Quote:
|
Originally Posted by bgtg19
Who said anything about making officials' jobs "dependent" on coaches' ratings? I attempted to make clear that, while I think coaches should have a voice, it should not be the loudest voice at all.
And it's certainly not the same logic. Officials are independent contractors who move around from location to location. The reason why we have "ratings" is so that people who are responsible for our playoff assignments -- people who often do not know us and/or do not see us work very often -- can make judgments about us using some method, even if an imperfect one. Coaches, on the other hand, continuously are in one location and are (or should be) constantly evaluated by one person, the athletic director.
Even though it is not the same logic, I do think your suggestion is a good one. Although our input might receive relatively minor weighting in the decision, I do think officials feedback about Ooaches might be helpful as a piece in the A.D.'s evaluation.  |
I don't care what kind of voice that you think coaches should have. The great majority are not competent and knowledgable enough to rate officials, and their ratings will
always be linked to the success of their team.
How about letting the fans rate us then? They have exactly the same objectives as the coaches. They basically just want to see their team win. They're also about as knowledgable and competent as the vast percentage of coaches when it comes to the criteria needed to evaluate and rate officials properly.
In more than a few states, post-season assignments are at least partially based on coaches ratings. Well, that's completely ludicrous imo. If an official's post-season participation depends on the whims of coaches, then it's just as reasonable that we should have some say in the coach's participation also. That's as logical as what you're proposing.
We disagree completely philosophically, and always will.