Officiating in the PAC

[BTTB]

I tried to ask some questions on this board last year.Â*Â* I was sincere about the questions, but the way I asked them must have revealed some of my opinions about officiating quality in the PAC 10.Â* In retrospect I should have been more careful with my words, because I attracted some unfocused hostility from a couple of posters here,Â* and my initial questions were never addressed at all.Â* In any case,Â* there has been no change in the policy or product in the PAC this year, and my attitudes haven't changed either.Â* I would like to re-pose my initial questions again though, and I'll be more careful with my choice of words.Â*

My first question has to do with the nature of the interaction between a major conference and a contract basketball official with regard to performance evaluation .Â* Is there a formal review that occurs? And does that take the form that one would think between a supplier and client?Â* And who are the constituencies that a conference supervisor of officials would take into account in that process?Â* Are the conference coaches surveyed about referee quality like students are asked to evaluate their Professors?Â* Or is that something that is taken up with the AD's, or is anyone involved outside of the league at all?Â*Â* As an aside, I can say pretty authoritatively that the fans are not a major element in the PAC 10 procedureÂ* :-)Â*Â* And if there is a formal evaluation,Â* with communicated expectations, does the style of play and how it differs from another conferences come up?Â* We would all agree that officiating styles differ from region to region, and that those styles did not arise randomly.Â* How does a league communicate the subtleties of it's desired style of play and administer its expectations since the rule book does not differ based on the conference in question?

BTTB