|
This is a very good discussion. FWIW, I hate coach rating systems, but sometimes that's the only way to get a good evaluation sample size if there just aren't enough professional evaluators on the state staff. I would argue that coaches should be expected to submit evaluations for 'x'% of their games. That way, the coaches who don't meet that minimum would have their evaluations removed. And/or....you could exclude coach evaluations whose season averages are > one standard deviation above or below the mean. That way, the guys who always put "5" and the guys who always put "0" are not factored.
I kind of like the approach Rich took. If you stop caring about post-season assignments, you have the freedom to call your regular season games without looking over your shoulder so much. That's very liberating. Worked for me last year as a new guy in a new state when I knew I wasn't going to even sniff the post-season. When I saw a few of my buddies drive 150 miles to work a 1/16 first round blowout with a final score of 76-13 and a paycheck of about $15 more than a regular season game, I realized the Friday night conference rivalry nutcutter I had back in January was a heck of a lot more exciting to officiate.
|