Wanna bet? Will transparency come to NFL officiating???
Sean Payton predicts UFL-style officiating transparency within “two or three years”
Published July 13, 2026 10:36 AM
We’ve argued in the past that the NFL should embrace the transparency the UFL brings to officiating. A member of the NFL’s Competition Committee believes it will.
“And I think every once in a while the benefit of this other league we have, I think quite honestly it’s been helpful for our league,” Broncos coach Sean Payton recently told Jason La Canfora of SportsBoom.com. “Every once in a while you see something you like, and I think Dean Blandino and his crew, when we kick live right to the booth review, I think that’s healthy. And I think you’ll see that in the next two or three years in our league.”
As Blandino told Rich Eisen in April, transparency in officiating “eliminates some of the angst and some of maybe the conspiracy theories.” Keeping the review process a state secret makes people think the NFL has something to hide — especially when the UFL and a growing number of college conferences have pulled up the shades and thrown the doors open.
In this age of legalized, normalized, and heavily monetized sports betting, it’s important not only to get calls right but to create the perception that they’re doing everything they can to get calls right.
“I definitely think you’ll see that coming,” Payton said. “I think it’s healthy, and it’s certainly comforting for the fan when you can see how they arrive at decisions. And I think it’s fair, especially to the officials and the people doing the review, to see what we arrived at.”
Yes, Payton is just one voice. But he’s not alone.
“I think a number of people feel the same way,” Payton added.
While there will be logistical challenges, especially during the controlled chaos coming from the cluster of 1:00 p.m. ET kickoffs on every given Sunday, it makes sense to create the infrastructure to both handle reviews efficiently and accurately, and to communicate the information transparently.
Please God, just one Lombardi before I die.
what you wanna bet they still fuck it up? i can see them using bad logic or some other way to still get the calls screwed up when it matters most, or they will make up a rule on the spot which they seem to do from time to time.
Why isn't Chuck Foreman in the Hall of Fame?
I guess I don't understand what they mean by transparency. I wouldn't be surprised if they are more transparent about some things, but what rigs games is always going to be subjective calls like offensive/defensive holding or pass interference. 1-2 free first downs that continue a drive vs 1-2 cancelled first downs that kill a drive is enough to swing a game more often than not. How are they going to be transparent when "this amount of contact" was not pass interference on most plays in the game, but on this play it was and it gave the offense a free FG with a chance for a TD and then for the other other team, the same amount of holding that happens on every play, happened on this play, but it was actually called reversing a 17 yard play into a -10 yard play?
Like pretty much any PI on a 40 yard throw is an automatic 3 points, which is a lot given how many single score games there are.
medaille wrote:
I guess I don't understand what they mean by transparency. I wouldn't be surprised if they are more transparent about some things, but what rigs games is always going to be subjective calls like offensive/defensive holding or pass interference. 1-2 free first downs that continue a drive vs 1-2 cancelled first downs that kill a drive is enough to swing a game more often than not. How are they going to be transparent when "this amount of contact" was not pass interference on most plays in the game, but on this play it was and it gave the offense a free FG with a chance for a TD and then for the other other team, the same amount of holding that happens on every play, happened on this play, but it was actually called reversing a 17 yard play into a -10 yard play?
Like pretty much any PI on a 40 yard throw is an automatic 3 points, which is a lot given how many single score games there are.
“You’re gonna see myself [and] Mike Pereira, in the command center, you’re gonna be able to hear what we’re saying,” Blandino said. “You’re gonna be able to hear what the officials are saying. You might not always agree with the decision, but you’re gonna understand why.
“And I think that kind of eliminates some of the angst and some of maybe the conspiracy theories and all that other stuff where it’s just people going through a process, trying to make a decision, and you’re gonna hear all of it and see everything. And I think that helps. I think the NFL could do more of that.”
"The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those who speak it”
It'll never be enough for some fans. The NFL chasing its tail for conspiracy fans is silly. This won't stop the very small minority in believing whatever it is they want to believe. Just like they faked the moon landing, they'll use AI to fake conversations with New York. 😉
StickierBuns wrote:
It'll never be enough for some fans. The NFL chasing its tail for conspiracy fans is silly. This won't stop the very small minority in believing whatever it is they want to believe. Just like they faked the moon landing, they'll use AI to fake conversations with New York. 😉
I think the NFL likes the conspiracy angles because it is another easy click bait attention getter. I don't see them going away from it because it drives interest.
Just like the whole WNBA/CC drama. They aren't going to fix it because it drives interest. People arguing about it has actually made the WNBA almost relevant.
StickierBuns wrote:
It'll never be enough for some fans. The NFL chasing its tail for conspiracy fans is silly. This won't stop the very small minority in believing whatever it is they want to believe. Just like they faked the moon landing, they'll use AI to fake conversations with New York. 😉
The touchdown pass from Neil Armstrong to Buzz Aldrin in that lunar crater was rigged, Rigged I tells ya!!
StickierBuns wrote:
It'll never be enough for some fans. The NFL chasing its tail for conspiracy fans is silly. This won't stop the very small minority in believing whatever it is they want to believe. Just like they faked the moon landing, they'll use AI to fake conversations with New York. 😉
speaking of conspiracy nuts... I can prove the world isnt flat..... know how I know? because if the world was flat, cats would have pushed every fucking thing off the edge of it by now. 🤣
Why isn't Chuck Foreman in the Hall of Fame?
The one comment that stuck out at me was the growth of gambling and betting sites, as a key reason to move toward adopting the UFL system of reviewing penalties.
Please God, just one Lombardi before I die.
Montana Tom wrote:
The one comment that stuck out at me was the growth of gambling and betting sites, as a key reason to move toward adopting the UFL system of reviewing penalties.
so the league kept itself as far away from gambling as possible for as long as it did, now we got a team in Vegas and they are looking at making operational changes to placate to the industry.... my how fast they grow up.
Why isn't Chuck Foreman in the Hall of Fame?
JimmyinSD wrote:
so the league kept itself as far away from gambling as possible for as long as it did, now we got a team in Vegas and they are looking at making operational changes to placate to the industry.... my how fast they grow up.
Yeah, gambling on the NFL hasn't been around very long. 😂
MaroonBells wrote:
“You’re gonna see myself [and] Mike Pereira, in the command center, you’re gonna be able to hear what we’re saying,” Blandino said. “You’re gonna be able to hear what the officials are saying. You might not always agree with the decision, but you’re gonna understand why.
“And I think that kind of eliminates some of the angst and some of maybe the conspiracy theories and all that other stuff where it’s just people going through a process, trying to make a decision, and you’re gonna hear all of it and see everything. And I think that helps. I think the NFL could do more of that.”
Sorry I was being a little obtuse on purpose. I just don't think them talking outloud about a handful of plays that are obvious to everyone is going to change things. I imagine that they're going to explain what a catch is, and is his foot in bounds before he got possession. What I don't imagine that they're going to do is look into whether the holding a certain ref allowed or called is to the league standard on how much holding is allowed. They're not going to say things like, "Hey they've been letting the DBs mug the WRs all game but on this play, they called the PI for much less contact and it cost the team the game, and we should investigate whether or not the ref should be suspended.
People are going to make compilation videos of every snap a RT does in a game and whether or not the ref was consistent on what they called holding or how much of a false start was acceptable. I don't think we're far off from somebody building an AI that can detect referee consistency and it will be like the MLB where this ump screws up the call 14% of the time, and the analytics guys will start being able to say that Billy Bob has cost the home team 6 points and the away team 2 points based on which down and distance it happened on.
StickierBuns wrote:
Yeah, gambling on the NFL hasn't been around very long. 😂
from the leagues front office, its a completely new thing for them to embrace over the last couple years. how many times did we hear the league wouldnt allow an expansion or relocation to vegas?
now they are likely ready to let teams put casino or gambling site logos on their jerseys.
Why isn't Chuck Foreman in the Hall of Fame?
medaille wrote:
Sorry I was being a little obtuse on purpose. I just don't think them talking outloud about a handful of plays that are obvious to everyone is going to change things. I imagine that they're going to explain what a catch is, and is his foot in bounds before he got possession. What I don't imagine that they're going to do is look into whether the holding a certain ref allowed or called is to the league standard on how much holding is allowed. They're not going to say things like, "Hey they've been letting the DBs mug the WRs all game but on this play, they called the PI for much less contact and it cost the team the game, and we should investigate whether or not the ref should be suspended.
People are going to make compilation videos of every snap a RT does in a game and whether or not the ref was consistent on what they called holding or how much of a false start was acceptable. I don't think we're far off from somebody building an AI that can detect referee consistency and it will be like the MLB where this ump screws up the call 14% of the time, and the analytics guys will start being able to say that Billy Bob has cost the home team 6 points and the away team 2 points based on which down and distance it happened on.
I think they were talking only about plays that are reviewed. I'm not aware of this changing which plays or calls are reviewable.
"The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those who speak it”
Edit Post (mod action — author will see a notice)
Warn Poster
Suspend User (3 days)
The user will be suspended for 3 days and will receive an email with the reason and information about how to appeal.