Association/Board Issues

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by SC Official

In my association's most recent development, we spent half our meeting tonight talking about Arbiter blocks, ZIP codes, scrimmages, and Thanksgiving tournaments. When we were supposed to be discussing Rules 9 and 10 the entire time.

Based on all I have read about your state run association, they need to go ahead and make their officials employees since they want to control every facet of their officiating careers.

If I were a college official in SC, my only HS officiating would be for the private schools. I would tell the state public schools association to kick rocks.

[WhistlesAndStripes]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

If I were a college official in SC, my only HS officiating would be for the private schools. I would tell the state public schools association to kick rocks.

I prefer telling them to pound sand, so as to reduce the likelihood of an injury that they blame on me.

[JRutledge]

1. Getting people to come to the business meetings to discuss our financial situations.

2. Getting people to participate like give presentations and run for positions.

3. Trying to keep younger officials to keep officiating.

Our associations do not assign per say so they are getting training mostly in our meetings, not getting games or having the leadership require any things to get games.

Peace

[BatteryPowered]

Originally Posted by SC Official

Losing younger officials to college.

My first thought when I saw this was something I heard soon after I took a management position the first time in real life: "The only thing worse than training someone and losing them is not training them and keeping them."

There is a lot less complaining in our association now that the assignor forces college officials to work the required minimum number of HS games to get a playoff assignment.

[JRutledge]

Those who say you are losing guys to college, how many college games can those young guys really get anyway? We have guys around here that do college, but even some of the better guys that have not reached D1 do not get really anymore than 20 to 25 college games. I would not want to work only that amount of games for my entire season.

Peace

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Those who say you are losing guys to college, how many college games can those young guys really get anyway? We have guys around here that do college, but even some of the better guys that have not reached D1 do not get really anymore than 20 to 25 college games. I would not want to work only that amount of games for my entire season.

Peace

Yes, that's an aspect that is forgotten. Last year was my most prolific college season, working 15 NCAA and 10 JuCo games during the season, plus a JuCo post-season game. My JuCo lost one of the 3 teams local to my area. So though it appears my final NCAA schedule will increase, my JuCo schedule will decrease. I will still have quite a bit of availability for my main HS association, especially on weekdays.

If I were to get to a point that I was working more than 25 college game (JuCo & NCAA), I would stop working HS and volunteer to be an evaluator and fill-in in cases of emergency.

[SC Official]

I hope I don't offend people when I say this. We have a bunch of bitter old geezers (and some not so old officials) in our state who think they should be entitled to get "quality assignments" rather than having to earn them. Our rating system is such that an official's ratings by his peers counts 25% of the total rating. As you can guess, it's not hard or uncommon for these officials to give poor peer ratings out of spite for a younger official or an official that works college basketball–and that harms those officials significantly. The "extreme" ratings (highest/lowest) are not dropped, either, so if you get one "failing" rating by a peer, it's not going anywhere.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by SC Official

I hope I don't offend people when I say this. We have a bunch of bitter old geezers (and some not so old officials) in our state who think they should be entitled to get "quality assignments" rather than having to earn them. Our rating system is such that an official's ratings by his peers counts 25% of the total rating. As you can guess, it's not hard or uncommon for these officials to give poor peer ratings out of spite for a younger official or an official that works college basketball–and that harms those officials significantly. The "extreme" ratings (highest/lowest) are not dropped, either, so if you get one "failing" rating by a peer, it's not going anywhere.

I can believe it. I got into officiating late (37), but after my first year I knew I wanted one day to be a college official. So I had the unique vantage point of an old geezer being treated like a young "hotshot" by some of my HS colleagues. I worked my first NCAA game at the age of 44.

So I am one to speak in defense of, and support, those young guys who have college aspirations. They keep me on my toes and I find them to be assets to my HS associations.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

That bolded portion easily takes care of the problem.

Agree.

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Also, blame the assignor, not the official, for the italicized portion. "Teddy V, if you want to work play-off games, you have to give us at least ## regular season games."

Not really. The assignor has no such control on an official getting a state playoff spot if they get the minimum. The assignor doesn't control the minimum number nor does he control the state level assignments.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Agree.


Not really. The assignor has no such control on an official getting a state playoff spot if they get the minimum. The assignor doesn't control the state level assignments.

In VA, there are a whole bunch of play-off games that come before the state tourney. And the assignors submit names from their association whom they want considered by the VHSL commissioner. VHSL only assigns state-level quarters, semi's, & finals.