|
I just recently stumbled across this forum. I wish I would've found it back when this topic was originally discussed. In Missouri, we are rated by the coaches. When I got my ratings from the pervious year, I was irate! My rating dropped (for the bad) by almost .5 points. Missouri uses 1-5 scale, one being playoff/championship quality, 2 district, 3 varsity, 4 JV and below, and 5 time to hang up the whistle (that is my definition for 5). They also check you in 9 different categories for needs improvement. Things like rules knowledge, poise, hustle, appearance, etc. After reading the State's definitions for these categories, the language is VERY loaded. Poise for instance, I got like four coaches that checked I need to improve on that. Well you look at the definition of poise, one word they use is maturity. I was 27 during last season. That was my 9th year officiating football, 8th doing varsity contests. On my crew, I was the youngest by 11 years. Do you think the word "maturity" might have stuck in the coaches' heads?
All in all, I do not think there is a "perfect" system. I think coaches should be allowed some feedback, but I wish the feedback provided was specific. Identify specific points, don't just dump it under some heading. Plus, guys on the wings and the R will always have lower ratings because they have the most contact with the coaches.
Feedback from coaches is a key part of becoming a better official. Granted, we all will have to take their comments with a grain of salt, but I think there is some, albeit small, value in coachesÂ’ observations.
|