Up to a point imo.....

I don't want to piss off the people that have bailed my azz out all season long right up to the playoffs. If they've done a good job for me, I <b>owe</b> them. And I don't want to lose them. If they can do the job.... maybe not quite as well as the D1 guy but still do the job.... then I'll use 'em.

That's the way I expect the system to run. Its fair and it offers both sides some latitude. The assignors get bailed out by certain guys and in turn they owe them. Assuming they "can" work the game, I would expect them to get first crack over me since they are owed one. But I can see some guys whining about this. Just because we are officials doesn't mean there are none in our ranks with coaches syndrome. You know they whiny, complaining type.

Same in our area. i watch alot of hoops so i run into the "top dogs" often. they are also the collge guys in our area. They have never been nothing but cool with me and I have never heard anyone complain about the playoff games and who gets them. Our Assoc. also does a good job of getting the up and comers into the mix.

Gee I'll bet that if you had a guy that worked 8 lower level college games and a full HS schedule get a college post season assignment over a guy that worked a full lower level college schedule that college guy would be busting a vein screaming bloody murder about it.

That is why there is friction, college officials just assume they are better officials and in many cases it just isn't true.

In a lot of cases they are young and have "the look" the assignor was looking for and they figured they could mold them into a good ref. But for every inexperienced "look" ref working college there are dozens of experienced HS officials that can call a better game.

I don't think that one can make the blanket statement that officials that only officiate high school basketball dislike college officials.

Officials of amateur contests can be divided into the following categories:

1) Officials that only officiate at the high school level and below.

2) Officials that officiate a mixed schedule of high school and college.

3) Officials that only officiate at the college level.

The percentage of H.S. and college games for a Group #2 official can vary from official to official.

It has been my experience that there is a small group of officials in both Groups #2 and #3, that think that they walk on water. These schmucks can give the rest of the members in those two groups a bad name.

I have also found that there is a small group of officials on Group #1 that resent officials who are in Groups #2 and #3 because they think that they should be officiating at the college level and they are not. These are the officials that do not know the rules or casebook plays, their mechanics are terrible and resent officials (Group #1, #2, and #3) who do know the rules and apply them correctly and use correct mechanics. These officials will always be with us and there is not much one can do about it.

MTD, Sr.

Maybe for you, but not for me. I'll work the HS rivalry game every day of the week and I'll be home 2 hours before you. Last night was an exception for me (traveling alone for over 100 miles). The college guys do it all the time and I'm not interested.

My game check tonight was $100 and I worked a 7:30PM game that ended at 8:42PM and we were showered and in the car before 9PM. In the bar before 9:40PM. Driving 8 hours? No thanks.

That depends on where you live. Not everyone travels that far or has to. You work in certain areas around here and you hardly have an hour drive. And if it is an hour drive it is not because of mileage.

And the last thing I am ever going to do is be in the bar after most games.

This is all about person preference and what you enjoy and why you officiate. I can tell you I do not do this for the money and could care less what I make when I officiate any game. If money was the gauge of my officiating I would not travel very far for the high school games I work.

I will say this, most college officials are better trained and better officials because they learn things that many HS officials do not get exposed to. That is not a basketball thing that is a sports officiating thing. There are things I mostly do not have to worry about when I have a college official working with me in any sport. True college officials usually attend more camps and more training before they ever step onto any floor or field. High School Officials tend to be very technical. High School Officials also tend to worry about exactly what the book says when it comes to mechanics and rules and do not think outside the box or cannot adjust to a newer concept. Officiating changes every year and if the book does not change I get into more debates about what that book says rather than what it takes to officiate the game we have in front of us.

And this is just my opinion. This would not apply to everyone.

Peace

Completely disagree. Every official is different, and you have to judge each individual official separately. You can't generalize and say "college officials are this" or "high school officials are that". There's just too many exceptions to the rule if you try to do something like that. I've seen many high school officials that fit into your generalization of college officials above, and I've also seen many college officials that don't come close to fitting your college criteria. The same goes for the "technical" and "unable to think outside the box" statements that you made about high school officials.

And that's why the opening post of this thread was just complete doo-doo from the git-go imo. The statement made in the OP was inherently wrong. It's impossible to substantiate or prove- one way or another. You can say that Jeff Rutledge is this and Jurassic Referee is that, but you can't say that anybody else is exactly like Jeff Rutledge or Jurassic Referee(which is probably a boon to mankind in itself:) ).

Jmo.

Why would you bet on this? That is a HUGE assumption. If the "college" guy misses the playoffs, you can bet there's a reason -- probably connected to his full "lower level" schedule. If the "HS" guy gets a college post-season assignment, you can bet there's a reason -- he's a good official who only has college availability on weekends, perhaps. Your bias against "college" officials is showing in your assumption here.

Again, a HUGE assumption. Not ALL college officials assume that they're better than ALL high school officials. Again, this is just a biased comment. You can't have met enough "college" officials with this attitude to apply it to a few thousand people nationwide.

JMO, but I think your comments show the resentment that I spoke about in my first post in this thread.

I think you are generalizing.

When I was in my first 5 years of officiating, there were some officials who worked higher levels that I really enjoyed. They were helpful and gracious. They mentored the less experienced officials and helped raise the talent level of our group.

There were also some other guys who gave the impression that we were lucky to be able to be in their presence. They did not give anything back to our group.

Now that I do a little college ball, I would like to think that I am one who gives back to our high school group and helps raise our talent level.

We have guys who have given back HS games because they picked up a college game. That is an accepted practice around here. On the flip side, I gave back my last CC game of the year (with my assignor's blessing) so that I could go to one of our HS state tournaments this year.

So to sum up all my babbling, it depends on the individual.

The nature of is discussion is a very general on at its core. And I cannot talk about every official that I have ever worked with and every official you have worked with. But just like a political race, there are some things I can reasonably say about the Democrats vs. the Republicans. Of course there are exceptions to every characterization, but there are some things you can generalize that are accurate about each party. This comparison is no different. I am also speaking from my personal experiences and what I have seen. And college officials that I have worked with hardly ever are as ridged or unaware of many different concepts and tend to be more flexible. And I can tell by officials that have college experience by the way certain individuals talk on this site. And usually it is confirmed at a later date.

Of course officials are individuals, but most officials that work any college or try to work college have usually attended more camps and trainings.

The question is a fair one and often discussed outside of this board. And I hear all the time about a rift between people that work college ball and those who only work high school when I talk to officials at a social or at a meeting. And there are college officials that act like they know more than high school officials and vise versa. Usually it involves post season assignments that many perceive the college officials are unfairly taking high school post season games. In my state the only requirement is to work 10 varsity games at each level (Girl's, Boy's, Class 1A-2A and Class 3A-4A). And you always hear these stories that some guy only worked 2 high school varsity games and some guy that had 60 varsity games is passed over. I have found that claim is usually not true and often exaggerated. Even people in my area that work a lot of college ball usually work a lot of high school as well. This is mainly because they would not work very much without the high school games. And unless you are a big time college officials, chances are working 10 college games is the most you will get. And that is a little much for many guys or gals I have come in contact with.

Peace

I rest my case.:rolleyes:

Well, then you have a terrible case. Your argument assumes that college officials all think that they're better than all high school officials; and you use that assumption to prove that college officials think they're better than high school officials. That's a lousy case.

I gave you a very possible scenario in which a mostly-HS official could get a college playoff game over a completely-college official, which shows that your original comments are not valid. How does that rest your case?

It seems to me that you are so determined to hold your position on this issue that you can't even discuss other possibilities. Again, JMO, and I mean no offense, but that's how it seems to me.

Scrapper1, I don't know what is wrong with BZ today, but he is refusing to see anything other than his own opinion.

I think there are some valid points in this thread, but I don't think it is possible to say one way or the other that one group dislikes the other.

Rut, you know I've lived in various locations and I find your comments surprising. I talked with one of my partners (he currently works for the future NCAA supervisor and lives in Miss.) on Monday and another partner (he used to live in the St. Louis area) on Thursday about this - not the first times this discussion has come up. The perception by many, with some actual examples, is the Midwest is the easiest place to break into D1 in the country. Your post paints an opposite picture. I'm not saying you are wrong, but I do know guys who've lived in that region and one who moved there and advanced quickly.

Why do I get the feeling that Joey Crawford just pulled a "Get In. Get Done. Get Out." on all of us?