Quote:
Originally Posted by scrounge
Maybe they can, maybe they can't (but if it was that easy, they'd be doing it).
But in the top 10 list of things they'd do with extra money, more $ for another official would be somewhere near the 42rd thing. And why would you think it would - or should - be otherwise?
If you ran a team and had an extra $500, would you get new uniforms? Fix that scoreboard? Reduce 'pay to play' fees? Have a team party? Defray transportation costs? Decorate the gym? Replace those slick, old practice balls? Refurbish the locker room? Enhance the concession stand?
Or get an extra official? Who on earth would donate $ if they knew that was the reason? This is tilting at windmills.
|
Exactly. They don't have the money for a third official, but they have new uniforms ALL THE TIME. So it's not that they don't have the money, they'd rather spend it elsewhere.
I was in the room when the league I hire for voted to add a third official. There was a strong case made for it -- off-ball play , competitive hiring (we wouldn't hire the best if they could go work 3 elsewhere), and the fact that all the post-season was 3-person.
A lot of local conferences cut pay per official when they went to 3 officials. OTOH, our conference hasn't had an increase in almost 10 years, so we stayed the same and hope to raise things up slowly over the next 5 years. It's an interesting thing -- when you hire for the best schools / conferences (in terms of geography and level of play) you can actually get away with paying less. I need to be able to offer more to entice some of the better people to take dates. This is how it is when an association doesn't do the assigning, BTW.
(BTW, those who would rather work 2-person and make more money are free to go elsewhere.)