NFL execs upset after Head of Officiating seen on Cowboys' party bus

[tk13]

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/writer/...-execs-say-yes

"That's definitely Dean," said an official with one club upon viewing the video, in which a man looking very much like Blandino, in jeans and a blue t-shirt, steps off the bus along with Stephen Jones, son of Jerry Jones, who serves as the Cowboys COO, EVP and director of player personnel, and who is a member of the highly influential competition committee. "Is the league trying to tell you it's not him? What is the league telling you guys about it? That looks horrible. I can't think of another owner in the league who wouldn't be pissed off after seeing that."

Well, frankly the league is saying nothing. After receiving no response from the NFL on Tuesday as to whether Blandino -- who routinely makes rounds visiting with officials and clubs during the preseason -- was in the video, I made a second round of inquiries into the matter Thursday. Two spokesmen declined to say anything for the record. But no one came close to denying it was Blandino in the video, and the league could point out that with Jones on the competition committee, it's not unusual for him to spend considerable time with competition committee members.

But it would beyond disingenuous, to the point of insulting the public and other NFL member clubs, for anyone from the NFL to have the gall to claim this was anything close to resembling official business. At one point in the video there are a host of young girls assembled on the bus, and the bus is pulled right up in front of a club on the Sunset Strip.

Blandino has done an excellent job in his position, and is engaged and dynamic. Coaches and GMs enjoy dealing with him, he is always available and accessible, works tirelessly, and provides cogent explanations and recommendations to teams and media alike. Everyone I spoke to about the video raved about Blandino as a person and an official, but those same people were flabbergasted by the idea of someone in his position out partying on a team bus with an owner.

At issue is the perception of potential favoritism by other clubs, and the way these images are being perceived around the league.

"So, should I have my owner take him to a strip club when he visits us?" asked one team official, hypothetically. "Is that how it works? We like Dean a lot, but let me tell you, if that was him out with (the owner of a rival of the club this official works for), my owner would be going nuts. This just can't happen.

---

An official from another club said: "It's total hypocrisy. This is a league where some people are above the law, but if you are a coach or a player or a low-level team employee, look out -- they'll throw the book at you. They take away your pension. I'll give Stephen credit, at least they took a bus. (Colts owner Jim) Irsay should have got a bus a long time ago. Have they gotten around to disciplining him yet?"

Another longtime team official: "Whether or not this would in any way affect Dean's ability to be impartial with the Cowboys is really not the issue. This gives the appearance of impropriety. If I am a fan of a team facing the Cowboys, or I work for a team that's facing the Cowboys, I'm upset by this. There shouldn't be any situation like this going on that could cloud his judgment. How is this protecting the shield? The league loves to throw that term around when it applies to players. So how is this not an issue now?"

Another veteran NFL official: "If I were another team owner, how could I not be irate? It gives the appearance of impropriety, and looks like a particularly cozy relationship between a team and the officiating department at a time when instant replay is being taken over more and more by the league office. You're damn right I'd be irate."

[rabblerouser]

Originally Posted by MagicHef

No, it's not, which I showed by quoting the rulebook 5 posts ago.

And I responded to that with a question.

[MagicHef]

Originally Posted by rabblerouser

Did he have his helmet off while confronting the officials (about the play that he wasn't even on the field for)??

Um... yes.

[rabblerouser]

Originally Posted by DaFace

Na, it's always been that you can't remove it as a player on the field. It's not a penalty to put a foot on the field without a helmet.

What about confronting the officials about a play you weren't even on the field for??

I'm just saying, if Todd Haley got an unsportsmanlike against the Jets for dropping an f-bomb, then Dez easily gets a 15 yarder in Dallas on Sunday.

Read his lips on the replay.

[rabblerouser]

Originally Posted by MagicHef

Um... yes.

You don't agree that is unsportsmanlike? ?

You must be a Cowboys fan

[Mr. Laz]

There is a 'get back' coach for a reason.


Players that aren't in the game aren't supposed to cross the white line.


A player without a helmet is clearly not in the game or getting ready to sub into the game.

At the very least the Ref should have given the bench a warning.

I believe it's a unsportmanlike conduct penalty for bench personnel crossing onto the field.

[DaFace]

Originally Posted by rabblerouser

What about confronting the officials about a play you weren't even on the field for??

I'm just saying, if Todd Haley got an unsportsmanlike against the Jets for dropping an f-bomb, then Dez easily gets a 15 yarder in Dallas on Sunday.

Read his lips on the replay.

The gripe about defensive holding is legit. The gripe about the lack of a PI call is arguable. The gripe about how it was all handled is legit.

The gripe about Dez isn't valid. Players are allowed to gripe about calls as long as they aren't being abusive toward the officials. That's all there is to it.

[MagicHef]

Originally Posted by rabblerouser

What about confronting the officials about a play you weren't even on the field for??

Not a penalty.

Originally Posted by rabblerouser

I'm just saying, if Todd Haley got an unsportsmanlike against the Jets for dropping an f-bomb, then Dez easily gets a 15 yarder in Dallas on Sunday.

Read his lips on the replay.

So now we're changing the reason for the penalty, now it should be for language? Do you have any evidence to show what he said?

[rabblerouser]

Originally Posted by MagicHef

Not a penalty.



So now we're changing the reason for the penalty, now it should be for language? Do you have any evidence to show what he said?

I don't, just lip reading. I think Dez got a pass for a reason.

Let's say, that if roles were reversed and it had been Suh coming on the field from the sidelines with no helmet, then the refs throw the flag.

It's a judgement call, I get that.

As for the PI...It's offensive AND defensive :



Should've been offsetting and replay the down at LEAST.

Detroit got robbed.

[rabblerouser]

Originally Posted by Mr. Laz

There is a 'get back' coach for a reason.


Players that aren't in the game aren't supposed to cross the white line.


A player without a helmet is clearly not in the game or getting ready to sub into the game.

At the very least the Ref should have given the bench a warning.

I believe it's a unsportmanlike conduct penalty for bench personnel crossing onto the field.

It is.

Or was.

[MagicHef]

Originally Posted by Mr. Laz

There is a 'get back' coach for a reason.


Players that aren't in the game aren't supposed to cross the white line.


A player without a helmet is clearly not in the game or getting ready to sub into the game.

At the very least the Ref should have given the bench a warning.

I believe it's a unsportmanlike conduct penalty for bench personnel crossing onto the field.

Nope, the refs have no say as to which personnel Dallas gets to have on the field, Dez could have been running on to take part in the next play. The fact that he obviously wasn't is still subjective, and doesn't matter. Dez did not break any rule.

[rabblerouser]

Originally Posted by MagicHef

Nope, the refs have no say as to which personnel Dallas gets to have on the field, Dez could have been running on to take part in the next play. The fact that he obviously wasn't is still subjective, and doesn't matter. Dez did not break any rule.

[Pasta Little Brioni]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

You are telling me any player can walk off the sidelines to argue with a ref in the middle of the field and it isn't a penalty? Everyone and their uncle has agreed it can be a penalty at the discretion of the ref.

Yup. Hef is wrong again....like usual. THE HEAD OF OFFICIATING said it COULD have been called, but let's listen to a bronco fan that doesn't watch games. That's why they should burn the rule book. Too many interpretations make the game completely unfair as they just make calls when they see fit.

[DaFace]

Originally Posted by Pasta Giant Meatball

Yup. Hef is wrong again....like usual. THE HEAD OF OFFICIATING said it COULD have been called, but let's listen to a bronco fan that doesn't watch games.

You guys are reaching here. He's never said it COULDN'T be a penalty - only that being on the field without a helmet on isn't grounds for it.

[Pasta Little Brioni]

Not at all. It very much could have been called. He said in that particular play Dez could have been penalized. The rulebook is a joke.

[MagicHef]

Originally Posted by Pasta Giant Meatball

Yup. Hef is wrong again....like usual. THE HEAD OF OFFICIATING said it COULD have been called, but let's listen to a bronco fan that doesn't watch games. That's why they should burn the rule book. Too many interpretations make the game completely unfair as they just make calls when they see fit.

If you read post #86, you'll see that I also say the the ref could have flagged Dez. In fact, my opinion in that post is basically identical to Blandino's:

"It's not an automatic penalty," Blandino noted. "It's the officials' discretion whether they felt that he was out on the field confronting them in an unsportsmanlike way. In that situation, the officials had some discretion and they felt that it didn't warrant a penalty. They just moved him back onto the sideline. If they had flagged him, I'd support it, but it's not an automatic."

Also, I think you're confusing me with Knowmo. I watch football.