the two sides pushing different versions as to why the talks have bogged down to a standstill, it’s important to focus on the heart of the ongoing tug of war.
A recent item from Football Zebras explores the sticking points.
Per the article posted on Thursday, the league has offered a compensation bump of 6.7 percent. The NFLRA wants 10.3 percent. The gap (abacus engaged) is 3.6 percent. Obviously, that becomes a larger number when converted to total dollars, especially with average compensation for the officials at $350,000 as of 2025.
Another point of contention comes from the ability to cut the cord on officials during their first three years in the NFL. Per Football Zebras, the two sides agreed to give the league that power in the current CBA. However, the NFLRA claims the league has failed to provide additional training and development resources for the officials in their probationary period.
Then there’s the effort by the NFL to invade the dead period between the end of football season and May 15. Currently, the officials are off limits during that window. The league wants to waive that rule for officials in the probationary period who did not earn a postseason assignment. The NFLRA has to date refused.
That last point highlights the risk that both sides are taking by not working out their differences quietly. The more the league talks about wanting more access to officials during the three-month dead period, the more the media and fans will begin to say, “Why in the hell is there a three-month dead period?”
The officials should be full-time, year-round employees. And they should be paid accordingly, enough to get them to give up their primary jobs.
Here’s how that arrangement could look. They’d live in a central location, somewhere like Dallas or Kansas City. Every week (Tuesday and/or Wednesday), they’d meet in the same room at the same time for a comprehensive review of any/all issues from the prior week of games that require emphasis in order to ensure consistency. They’d spend the rest of the time between games studying calls from the prior week, staying up to speed on the many requirements of the rule book, keeping themselves in peak physical condition, and getting a little rest so that they’ll be mentally ready to go when the next game begins.
After each season, they’d spend their time preparing for the next one. The NFL could develop a virtual reality simulation that would expose them to every possible scenario that could play out during a game. Through that system, they’d work on spotting fouls and making calls amid a sea of humanity moving faster than the human eye can see. They’d be directly involved in the offseason rulemaking process, which (thanks to the dead period) necessarily excludes them.
They’d work offseason practices. Those that need more live reps could be assigned to the UFL.
And, yes, there would still be time for a break, similar to the break the players get.
It’s not complicated. But it also wouldn’t be cheap. The job would have to pay enough to get the officials to move to the city the NFL chooses to be the headquarters for all officials. To get them to give up other jobs that entail far less accountability, and thus a significantly reduced risk of termination.
The minimum salary for a first-year player in 2026 is $885,000, even if he never sets foot on the field during a game. The officials — who work every snap of every game — should get at least that much. For that kind of pay, the league would easily find a full slate of individuals who would make the commitment all players make. Move to a new city. Commit fully to one profession. Make that job not just the top priority but the only one.
It likely would require a transition period for many of the officials who have been operating for years under the part-time rules. The 17 referees, who have earned their white hats, would perhaps have lesser off-season requirements. And maybe they wouldn’t be required to move. (They could participate in the weekly in-season sessions by Zoom.)
For all new officials, however, the full-time rules would become the new reality. If you want to be an NFL official, this is how it works. And if the gig pays enough, the NFL would still be able to attract the best of the best.
Would it result in no mistakes ever being made? No. Would it create the impression that the NFL is doing everything it can to achieve perfection, even if perfection at all times is impossible? Absolutely.
And that would be a far better look than having a roster of officials who are treating officiating as a hobby that pays extremely well, as hobbies go.
The job is far too important to be second fiddle. It needs to be the only fiddle. At a time when the NFL and NFLRA are fiddling with the contours of the part-time profession, everyone with an interest in the integrity of the game should be demanding more.
The NFL and NFL Referees Association have ditched negotiations for public relations.
In response to Wednesday’s statement from the NFL Referees Association accusing the NFL of sending representatives without authority to this week’s failed bargaining session aimed at striking a new deal on a Collective Bargaining Agreement, the NFL has issued a new statement.
“We continue to focus on investing in accountability and performance in our officiating,” NFL executive V.P. Jeff Miller said. "[NFL Referees Association executive director] Scott [Green] and his team haven’t changed their approach in almost two years, continuing to demand raises at almost double the rates of the increases realized by the players over the course of this CBA and, in addition, millions of dollars in marketing fees that rank-and-file union members never see. We are ready to continue negotiations to reach a fair and reasonable agreement, but in the meantime, while the union refuses to engage in a meaningful way, we will continue to prepare for the expiration of the current agreement because we will be playing football in August.”
The league’s statement doesn’t address, in any way, the claim that the team sent by the NFL to Wednesday’s session, which ended more than a day, early lacked the ability to make concessions from the league’s existing position.
The good news is that the two sides have months to go until the 2026 season starts. The bad news is that they’ll likely take every minute of it to reach a new deal — and possibly then some.
Whatever the outcome, here’s hoping everyone realizes the stakes and comes to the table with the goal of striking a deal that works for both sides. Get in a room and lock the door. If necessary, use a mediator to preside over the talks.
But, again, the deadline will drive the ultimate action. Unless both sides can trust each other to operate in good faith now, there’s no chance a deal will be struck until later.
Much later.
The NFL has two different unions with which it must negotiate labor deals. The contract with the NFL Players Association covers five more seasons. The contract with the NFL Referees Association covers none.
With the rhetoric ramping up between the league and the NFLRA — and with the league making plans to lock out the officials and once again hire rank amateurs to work games at the highest levels of the sport — the NFLPA is paying attention.
“This is not just a labor issue between the league and officials,” the NFLPA said in a statement issued to PFT on Wednesday night. “This directly impacts the working conditions of our player members. We are closely monitoring the situation.”
The game officials are essentially the first responders when it comes to player safety. For low-level college officials and high-school officials who’ll get the replacement assignments, it’s too much to expect them to know the NFL’s rules, to apply the NFL’s rules, and to ensure that the NFL’s players are at all times protected.
The union’s statement meshes with recent comments made by incoming executive director JC Tretter with Pat McAfee.
“I’m going to talk to the refs’ union,” Tretter said. “I’ll talk to [Commissioner] Roger [Goodell], too. I’ve got to get an understanding and background information of what’s going on. They’re in negotiations now, so that’ll take time.”
Recent negotiations imploded prematurely on Wednesday; a planned two-day effort ended after the morning session on the first day. The NFL blames the officials. The NFLRA has pushed back, blaming the NFL for sending people to the meeting who lacked the authority to negotiate.
“We support unions getting what they deserve,” Tretter said. “We want to make sure the refs get taken care of and are treated fairly. We stand with all the other unions that are fighting in collective bargaining. So we would love to help them in any way possible.”
It’s a delicate balance. Both the NFLPA and NFLRA are eating at the same trough of total dollars. Already, the league has made noise about needing to look at the current salary cap formula based on rising expenses, since the NFL covers everything associated with presenting games from their half of the roughly 50-50 revenue split. If the NFLPA pushes too hard for the NFLRA to get more, the NFL may try to take something away from the players.
Still, it makes far more sense for the two unions to work together. They’re dealing with a collection of the most rich and powerful people in the world. They’re aggressive. They’re ruthless. They’ll “partner” with their players and game officials on their own terms.
As it relates to the negotiations between the NFL and NFLRA, it makes sense for Tretter to get up to speed on the actual issues. What’s the basis for the impasse? Who’s being reasonable? Who’s being unreasonable?
It requires cutting through the P.R. spin and getting to the nuts and bolts. What is fair? Each side will have its interpretation.
The bigger reality is that the broader officiating model is broken. The officials need to be full-time, year-round employees. Calling NFL games can’t be a part-time gig. It needs to be the only thing the game officials do.
The rest of the league treats it as the sole focus during the season, and throughout most of the offseason. The sport is too big, and the stakes are too high, for game officials to be treated as seasonal employees who spend four months balancing other jobs with a weekend trip to wherever their assigned games are.
The problem is that neither the NFL nor the NFLRA may want that. The rest of us should be demanding it.
The NFL Referees Association is finally fighting back.
With the NFL dominating the P.R. battle tied to the ongoing Collective Bargaining Agreement negotiations, the NFLRA had not responded in kind. On Wednesday, the union did.
The NFLRA issued a statement following the collapse of a planned two-day bargaining session on Wednesday morning.
“Today the NFLRA negotiating team showed up to what was supposed to be the start of a two-day session with the league to make progress towards a new Collective Bargaining Agreement,” the NFLRA said in a statement. “Unfortunately, it was soon clear that the NFL did not arrive with the same level of commitment.
“We offered a counter to the most recent proposal, which was rejected. We asked that they respond to our offer with the goal of making forward progress. We then learned that no one in their delegation was authorized to negotiate beyond their original proposal, and at that time they chose to leave, after less than half a day of talks.
“We have come to learn that this is a common negotiation tactic used by the league to seek unreasonable concessions, which we quickly communicated to our members. Though frustrating, it will not disrupt our union’s united position of achieving a fair deal.
“The NFLRA will continue to bring its dealmakers to the table to secure a CBA that is fair, recognizes the key role that NFL Officials play in the League’s success, and provides both sides with the long-term certainty that management, officials, coaches, players and fans deserve.”
It’s definitely not uncommon for a party to a negotiation to send an empty suit to the talks. And, yes, it makes it very difficult to make progress if the person doesn’t have the authority to make concessions as to the existing proposal.
We’ll ask the league for comment on this. And there’s a chance the two sides will agree to disagree. Still, something from the NFLRA is better than nothing, because if the NFLRA is going to say nothing, the NFL will be the one saying everything that the media and fans see.
