State assignment limitations?

[DownTownTonyBrown]

Do any of your associations have limitations set on how often one can attend the State Tournament?

I was just notified of the four local officials our association is sending to the Girls State Tournament.

Three of the four are also going two weeks later to work at the Boys State Tournament.

Most of these seem to be permanent fixtures that our association sends year after year after year. All of these individuals have gone to the State Tournament before... some of them many multiple times.

Of course they also get to do most of the preliminary (District) games deciding which teams go to the State Tournament.

Are they good officials? Yes. Heads and shoulders better than everyone else? Not even close. Yes I feel slighted - many in our association feel slighted.

I'm one of the President's of our association and I think many of our officials would like to see the wealth shared. Does anyone have recommendations that we could put in our By-Laws that would help us get tournament assignments distributed more equitably among our officials.

[Edited by DownTownTonyBrown on Feb 23rd, 2005 at 01:20 PM]

[Camron Rust]

Originally posted by DownTownTonyBrown
Do any of your associations have limitations set on how often one can attend the State Tournament?

I was just notified of the four local officials our association is sending to the Girls State Tournament.

Three of the four are also going two weeks later to work at the Boys State Tournament.

Most of these seem to be permanent fixtures that our association sends year after year after year. All of these individuals have gone to the State Tournament before... some of them many multiple times.

Of course they also get to do most of the preliminary (District) games deciding who goes to the State Tournament.

Are they good officials? Yes. Heads and shoulders better than everyone else? Not even close. Yes I feel slighted - many in our association feel slighted.

I'm one of the President's of our association and I think many of our officials would like to see the wealth shared. Does anyone have recommendations that we could put in our By-Laws that would help us get tournament assignments distributed more equitably among our officials.

This is part of a debate going on here (Portland, OR) right now. Who should go and what, if any, limitations should there be.

There are 5 tourneys: 4A boys, 4A girls, 3A boys/girls, 2A boys/girls, and 1A boys/girls.

Right now, the top 14 vote getters get a tourney assignment and an official can only go to one tourney in a given year.

In addition, an official can not go to a tourney more than two years in a row. They must sit out every third year. (This is a statewide rule).

This effectively uses a pool of 21 officials for the tourneys with a few changes from year to year.

There are proposals that would expand this in various manners to include a few to several more people in the rotation. (We have about 350 people in the association).

The biggest point made is that the process is so subjective (by peer and coach vote) that how can you really say that the person that is constantly #22-25 is really not as good as the person that is #18-21.

In any case, no one here would even think of letting the same guys/gals go the more than one tourney in a single year. There are just too many good officials for that to even be reasonable.

[zebraman]

Our association rules are that an official can only go to state in either girls or boys in a given year.

We also have a rule that an official has to sit out one year if he/she has gone to state two years in a row for boys or girls.

The second rule means that I will not be going to state this year. However, I fully support both rules and am happy that our association spreads the wealth and gives as many qualified officials as possible the opportunity to experience state tournaments.

Z

[LarryS]

As I understand it in our association, the chapter submits a list of names to "nominate" officials for regional and state assignment consideration (not sure about the number of names on each list). There are seperate list for boys regional, boys state, girls regional and girls state.

Our chapter chooses not to put an official on more than one list in a given year. They also choose to rotate the officials they nominate...and I think they will not put you on the list more than two years in a row.

Not sure who selects the officials or what info is submitted with the names. Since I have only been in the chapter a couple of years I am not eligible for playoffs (probably another couple of years).

Playoff assignments for the first 2 rounds are made by the assignment secretary, with input from the board. Schools can request certain officials. In the past, those request were filled regardless of the qualifications. This year, if an official does not meet all the requirements for a playoff assignment the coach is told they are unavailable...about time.

[Indy_Ref]

2 Tournaments in Indiana: 1 boys & 1 girls

4 levels in each tournament: sectionals, regionals, semi-state, state

An official must get voted into the tournament via a YES/NO vote. "Yes" vote is worth 1 point "no" vote is -2 points. Every year there are a openings in each tournament. There are usually 10-20 openings in the girls' tournament and about 2-10 openings for the boys' tournament. Any official who is certified can apply to get into each tournament. There are usually 120+ new tournament officials who apply each year. You have to be in the top "X openings" number of rankings to get in (i.e. if there are 10 openings, you must rank 10th or better out of all the applying officials to get in!)

Once in, an official must do 3 sectionals before being eligible for a regional; 3 regionals to be eligible for semi-state; and 3 semi-states to be eligible for the state. These games do not have to come in successive years...just 3 total. Once an official does a state game, he/she must start over. HOWEVER, they only have to spend ONE year at each level the next time through. We used to limit officials to 3 states for each gender, but that has been revoked. Now, you can go as many times as you can make it.

So, there are usually 256 officials who work each tournament. After your first year, you must stay ranked higher than the bottom 5% or you go back into the "yes/no" pool. That means the bottom 12-14 officials get booted and go back onto the "yes/no" list.

[TwoDot]

In Montana, the policy is set that you can only work two tournaments below state level each year, and only one state tourney each year. This covers all four classifications and genders. In addition, an official con only work the same tournament for two consecutive years.
The selection is made by the state office and consists of a combination of coaches ballots, the individual pools ratings, and other factors such as location of the tournament, etc.

[JRutledge]

As it relates to just making the playoffs, the answer is no.

There is an "unwritten rule" as it relates to how many times someone works a state final. We have been told that 3 times is enough. For the most part they have stuck to that over the last 20 years or more. There was a guy last year that went his fourth time and that was because there was some conflict for him to work the Championship game (with a school). That was an unusual case and I cannot think of any other situation where an official went 4 times. Now those number of times are based on which side of the gender you are working those games. I am not talking about working both genders to come up with that number. You could theoretically work 3 Girl's and 3 Boy's State Finals in your career.

Peace

[DownTownTonyBrown]

Guess what! Our Association Board has scheduled a meeting to discuss this very topic... without any prompting from me.

Does anyone else have any other suggestions?

It really seems like for most of you there are some statewide rules that set limitations and that for some, there are also additional rules at your local association level.

What works? What doesn't? What rules are in place that are upsetting to the association's constituents? If we are able to establish some policies, I don't want to create any problems.

I appreciate any help you can offer.

[JRutledge]

What are you trying to accomplish? What kind of limitations do you want, if any?

I guess I have a problem with putting too many limitations on people if they are simply the best. I can see you might want to limit the times someone works a State Final, but not just the playoffs. I think if you are good, you should work the playoffs until there are others that are just as good or better.

Peace

[Mlancaster]

In Georgia, the GHSA controls the selection of State Tournament officials, based upon recommendations of local associations, camp attendance, and evaluations.
The 25 local officials' associaitons have little to say in the matter.

We have lots of officials who have worked the State Tournament for many, many years (well over 10 years). The same officlas do not always get a final, but tend to more often than not.

[pizanno]

One of the obstacles is a fair ratings/evaluation system. I've yet to see one that I like. Many systems, as Camron pointed out, are just too subjective.

I think there's something to be said for having the best officials available for the good of the game and kids. I had one official state that "if you were a coach at the state tourney, you wouldn't play your second string more than your first "just to spread it around".

That analogy would work if officials only worked four years, then graduated to the next level (or quit).

Therefore, I believe that big-game limitations are necessary to create greater opportunities for younger or less sesoned officials to cultivate their skills in a challenging environment.

This process would making the association stronger as a whole. This should be your approach; avoid the "it's my turn" argument.

[Rich]

Originally posted by JRutledge
What are you trying to accomplish? What kind of limitations do you want, if any?

I guess I have a problem with putting too many limitations on people if they are simply the best. I can see you might want to limit the times someone works a State Final, but not just the playoffs. I think if you are good, you should work the playoffs until there are others that are just as good or better.

Peace

Best? Way too subjective, IMO.

States should have a pool of people who they would feel confident in sending to the state tournament and spread the wealth. When I'm king nobody would work more than one girls and one boys state final in a lifetime unless there was nobody else qualified to work the game.

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by Rich Fronheiser


Best? Way too subjective, IMO.

States should have a pool of people who they would feel confident in sending to the state tournament and spread the wealth. When I'm king nobody would work more than one girls and one boys state final in a lifetime unless there was nobody else qualified to work the game.

The "best" might be a subjective label. But we all know of people that consistently do the job year in and year out. There are also officials that cannot do the job at all. That might be subjective, but that is just the truth. And to say that someone should only work one state final is also IMO not very practical. Then you are going to have a bunch of people that either are not ready, or never were truly qualified in the first place to work games. I have no problem with a limit on how many state finals someone works (we have one here for the most part). I just think one is too restrictive. I am just saying that you should not throw away those that have proven themselves over an extended period of time. And you should not move guys that can barely handle a big time regular season game, let alone a playoff game that will affect seniors and memories for life. I am not saying officials should work forever, but you should not put officials with very little experience on games of that magnitude.

Peace

[Rich]

Originally posted by JRutledge

The "best" might be a subjective label. But we all know of people that consistently do the job year in and year out. There are also officials that cannot do the job at all. That might be subjective, but that is just the truth. And to say that someone should only work one state final is also IMO not very practical. Then you are going to have a bunch of people that either are not ready, or never were truly qualified in the first place to work games. I have no problem with a limit on how many state finals someone works (we have one here for the most part). I just think one is too restrictive. I am just saying that you should not throw away those that have proven themselves over an extended period of time. And you should not move guys that can barely handle a big time regular season game, let alone a playoff game that will affect seniors and memories for life. I am not saying officials should work forever, but you should not put officials with very little experience on games of that magnitude.

Peace

Who said you would put officials with no experience in games of that magnitude? You'd still have to "work your way up the ladder" before going to state. You'd still have to work regionals, sectionals, substates, and all those preliminary rounds that states have.

I think I counted 622 officials in my state that were "playoff eligible." 48 officials here work the state tournament every season. No reason that you couldn't pick out a different batch of 48 every season.

But the problem is this -- it takes manpower and effort to identify those people who would do well in the state tournament and it's much easier to just send somebody again, and again, and again. And people like the OP may be good enough to work, but don't.

I'm not complaining personally -- I've never lived in a state long enough to work my way into such a position and I'm thrilled with my playoff schedule.

[KingTripleJump]

In Texas, it's a 3-year gig. So if you get selected to work at State for Boys or Girls, you get to work it for 3 years.