Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Nevadaref
So what makes up the other approx 7/8? Is it stuff that all officials may score similarly on or get the maximum score from? If so, then isn't this last bit what separates the officials and makes the difference in the selections for postseason?
|
Illinois has a 40 point rating system with only 5 points dedicated to ratings from coaches (combined with certified official's ratings). For example I bet in the past week I will receive more certified official's ratings than coach's ratings. Things like rankings, Top 15 percentile and test scores make up that rating. And if you are worried about one coach that you might not see again for 2 years then in my opinion you are worrying too much. I received about 70 ratings last year in Boy's basketball alone. The percentile involves a 2 year cycle so you can add about another 50 ratings the year before. And our rating system is based on the more ratings you get. For example if an official gets 5, number 1 ratings for the year is not going to be as well off as someone gets 50 number 3 ratings. So I want the coaches to rate me even if they give me what is called a bad rating.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Nevadaref
Of course, I don't know that specifics of Illinois and really don't want to, but the logic of this argument would apply to anywhere that used coaches' ratings as a part of the officials ranking. One must examine closely how much of an impact it has, even if it is only a small percentage. That small number could be the difference maker.
|
It might not apply if coaches ratings are the only area that get you post season assignments. In some areas the coaches pick the officials for the post season assignments (Texas Football is an example of this). My point was our system is not as ridged based on what a coach rates you. Making calls because a coach might be upset (around here) should not even be a factor in how you call the game or interact with a coach.
Peace