I'd say, 60 hours a week in season....of film review and game situation testing...10-12 hours a day...integrity of the game is at stake...no stone should be left unturned....maybe 5-10 hours of some type of physical training, eye training too...be in shape to make crucial calls, have your eyes ready to see said calls....and definitely 40+ hours a week off-season...review new changes and implement them in the training room, & maybe get involved with a lessor league (arena/lingerie /something) lol...seriously....integrity of the game is at stake...full time work to improve the product....it'll never be perfect, but they can strive to eliminate the obvious blown calls that damage the product & effect the game in a negative manner...
Like, are they reviewing their games TODAY with senior official, correcting & critiquing what mistakes were made? Telling them okay, this was done properly? Is there any fear of replacement? What are the penalties for continual substandard work? Just curious, thanks for your insider opinion...
WOW,,, so you think staring at a computer screen, or monitor for 8-10 hours a day is going to help their vision? LOL In what other profession are "employees" expected to "train" for 10 hours a day, to perform a 3 hour "job" once a week? Not to mention the logistics of bringing 150+ officials in for a 7 day work week. Are you suggesting they all be required to relocate to have the privilege of performing this job? I certainly hope you are not somebody's "boss" if this is your idea of fair work conditions. (that was a joke)
As to your question about them reviewing the games, I guarantee they are getting graded, and briefed on anything that happened in each game this week. I get the frustration, but this is simply overkill. People seem to be acting like these guys just get out of bed, and get on a plane the day of the game, and go work the game, then go back to their "day jobs", and then repeat the process next week.
I don't know of ANY profession that would require that sort of "training", including the PLAYERS who play the game.
As far as penalties for "substandard" performance. They are evaluated and graded on every play, whether they make a call or not. They are required to submit a review of any questionable plays, again, whether it was in their coverage area or not. Each official has a different mechanic and responsibility on every play. As far as "fear of replacement", they deal with that every week. At the end of each season, they are ranked by position, and if they are ranked in the bottom at their positions in consecutive years, they are not retained. Contrary to public opinion, there is turnover of the staff every year.
Guys gets "promoted" or switch positions and are usually moved to different crews. But to think there is no accountability for them, is just plain wrong. It seems people are of the assumption that the Union protects these officials, and makes them untouchable. That is not the case. They negotiate contracts, and as part of that contract, there is an evaluation program put it place. They are also there, to monitor the communications between the league and the individual officials. If the league tries to fine, or suspend an official, the Union is apprised of the reasons, and ensures due process is met. But they are not there to guarantee employment. They also monitor any public commentary made by the league, and that includes players, coaches, and league officials. And the NFL isn't the only league that does this. Why do you think that the penalties (fines) are so severe for publicly criticizing officials? And that applies to all sports, professional or otherwise.
I still maintain this is not a personnel problem as much as it is a league problem, based on the way they want the game officiated. The RULES are the problem here, not the officiating. It's the way the league wants the game to change, all in the name of safety, and they are more than willing to "tolerate" the perception that the officiating is substandard, as opposed to put the league at further risk of lawsuit.
The changes that have been made, and the way they instruct the officials to "error on the side of caution" has made these guys flag happy when there is any doubt that a "safety" penalty has occurred. It appears to be worse than it ever was, because of the technology behind the replays, and the shear number of plays that end being questioned.