I believe it was Lute Olsen the other day wanting the officials to be NCAA officials, rather than work for specific conferences. He maintains the type of game called would be more consistent nationally, rather than regionally. I think the merging of the "National League" umpires and the "American League" umpires, has made MLB a little more consistent. Is this a valid proposal??

I think that would be a huge undertaking.

Look at it in terms of high school officiating. You're talking about the state asociation assigning all games, doing all training and local association supervisors not having any input. I think that's a HUGE task.

In SC, the state assigns all games but it's still left to the local association to conduct training. As long as you have any local involvement, you're going to have differences in philosophy. Hell, we have it within our own local association, where we have outlying clinics in football and basketball.

Travel would be the main problem as I see it.

MLB umpires are pros. They make a living at it.

College basketball officials don't for the most part.
You would be asking guys to fly all the way across the country quite frequently, and many people couldn't do that because of their regular jobs. I think people who are pros need to stay closer to their area.

Roy Williams
 

Roy Williams has stated something similar. He thinks officials should only be able to work in 2 conferences and not more than 2 times a week.

That's probably the general premis now except that you work specifically for a conference and when in that conference, you do as that assignor says.

Re: Roy Williams
 

I think Roy Williams should only be able to coach 2 practices and 1 game per week. That way he'll be fresher for his game and have more time to study rules. This will help all coaches be more level headed towards the officials.

I don' think travel is an issue. These guys travel all the time now.

As for the number of games in a week, I think two is a little too restrictive. A more reasonable solution would be for them not to work on consecutive days. A coach may THINK he wants officials only working two days a week but he'd better realize that new, less experienced offiicals are going to have to move up to D1 to work all those games that are left. Most of these guys work 4-6 games a week. So you're looking at increasing the staff 50-75%.

But I agree that they work too many games in a week. I don't see how a 55 year old official work 6 out of 7 days a week, especially with all the travel that's involved.

Re: Re: Roy Williams
 

Realize that's said tongue in cheek but you're comparing apples to oranges and you know it. ;)

Chris you took the words right out of my mouth. Good Ole Roy should only get to play & practice twice a week.

Re: Re: Re: Roy Williams
 

I think both Roy's comments and mine are equally foolish. If he'll retract his, then I'll retract mine.
Of course I know it's apples to oranges but he needs to leave the governing of officials to someone else.

Good Idea
 

Wait a second - I don't know how many of us work college ball in here but this proposal(I know it is a coach's proposal and not a formal consideration yet) would give all of us a chance to move up quicker. I know that if and when I get a chance to do something other than DII, DIII and JUCO I am going to jump at the chance.
Why would we on this board not be in favor of limiting an NCAA officials schedule? i.e. Every other day. This would give us all more of a chance to move up and we would all be fresher and more focused on our games.
RE: being NCAA officials as opposed to conference officials, both sides are correct - It is a HUGE undertaking and it WOULD make the game more consistent.
AAR

Re: Good Idea
 

Heck, considering what AAR said, I think 2 games per week is plenty for the current D1 officials. Maybe someday down the road I'll change my mind but until I get there, that's my stance!

Wouldn't it just be easier to get all the Conference Commissioners/Assigners on the same page nationally...instead of letting Assigner X from Conference Big-time tell his officials to call the game the way he/she wants it called, while Assigner Y from Conference TV Contract gets to decide to have games called differently - why not let the NCAA have some "teeth" in enforcing things at that level - rather than just the memo's Hank Nichols sends out...

Maybe we would be in favor of it; but the guys working those schedules sure wouldn't be.

I agree with Chuck whole heartedly. Something else to consider, we all talk about integrity and how important it is to all of us. If we want the D1 guys to only work 2 games a week so that we can get there, then when we would get there want to change it back, well that to me is an integrity issue. If we want to look honestly at the proposal, we have to look at it from the D1 guys perspective....

You probably speak the truth. But if they worked every other day, they would have a little more spring in their step come February and March. Catch-22
AAR

Rocky - at the Division I level on the women's side, we are much closer to the national consistency of which you speak. It's a matter of ego's as I see it. I.e., "I'm not letting somebody in Indy tell me how to run my damn leagues." v. "Let's all get on the same page so we can have ONE set of officiating guidelines nationally."

It's not there yet, but it's a heck of a lot closer to being achieved on the women's side.

It is closer to that because the same freakin officials work all the games. The same officials go to the final four all the time. There are officials that have double digit appearances at working the championship alone. Of course it is going to seem consistent when you see the very same officials on the high profile games. There are more politics on the Women's side than anything you will ever see on the Men's game.

Peace

It's not an integrity issue, it's a greed and ego issue.

Good grief, don't you think I was joking about wanting it changed back to the current way if I ever get there?

Wow. It's been over a year since I've posted anything and JRut is still able to piss in my bowl of cereal without any qualms.

JRut - your response is truly that of someone with a chip on the old shoulder.

Maybe those same people work the final four because they do the best job of calling the game the way that Marcy and the NCAA wants it called.

More politics on the Women's side??? Wow...interesting point of view, but I would have to say that you don't have a clue...

Why every time someone says something that another poster does not like they have to have a chip on their shoulder? Seriously, why is that?

First of all I do not work any Women's basketball. I used to but I had to make a choice and I decided to only work Men's basketball. It was made clear I could not do both. Having said that this is not my words, this comes from the officials that work at that level. I know officials that cannot smell certain games because a very small group is always on those games. On the Men's side you can see many officials on the big games. Every year on the Men's side I see a completely different group of Final Four officials. I see the same names working the Women's Final Four almost every year. Even those that have not worked that level for years can step in and work the Championship game.

This is an observation just like you are making. I have that right to make that observation. I have seen officials that are not respected at the HS and lower level college ranks, all of a sudden get hired at the D1 level. Then the next year get fired because they could not cut the mustard. And all of this with an officials that has not worked 5 years total as an officials.

Peace

Name one official on the Men's side that has less than 5 years total experience and is working D1 ball. I can think of about 3 that happen to on the Women's side. Not 5 years of HS varsity experience, 5 years of total basketball officiating experience.

Give me one name and I will accept your point of view.

Peace

Is it political or is it the gender equivalent of affirmative action?

Z

Affirmative action is based on race and gender and ethnicity. The biggest benefactor of Affirmative Action policies in this country are white women. If you do not believe me look it up. Based on your question I am not sure you understand what Affirmative Action really is. Having said that, I was not just talking about just women who work games on the D1 Basketball on the Women's side in this post. The same officials seemed to work them regardless of what their gender is. I will say that there are Women that get opportunities that the men never do with the same level of experience. That does not bother me one bit, but I do not see this surge of Black male officials getting D1 opportunities on the Men's side the way women get those opportunities on the Women's side. Not unless they work the SWAC or MEAC.

Peace

Duke Edsall was hired to work in the ACC in the early 1980's. At the time he had less the 3 years experience. He worked his first final four in 2002.

That was 25 years ago. Name someone today or in the last 5 years. Teddy Valentine got hired at the D1 level without working a single HS varsity game. But that was over 20 years ago when that happens. Teddy has worked 2 Final Four games if I am not mistaken. Let us talk about today. I can name 3 officials in the past 5 years that were hired with less than 6 years of experience on the Women's side. Not only did that raise eyebrows when that happen, but these same officials did not work an extensive lower level college schedule when they were hired.

I realize this is an emotional issue (not sure why when we rip Men's officials here all the time for their mechanics and rules knowledge), but let us deal with facts. Stop trying to defend something that you just want to get upset over.

Peace

The men's game has been around a lot longer than the woman's game has. So maybe the game's "maturity" has more to do with this than politics since you say that what is happening in today's women's game also happened in the men's game 25 years ago.

Not wanting to get into a long-winded discussion about affirmative action, but what I see is that a big effort is made to promote women's officials in the women's college game. I think it's good for the game and it doesn't bother me a bit. I do see some female officials get in over their heads sometimes when they are promoted too quickly but that works itself out. If you are good enough, you will get promoted regardless of your gender.

I know that when I go to state for a girls HS tournament, I will have to be considerably better than any female officials that are there in order to work the final. That just makes it that much more satisfying when I do.

Z

Can't... can't name any of those on the Women's side either (don't follow their bio's as well as you do I guess) but what does that have to do with politics? Are you seriously saying that when I sit down on a weekend to watch games and see the same names and faces week in and week out - on the Men's side, now - that that is only because they are good, but if I see the same faces on the Women's games, that's because of politics???

I'd like to go back to the issue of people working too many games. I can see both sides of the issue. I know that my first year of varsity hs, I only had about one or two games a week, and taht was enough! emotionally and mentally, I was maxxed out. But the next year, there were a couple of weeks when I had three games, and sometimes varsity two nights in a row, and it wasn't as bad. I had improved to the point that I could handle it. I'm assuming that the D1 folks that are working 6 games a week have worked enough that they can cope with the stress, and don't get burned out. I expect the assignors don't think they're overworked. THey sure don't HAVE to give that many games to one person!

On the other hand, I can't imagine how it could be humanly possible to be intense enough, and confident enough, and physically fit enough to keep up that kind of schedule for 5 months. Would there be a way to back some of the heavy hitters off a little and give someone else a chance to take some of those games? Would it cut down on errors and bad calls? How could those questions be answered?

Just to divert us back to the original discussion for a second. . .I think that having NCAA officials as opposed to conference officials could be done. It doesn't seem to me that it would be much different than the situation now with regard to travel etc. The officials working the big D1 conferences come from all over the country and travel all over as well. You would still have that geographic component with regard to assignments. It seems that one big hurdle would be compensation. My understanding is that every conference pays differently. Would the NCAA have to institute some kind of pay scale that ranks the conferneces? That would seem to ruffle some feathers even if you paid everyone the same thing across the board in D1. Also, would it just be done for D1, or for every division? Doing that would be a MAJOR undertaking. I have also heard that one concern is whether or not to employ the officials or allow them to continue to be independent contractors. Just some thoughts, but I do think that having NCAA officials does bear some consideration

I agree with Rainmaker that as you gain experience you can handle more games during the week. However, the facts are there are many officials that are big time officials but they are safe. Sometimes what is unpopular call is the correct call. How many off-ball calls have we really seen in the tournament or throughout the year for that matter? There are also officials who look like bafoons on the court jumping around. That wouldn't be so bad except it has been analyzed and proven by someone with a ton of experience that thes officials put themselves in bad positions. Love it or hate it the NBA officials are much more consistent than the NCAA officials while still maintaining their character (Joe Crawford). The college game is so regionalized that it hurts some teams come March.

I do not agree with JRut about who you see on the games on the men's side. My TV shows me the same guys working. I could probably tell you 3 or 4 officials right now that will be in the final four. Also, I don't know about the women's game but I do know that politics on the East coast and West coast is a major player on the men's side.

**on a side note - I'm in Vegas for the Easter Classic and I had Jordan's son last night. MJ was there and some things were pretty funny. On more than one occasion I heard "I know Michael is here but you don't have to cheat for his team" from the stands. Little did this lady know that I could give two hoots about that. Now, if Magic was there I would have been like a 5-year old trying to get autographs, pictures and a job! :D

This seems to be a much more emotional discussion for some reason.
 

All I am saying is that things are not wonderful on the Women's side. There is politics on the Women's side just like the Men's side. I am not talking about just with who gets hired at that level, but you cannot tell me that the same officials have to work the Final Four every single year. When I read Referee Magazine when and they interview an officials and you see their resume, you would think no other officials exist on the Women's side. There are some very good Men's officials that we see on TV that only have one or two total Final Four appearance in 30 years of working. While someone on the Women's side has over 10 Final Four appearances with barely 20 years of experience. Something does not sound right if that is the case.

Now that is a personal opinion and I have the right to have that opinion. If those that work Women's basketball have no problem with that, then so be it. It is your right to not have the problem. I just would like to work a level where at some point I might be able to get that opportunity to work the Final Four, then if I am not the right person I will see other officials work more than 10 chances over hundreds of officials that deserve the right opportunity. In my state they basically put a cap on 3 State Final opportunities. There are several officials that get those opportunities as a result. Or maybe the officials that get the opportunities are the best and the overall quality is lacking in the mind of the NCAA. Either way that does not shed a good light on Women's NCAA Assignments. It is either quality or politics from what I see.

Peace

Tomegun, I was wondering where you were at. I haven't heard from you for a while. Have a great time in Vegas and I will talk to you once you return. Gotta tell you what happened at the meeting last night

Re: This seems to be a much more emotional discussion for some reason.
 

Oh, ok...now it is the same. Your earlier post said that there was MORE politics on the Women's side, but now they're just like each other...now I get it!

I see the same officials all the time as well. But they are not working the Final Four every year. The officials in the Big Ten Tournament when I have attended, I have only seen two of them actually reach the Final Four in the past 6 years I have attended the Big Ten Tournament. I know two of those officials went several years between trips. I have watched the UConn-Tennessee Women's game and it seems like two of those officials automatically are in the Women's Final Four. One of them I have met personally and she is an exceptional official, but do not tell me she is the only official capable to go to the Final Four several years in a row. Maybe she is, but do not convince me, convince those that work those games (regardless of gender) that point that fact out. They can spread the wealth a little can’t they? I am sure Dee Kanter is a great official, but why was she in the Women’s Championship game the first year she was back after being fired from the NBA? Dee already had worked multiple Final Four games. Now that did not tick me off, I am not an official that worked a Regional Final the year before.

We talk all the time about appearances and perceptions. That just does not sound right to me.

Peace

Re: Re: This seems to be a much more emotional discussion for some reason.
 

Rocky,

There are politics on both sides (that was the point of the statement above). From my observations is more on the Women's side because you do not see a distribution of assignments like you do on the Men's side. You can try to split my words to mean things you want them to, I stand by what I said. You do not have to agree.

Peace

Joe DeRosa officiated for three years before being picked up D1.

He worked 3 more years before being picked up by the NBA.

Re: Re: Re: This seems to be a much more emotional discussion for some reason.
 

Obviously I don't agree...and I didn't split any of your words - you contradicted yourself, again...

Oh well.
 

Both sides have politics. Name one thing in life that does not have some politics involved? Education system, different occupations and government interactions all have some form of a political structure in place. Depending on what we are talking about, some has a higher degree of politics. So if I say the education systems and government has politics, does that mean they have the exact same level of political influences? I guess to you that would mean both have the exact same political structure or influence if I used them both as in example in the same sentence. But then again, you are the one that feels you need to defend a side of basketball that clearly most here could give a damn about. This is the most conversation about Women's basketball and the officials in literal months. When someone even tries to force conversation about Women's basketball, no one replies.

Peace

I think another isue is the coaches.

Even at the HS varsity level most coaches don't like seeing a fresh face working their games. Do you think coaches who do this for a living want to have at least 1 unkown on each of their games? The big time officials work heavy schedules because they're in demand by the coaches & assignors.

Why are those that work Women's basketball so sensitive to issues related to the officiating side of the game? If the game is so great why do you feel you have to defend it all the time?

I have to agree with Dan's point. You are not going to see brand new officials on every game because the coaches at that level have their jobs at stake. Not the same thing at the HS and Junior High levels. Coaches at the NCAA level might want it in theory at first. Then when the games are called they would question every call made by these newer officials.

The rules are different. The mechanics are different. The assignors are totally different. Many of the officials can work a full D1 schedule of Women's basketball and can work an entire season of WNBA games, but the politics are exactly the same?

Just in HS basketball in my state we have one assignor for Girl's basketball playoffs and another assignor for the Boy's basketball playoffs. Many of the assignors for conferences are not the same, neither are the issues that relate to girl's and boy's basketball. I guess Rocky probably believes that everything is the same because it is PC to say so. So in rocky's mind the same officials must work both across the board and who officiates those games are have the exact same issue. I guess some of us will never understand this PC way of thinking. I know I will not.

Peace

That is really my point. I do not understand how all these things can be completely different but when you say anything negative about Women's basketball people get livid. I work college Men's basketball for assignors that assign both NCAA Men's and Women's basketball and they make it very clear their expectations are different.

Who's livid? Who said anything negative aboue women's basketball? I don't understand your post.

Juulie,

You will have to ask those that seemed to think Women's basketball does not have any politics involved. I am not the person to answer your question. I would not consider that negative, but there are those that might think so.

Peace

Good question Juulie...don't know who's livid - but I do know that JRut's trying to change his comments mid-stream again. I never said that there were no politics involved in NCAA Women's Officiating (and Juulie, who knows me personally, can attest to the fact that I have discussed that very issue at camps before)...however, Mr. Rutledge made a statement that there was MORE politics on the Women's side - I disagreed with that, he tried to change what he said, I called him on that, and now his buddy PS2 jumps in to say someone is livid...ib the immortal words of Jurassic - "Lah me!"

DJ -- Breathe. Let it go. You'll feel a lot better in a few minutes, I promise.

PS did you have any interesting post-season games? If you don't feel like bragging, you can e-mail me privately, and I"ll post it for you!

Why does it bother you so much what I say? I have every right to feel a certain way about Women's basketball. Both Men's and Women's basketball has a lot of politics involved. In my opinion, Women's basketball has more politics or more factors where an even smaller group of people get the big assignments. I base that on what I have seen and what those say that work at that level. If you feel that is outside of what you believe, so what. I live in a large metropolitan area where there are officials that work D1 ball on both sides. The Big Ten office is in this area. They Big Ten alone holds a Men's camp and the assignor for the Big Ten Women holds a camp in the area as well. There are a lot of officials that are trying to go after that big time college dream and do not have to get in a plane or drive hundreds of miles to get there. I am just sharing you there sentiments and their opinions as well. If you do not agree with that, who cares at the end of the day?

Peace

I said you were acting livid based on your reaction to what is really not a big deal. It seems like you do not want an opposite opinion to what you believe being shared here. JRut gave an opinion. That is all. If you do not like those opinions then coming to a place like this is going to cause you a lot of problems. You sound like a softball umpire that tries to convince everyone that working softball is better than working baseball. It is a hollow argument just like your debate here is.