Wanted, Reward, Dead Or Alive ...

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by SC Official

As it relates to officials not being able to get off work early enough for early start times, that's the schools' problem as far as I am concerned. Eventually they're going to have to spread out their schedules so that games aren't starting before 5:30-6:00. But of course, that would require administrators to work more and more transportation costs and other logistical challenges that schools don't want. But again, tell me why those should be the officials' problems.

No one should sacrifice his/her real job to work subvarsity basketball like so many of these schools seem to think. Not all positions have flexible hours for employees, and that's not going to change just because there's an officials shortage.

I totally agree with this. Later times would help in many situations for officials. It is easier for varsity officials when your game is the main focus.

Peace

[ilyazhito]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I totally agree with this. Later times would help in many situations for officials. It is easier for varsity officials when your game is the main focus.

Peace

Me too. And we wonder why we lose so many younger officials before they could possibly work varsity games. First, they often get mistreated at the middle school and subvarsity games that they do work. Second, the games they do work can be as early as 2:30 in the afternoon. This can be a problem for people who have jobs, because not everyone can work a job with flexible hours or use leave time to work early games. Students may be able to work early games, depending on class times, but not those who have real jobs.

If we can support newer officials for at least the first 3 years of their careers, give them training and development opportunities to prepare them for the varsity level (with occasional varsity assignments toward the end of the program), and ensure that games are scheduled at realistic times (not earlier than 4:30 PM for a subvarsity game), then we might see more young officials stay, and avert the shortages. And let's not forget the ladies, y'all. If we can have both men and women in stripes, we might go a long way to solving the problem of having enough officials. EBO is almost 1/5 female (7 women for ~55 officials).

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

Me too. And we wonder why we lose so many younger officials before they could possibly work varsity games. First, they often get mistreated at the middle school and subvarsity games that they do work. Second, the games they do work can be as early as 2:30 in the afternoon. This can be a problem for people who have jobs, because not everyone can work a job with flexible hours or use leave time to work early games. Students may be able to work early games, depending on class times, but not those who have real jobs.

Who the hell is starting games at 2:30 PM on a weekday? That's insane. That's before school lets out in most districts. We rarely have games before 5:30 here, and if we do it's more like 5:00 which is still reasonable. But schools are also only playing 2 games/night more often than not.

And I would never use PTO to work anything lower than an NCAA D1 game; I'd give back the game if I had no other choice. Using PTO for a subvarsity game is unthinkable to me.

[ilyazhito]

Baseball games have started as early as 2:30 in my experience. I have had to work a 2:45 private middle school basketball game, and public middle school basketball games in Montgomery County are scheduled to start at 3:15 PM (most usually start around 3:20). However, JV basketball games are at 4 PM (DCIAA) or later, with the varsity game (or games) following at 6:00 or later (MCPS does 5:30/7:15 for the JV/varsity schedule, DC has 4 PM JV/6 PM Girls Varsity/8 PM Boys Varsity. Private schools have Freshman/JV/Varsity with the 1st game starting around 4, or JV/Varsity with the first game at 5/5:30 PM).

Even though most subvarsity officials will never work varsity, I still believe that a valid approach for training would be to treat all officials in training as if they had varsity potential, and then choose the best of those in training to be added to the current varsity staff, with the next tier doing spot varsity assignments as needed. In this way, advancement would become more objective than subjective, because there would be evaluations of officials working, rules exams, practical tests, and other objective criteria to rank officials.

I wouldn't say that varsity officials do not work subvarsity games when available to do so, because their input would be very useful to the newer official that has a subvarsity schedule (I don't know how useful that would be to the veteran subvarsity official (5+ years with no varsity experience)). However, later start times would make sense for working officials, especially if the games are spread over a wide geographic area and travel is required.

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

Even though most subvarsity officials will never work varsity, I still believe that a valid approach for training would be to treat all officials in training as if they had varsity potential, and then choose the best of those in training to be added to the current varsity staff, with the next tier doing spot varsity assignments as needed. In this way, advancement would become more objective than subjective, because there would be evaluations of officials working, rules exams, practical tests, and other objective criteria to rank officials.

I wouldn't say that varsity officials do not work subvarsity games when available to do so, because their input would be very useful to the newer official that has a subvarsity schedule (I don't know how useful that would be to the veteran subvarsity official (5+ years with no varsity experience)). However, later start times would make sense for working officials, especially if the games are spread over a wide geographic area and travel is required.

Advancement is always going to be subjective to a certain extent. The majority of officials think they are better than they are, better than the evaluations they receive indicate. And that includes officials working primarily subvarsity basketball. There's no reason to opine about a Utopia of fairness because there will always be officials who think the deck is stacked against them.

Many varsity officials want nights off when they're not working varsity games. Completely reasonable; most of us have family, pets, jobs, etc. You can't force people to officiate.

Yes, later start times are very helpful, but ultimately it's up to the schools. For multiple reasons they don't want to do this; eventually they will be forced to.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

Even though most subvarsity officials will never work varsity, I still believe that a valid approach for training would be to treat all officials in training as if they had varsity potential, and then choose the best of those in training to be added to the current varsity staff, with the next tier doing spot varsity assignments as needed. In this way, advancement would become more objective than subjective, because there would be evaluations of officials working, rules exams, practical tests, and other objective criteria to rank officials.

My point was not about training. My point was that most will never become a varsity official largely because of their own doing. If you do not want to travel and like being done at 8:00 on a Friday, varsity is not going to be for many people in that category, let alone how much you train them. The point was that many officials like working at a certain level because they can get games close to their house or job and be home at a certain time. Varsity officials in my experience are much more likely to be asked to work in a larger area or for different conferences if they want a full schedule. Not the case in lower level games. When you add in all the mistreatment and problems with other issues, you make it harder to keep people as officials.

I belong to an association that I was asked to join because the leadership wanted to raise the level of officiating in that group. They wanted officials that worked the postseason and wanted to work the postseason. The association had a reputation of being the "Middle school officials association" because most of the membership really relished working middle school or junior high games. Even high school games for many was not a desire.

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

I wouldn't say that varsity officials do not work subvarsity games when available to do so, because their input would be very useful to the newer official that has a subvarsity schedule (I don't know how useful that would be to the veteran subvarsity official (5+ years with no varsity experience)). However, later start times would make sense for working officials, especially if the games are spread over a wide geographic area and travel is required.

At least here, many veterans that work subvarsity games which usually are not on a varsity night are because they either cannot advance or they are doing it for the quick money. If you are a veteran at the varsity level in high demand and you take advantage of that demand, then you are likely not working a lot of subvarsity contests. It is hard to do multiple days a week outside of the varsity contests when you have other obligations than high school sports.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

The point was that many officials like working at a certain level because they can get games close to their house or job and be home at a certain time. Varsity officials in my experience are much more likely to be asked to work in a larger area or for different conferences if they want a full schedule. Not the case in lower level games.

Great point. Connecticut is a small state, and I'm only in a little corner, so I'm not required to travel more than 55 miles (one way) for any of my varsity games.

Back in the day, when I did recreation, and travel, games, they were all in my hometown. Ten minute drives. Back when I was doing Catholic middle school games, they were all in towns adjacent to my hometown. Twenty minute drives. I worked these types of games both for the experience, and the money.

Back then, and now, I would never travel 55 miles (one way) to do a recreation, travel, or a Catholic middle school game. Especially when there were, and are, tons of these games available to work much closer to home.

I just choose not to work them. I've paid my dues. I've been around the block a few times. I've been to a few rodeos.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by SC Official

Who the hell is starting games at 2:30 PM on a weekday? That's before school lets out in most districts.

I thought same thing myself until I gave it more thought. In the school system in which I used to teach, the bell for end of the high school day rings at 2:05 p.m. Also, student athletes are often allowed to leave their last class early if they have a early afternoon road game.

Middle schools in my district often try to begin games at 3:15 p.m., when the final bell rings at 2:35 p.m.

No 2:30 p.m. starts, but it not very far fetched. Maybe possible, but highly improbable.

On the other hand, a few school systems here in Connecticut are contemplating the new scientific research (something about hormones and circadian rhythms) that says that teenagers don't function at full brain capacity until later in the morning (the high school in my district begins at 7:35 a.m.) no matter how many hours of sleep they get the night before. The research says to start high school later in the morning, thus ending the day later in the afternoon.

Problems for schools contemplating such a changes include transportation issues (high schoolers are normally picked up first, then the same buses pick up middle schoolers, and finally the same buses pick up elementary students), and the problems with interscholastic sports having to start later, with scheduling problems with other schools that have chosen not to start early, and problems with sunset interfering with spring/autumn outdoor sports that are not played under the lights.

[JRutledge]

Not all subvarsity officials are actually only working subvarsity. Many of the middle school games are done by veterans as they do not mind working those games. Many subvarsity only officials are also not going to work any varsity realistically in their career either. But you can schedule games that make it easier for those to work the games regardless of their position at that time. Unless someone has a flex schedule, works a different shift or in things like sales where you have access to change your schedule, many people are not available for a 4:00 game. And that does not include the people that have other issues with sportsmanship or putting up with the demands of officiating.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Not all subvarsity officials are actually only working subvarsity. Many of the middle school games are done by veterans as they do not mind working those games.

That's me, or it will be me soon. I just retired from my "day job" as a chemist. I've decided to make self available for 3:30 p.m. middle school games, and 4:00 p.m. freshman games. Not a full schedule, just between my varsity games, but enough to help my assigner out, and to work with inexperienced officials as an unofficial mentor/evaluator (I'm a retried teacher, it's in my blood).

Can't ignore this aspect, now that I'm on "fixed income", the extra cash will help a little.

I'm going to be one of my assigners favorite officials. I wonder what he'll get me for Christmas?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

... we wonder why we lose so many younger officials before they could possibly work varsity games.

Here, in my little corner of Connecticut, we used to have some strict local "years of service" rules regarding moving up the ladder. No matter how good an official was, they had to wait a minimum of seven years to get a full varsity schedule.

One year as an IAABO working "cadet". Three additional years as a subvarsity official. And three additional years as a "split' official, working both subvarsity, and varsity games. After waiting seven years, if one was evaluated as good enough, one would finally get a full varsity schedule in the eighth year.

No more. Our new local system involves observations by trained evaluators, so if one is good enough, one can work varsity games right away.

Now, fewer competent, proficient officials are "dropping out" after waiting for varsity games. It was a good change, a necessary change.

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I thought same thing myself until I gave it more thought...

I feel no sympathy for schools that can't find officials for ridiculously early start times. They need to realize that no one is making a living officiating basketball.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Here, in my little corner of Connecticut, we used to have some strict local "years of service" rules regarding moving up the ladder...

In South Carolina you get five "experience points" in your rating for each of your first five years of experience until you reach the full 25 points. And until a couple years ago, it was seven years until you got full experience credit. The current system is such that an official likely won't sniff a varsity game until at least his/her fourth year, and even that might be too optimistic. And all that is assuming the official performs well on the statewide exam. District directors can "accelerate" an official's experience but it's not done that often.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by SC Official

In South Carolina you get five "experience points" in your rating for each of your first five years of experience until you reach the full 25 points. The current system is such that an official likely won't sniff a varsity game until at least his/her fourth year, and even that might be too optimistic.

Do you have trouble "keeping" officials, or do they get impatient and move on?

We didn't know of any other way (a long wait for varsity games) so nobody complained until we merged (it was actually a hostile takeover) with another competing local association. Then the shit hit the fan. The merger agreement stipulated that the guys moving over from the other association would receive the same level and number of games as with their old association. Most of these guys (not all) were horrible officials who were getting full varsity schedules, while our competent, proficient guys with a few years of experience under their belts, were only getting subvarsity games.

It took a few years, with some hiccups, but we eventually came up with a better system that rewards competence, and proficiency, rather than a certain number of years experience.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by SC Official

In South Carolina you get five "experience points" in your rating for each of your first five years of experience until you reach the full 25 points. And until a couple years ago, it was seven years until you got full experience credit. The current system is such that an official likely won't sniff a varsity game until at least his/her fourth year, and even that might be too optimistic. And all that is assuming the official performs well on the statewide exam. District directors can "accelerate" an official's experience but it's not done that often.

That sounds about right. I've rarely seen a person that is ready for varsity in much less than that. Many think they are, but they're mistaken. There are, of course, exceptions, but they are just that exceptions.

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Do you have trouble "keeping" officials, or do they get impatient and move on?

Just depends on the area. We're certainly an "old" state overall and the shortage talk has come up, but the way varsity games are assigned prevents it from being too much of an issue as it relates to simply covering the games.

I know more than one official who got hired for college ball before getting his first varsity assignment. Say what you want, but in my state if you're competent enough for that level, there's no reason you can't handle a high school varsity game. I bet over half of the officials getting full varsity schedules statewide wouldn't get hired by a college assigner, if you just look at ability.

I haven't heard of a young official getting impatient and just quitting, but a lot of the college students end up moving out of state for their real jobs, or just deciding they don't like officiating. Thing is, most young officials getting into college ball don't have the luxury of just quitting high school altogether if they want a full schedule.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

That sounds about right. I've rarely seen a person that is ready for varsity in much less than that. Many think they are, but they're mistaken. There are, of course, exceptions, but they are just that exceptions.

I'm torn. I understand "paying your dues" but think that has to be balanced with getting officials on varsity games when they are ready, if you really want to keep them and aren't just paying lip service. When 30-year veterans that haven't improved since their third year talk about how they've "earned" the right to work big games, that's an issue and discourages young officials who, quite frankly, are better. At the same time, I don't agree with pushing out the veterans who are competent and respected to make room for the "new generation."

So, somewhere there's a sweet spot but I'm not sure where that is. I think five years is too long as a general rule. I think being varsity-eligible in one's third year would be a good solution; if someone isn't ready then don't use him/her, but don't hold back the officials who are getting college schedules after two years (as I have seen).