John Clougherty says it....
 

ACC Coordinator of officials thinks (some) officials work too much.

Link

At least he recognizes that under the current system, he has no control.

He has "some" say over that. It is just whether he wants to use it. I know I have been told in some leagues what I can and cannot do or I will not work their league. He could do that same thing as it relates to his conference, but of course like he said he has no control over another conference.

Peace

Yep, he could, but he doesn't want to lose the big dogs by telling them they are limited on how many games they can work if they want to work for him. And he certainly couldn't just tell the younger guys that while allowing the big dogs to do whatever they want. Well, I suppose maybe he could, but....

But it works so well elsewhere... ;)

Totally agree. He's basically saying the same thing the coaches say: "They work too much, but I want them working my games as much as possible."

He could easily expand his roster and assign his big dawgs fewer games in his other conference, the Colonial (CAA).

Did you read the quote?

He says he lets his officials know he has first dibs on their schedules. Once he has them scheduled, though, he has no control over how many games outside of the ACC they take, since they're independent contractors.

What else would you have him do?

He could require them to have a certain number of days off if they want to continue getting games from him. In order to do so, however, he'd have to put some teeth into the policy.

Assign them fewer games. Utilize more of his roster. Expand his CAA and ACC rosters. Require his officials be in the host city a certain amount of hours before gametime.

There are things he could do. But he is just like the coaches--HIS games aren't the problem, it's those OTHER games that create the "overwork".

That would be hard to enforce. He could require them to arrive on site 24 hours ahead of the game to ensure that they're rested for his games.

I agree with that. But maybe you need to put your foot down and make a policy and stick to it that works for your league. Maybe other leagues will follow and you can get more guys in the mix that can work. I love many of the big names, but other officials can work too. And if you only want to give games to guys that will not even in many cases work deep into the post season, then what is going to happen in a year like this when many of the big timers are hurt. I think at some point you have to set a standard if you truly believe that certain officials are tired because they worked 10 days in a row. I am much younger than many that do that, and I get tired over working 2 or 3 days in a row.

Peace

You must not understand what I said then. Because he could require things that would make it difficult to work other games before and even after his games.

I have a college assignor that told us that he does not want anyone double dipping on the day of his games. And if he finds out he will fire us from his league. Now what we do afterward is up to us, but we are not going to work a high school game in the morning and then his college league in the afternoon or evening (usually on a Saturday). Now a guy working D1 is more than likely on TV or there is a box score somewhere that will record who worked the games. Yes we are independent contractors but he can make a policy that will lessen what we work if we want to work his league. And if those that value his league (which is considered by many the best league in the country if you let the media tell it), then you will accommodate him. It is not that hard to do if he really wanted to do it.

Peace

Exactly. If he really wanted to, he could. What he really means is, "I'm not willing to take the steps to enforce it with my league." He even said as much, "I have an option not to assign them ACC games."

And he's not willing to take those steps because he knows he's going to lose some of the officials over it, and those are the officials that the coaches and the conference are most comfortable with.

While I agree he could take steps to make this happen - and I also agree there are more officials who can work that level than get to - I don't envy his situation.

fellas...this is the "which comes first? the chicken or the egg" debate....

it will all be solved by the NCAA and changes that will be made to regionalize the officiating assignment process. probably something like - each region has an assignor and you can only work games at schools located in your region (where you live); that way one assignor can control how many games you work (eliminate "tired" officials), where you work (cut down on travel expenses paid by schools), and what schools you work at (regardless of conference affiliation).

probably several years away, but a strong possibility of happening....

Don't like that proposal.

Me neither. I don't think jeff has thought through all the ramifications.

edit: unless he's joking.

This is not Jeff's idea. This is actually an idea that John Adams has thrown out there and it already done with the football side. And honestly this is largely done at the D1 Women's side as there is really one person that assigns several regions and conferences. The ramifications are only bad if the conferences only want to see the same officials all the time. Other than that this is probably a good idea and will give more guys a shot to work many conferences and better games. You cannot tell me that the guys that work most of the top games are the only ones qualified to be on the floor. ;)

Peace

I think all it will do is that instead of "those" guys working all over the map, they will get all the games in their region and travel less.

I like the idea that though one supervisor might not like me, the next one will.

I would amend my response to say if it's only done at the D1 level, it wouldn't be so bad.

I guess I don't see that it's such a big problem (tired officials) that it requires such a top-down approach. If Adams can get the important people to buy into this plan, he wins.

My instincts are more laissez faire, so my reaction to this is going to be negative. It would never really affect me, though, either way, as I doubt I'll be working D-1 at any point.

And this is the part that sticks with me, too. I don't like the idea of one guy essentially being able to determine whether you're qualified to work. The effect would be the exact opposite of tearing down any sort of "good ol' boy" network. It'll strengthen it.

If one commssioner / assignor / school doesn't want to hire me, I shrug and take more games from another. However, I have worked as a varsity official in another state where you *had* to join an association and all games were assigned from there and one person with all the power in the area controlled whether you worked or didn't work.

I would guess that a few officials would be glad to take fewer games for more money and a "staff" position, but others would say goodbye and go to other conferences.

Let me also make something clear. Adams did not say he was changing the process for this reason that I am aware of. He just wanted a more even assigning process that would be based on region. And I believe that you could work other regions, but it would be based on who is playing and likely non-conference situations. This would be done in an effort to give newer officials a chance that I remember.

Peace

In CO, we have to belong to an association which assigns all of our games for high school. That said, if for some weird reason I became disgruntled with my current situation, I could drive to the nearby area and work for them.

The idea as jeffpea proposed it wouldn't allow for that, as D1 schools (presumably it would be limited to them) would be forced to use a regional assigner, and officials would be forced to work for the assigner in their area.

Not necessarily. I do not get the impression that the conferences do not choose who works for them on some level. You still will be hired by conferences. But you might work in other conferences if there is a need or if it will cut down on travel. At least that is how it is done at the football side. I think there would be a similar policy. Again this was only talked about as a concept in basketball, it has not been implemented. We will see if it ever comes to that policy.

Peace

Rut:

On a side note, John Clougherty is a 1964 graduate of Youngstown State University, :D.

MTD, Sr.

I was afraid you were going to say he graduated from The Other State University.

LOL!!!

Peace

the two main criticisms that people have of the current officiating set-up is: 1) guys work too many games (i.e. 25 days in a row), and 2) their isn't enough accountability and consistency in the officiating....

By having one regional assignor (who reports directly to John Adams @ NCAA hdqtrs), you kill three "birds with one stone" - 1) he can control how many games each official works per week, 2) you are accountable for your actions - if you do not follow the directives of the NCAA higher-ups (at least to their satisfaction)...you won't work!, and 3) you will work games closer to home and reduce the amount of $ paid to officials for travel (what administrator is against reducing costs these days?).

Of course, it will be interesting to see who wins the power struggle - the NCAA for more accountability/coordination to improve the "product"? or will it be the coaches who want to see the officials they want to see, when they want to see them (Tom Izzo WANTS Ed Hightower on his games - that's why Ed worked 15 of 'em in the 08-09 season).

this isn't "my plan"...rather this plan (or some form of it) is coming from those at the top of the food chain (NCAA)

"I wouldn’t even think about telling my top guys, who work multiple leagues, that they can’t do that. I have an option not to assign them ACC games. But once I assign them my ACC games, they have the right to go anywhere they want to referee after they get my games. Their commitment to me is to take my games first. They can then take those and go wherever they want. They’re independent contractors; I can’t tell them not to".

Maybe??, something similar happened to Mr. Clougherty during his career which he did not appreciate. Therefor he would not be inclined to do something to his staff that he did not appreciate being done to him years ago.

Since the NCAA is nothing more than an association of member schools, everything the NCAA does is based on what the member schools want it to do. I was under the impression the NCAA either does not, or cannot, control what happens during regular season athletic contests, other than specific issues like eligibility and recruiting rules. All the other issues are handled at the school and conference level. The NCAA does however control their "championships", or the NCAA post-season. If the schools want the NCAA to take over the officiating scheduling, they would vote to have it done.

The other issue that isn't mentioned much is the fact that schools, conferences, and the NCAA have to be careful how much control they try to exert over officials. If they put too many conditions on them, officials might then be considered "employees" by federal labor and tax standards, and then would be subjected to a whole other set of rules and regulations, such as federal and state tax withholding, FICA, unemployment insurance, overtime (no, Mark, not that overtime...) rules, and so on. And, since the NCAA will have more expenses based on officials being employees, the overall amount paid to officials will be less than if they treated them as independent contractors.

I agree, but they still could set some standards that make it an option for those to agree to those conditions. I do not think you would in principle violate independent contractor laws if you required some things while taking an assignment. They already do this now, but it is not about where you work and when you work. But they do say what you wear, what mechanics you use and make decisions based on that. I am certainly not a lawyer, but what is asked of them now could be seen the same way if someone wanted to challenge that in court. Something tells me that would be a very difficult case to fight.

Peace

I think if an organization like the NCAA were to make these decisions from the top, telling conferences whom they could hire (jeffpea's suggestion would include that) and telling officials for whom they could work, they'd be pushing the envelope a bit. I'm not labor lawyer either, so I couldn't say for sure.

The NCAA can set some standards. And if this is out of line, then telling officials what to not have on their shoes is also out of line. And all I am saying is if they go to regional assignors, that are what the schools have agreed to do, not just a dictation from the NCAA. And a challenge to that might be very difficult.

Peace

It might, as long as the schools are still in charge. I'm not sure what role it would play, but there are anti-trust and collusion issues to take into account, too; especially if the end result is to arbitrarily reduce the income of some officials.