December 18, 2007

Mike Huguenin
Rivals.com College Football Editor

MORE: Official misconduct: Official's background raises questions | Wetzel: Big Ten blew it big time

Anyone over the age of, oh, 15 knows all about perception and how it often becomes reality.

Heck, in some cases, what is thought to be (i.e., perception) actually becomes more important than what is (i.e., reality).

That's why sports leagues on every level ? from T-ball to the NFL ? obsess so much over officiating. There is a sacred trust, of sorts, surrounding officials and sports. That's why when the folks making sure the rules are followed are perceived to be less than honest, there's a taint surrounding the outcome.

That's why the scandal surrounding NBA ref Tim Donaghy over the summer was such a blow to the league's image.

It's hard not to think of the Donaghy situation when reading about Big Ten football official Stephen Pamon. No, there are no specific gambling allegations surrounding Pamon. But there seem to be numerous character flaws ? the man admitted beating children with an extension cord, for god's sake ? and those flaws coupled with some on-field issues with Pamon and his crew leave you scratching your head as to why this guy remains a Big Ten official.

You can be assured that coaches, fans and school administrators are thinking back about games officiated by Pamon and starting the "I wonder ?" games.

Maybe there was a controversial pass-interference call by his crew, or one involving a third-and-1 ball placement that seemed a little off. Regardless, past calls now will be re-examined.

And what about future calls? Can you imagine the uproar if a Pamon-led crew, for instance, called a roughing-the-passer penalty on a key third down, or tossed a flag and called holding 10 yards behind the runner on a punt return for a TD?

Hey, maybe the calls ? past and future ? would prove to be legit. But if the perception exists that there was something untoward about the calls, you risk that "sacred trust" being broken.

Frankly, you wish the Big Ten would answer questions about Pamon ? specifically, were background checks done, and, if so, how he passed.

It's hard to imagine red flags not being raised by even a cursory background check. If there weren't red flags, you have to wonder what kind of background check was done.

And if there were red flags, why was he allowed to remain a Big Ten official? If there's an official with as many off-field issues as Pamon, why in the world is he representing your conference on the field?

MORE: Official misconduct: Official's background raises questions | Wetzel: Big Ten blew it big time

Mike Huguenin is the college sports editor for Rivals.com. He can be reached at mhuguenin@rivals.com.