Two women in stripes - newspaper article

[Old School]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I agree to a point... The players have to earn their spot in the tourney, not by being just good enough, why not the Refs too? The teams don't get an automatic spot just because they've worked hard and haven't been for a while (or ever). Being a competitive selection process gives the officials a reason and incentive to continue to get better and work to do thier best and not just be average and wait their turn.

Ya-but, the players cycle thru every 3rd or 4th year. The officials are there for life. Why not cycle the officials thru as well. The competitive selection process is not that competitive if you got the same guys working the big games every year. I think the argument here is once selected, it should not be for life. Otherwise, Ronald Reagan would have tested out the best president every year until he was unable to serve.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Plus, we are service providers to the teams. Given that some officials really are better than others, do you really think the teams want to 40th best ref since the 20th best has his/her turn last year? Don't they deserve to hire the "best" available official? Sure, There needs to be a way to address inequities in the system to ensure that those that deserve to go get a chance but simply being an average offical for X number of years is not an adequate measure.

Problem is, you decide what's average and you also decide to put your buddies back on the biggest games. In the current system, NCAA included, the people that have served (past tense) will always test out better than anyone that hasn't. IOW, once an official works a big game, he will always be more qualified to work the next big game than the person that hasn't. So the self-fulfilling philosophy. If I worked 4 final games, I will be more qualified then the person that has worked two. The person that has worked 2 will be more qualified than the person that hasn't worked any. If you, that's right you, the assigner don't step up and say, okay you worked two, I'm going to put someone else in this year and next, just to spread the wealth, than the system will forever be flawed. You see the reason why you need term limits. It's for the big dawgs.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Old School

Ya-but, the players cycle thru every 3rd or 4th year. The officials are there for life. Why not cycle the officials thru as well. The competitive selection process is not that competitive if you got the same guys working the big games every year. I think the argument here is once selected, it should not be for life.

Reality is that there are always several new people each and every year. Sure there are some that stay in the top and work 5-7 tourney over 10-12 years but that number is not big. Those complaining about no one else getitng a shot are simply ignoring the new people that really are geting in and focusing the fraction that do work multiple years.