There it is. Sports are supposed to teach us this, right? Life lessons? Revealing character? I know I've certainly learned more than a few things.

The one I hear from time to time is, "I'm just tired of their excuses." I have no idea what to say to that.

Honestly, I can't think of any obvious examples. It may be that I just can't remember the person, but if you want shoot me a PM or email, which will remain private, with a couple of examples, I'd certainly entertain the idea. And, if I agree, I'll come back here and post that I agreed. It is certainly possible.

I guess it depends on what you mean by "Don't fit into the network?"

There are a lot of guys that do not fit and never fit, but it not because of the network. It is a lot of times because of stuff they do that have nothing to do with calling the game. And when you have a lot of guys that are talented, someone is not going to get an opportunity. Even in the most competitive things there are always people that get passed over. So to act like it is only because something the "network" is doing nefariously is kind of sad if you believe that. I know more guys that are impatient or are just not as good as they think they are. There are probably more that do not really know their true talent or what others think of their talent.

Again it depends on where you are. Here there is not much of a network. You have to compete with many officials and get the eye of many people to get a shot. They are not all on the same page or think that the games are equal in stature. Or not all those people have the same amount of games available to them. And what many officials do is dismiss the places where the opportunities are best because they do not want to travel, or those games in a particular conference are not good enough for them. Or in many cases they are not a "girls" official or they are not a rural official. The amount of slots are not going to change, but I see so many officials not willing to do what it takes to get hired. I know when I started I was willing to go anywhere and work anything to be seen. So I am certainly not feeling your position if you think that goes on everywhere. Maybe that happens in other parts, but not here. I do not see many officials that do not deserve a shot here that do not get one. I do see many that are not deserving or not ready getting a shot, but it does not mean that everyone is on the same page with their talent either.

Peace

BNR,
Please refer me to the post you would like me to address. I scanned your prior posts to this point and am not sure what you are referring to.

I don't have time to hang out for days in a row here, just a little too busy and I catch up when I can.

My situation has nothing to do with getting games. I can get them, it has to do with not being happy with the local climate, from the ADs/principals on down.

Another take on this, and forgive me if someone has already mentioned it, is that because of the ability in my area for school districts to team up with one association over another, the assigner has a vested interest in making sure the school district is happy with the product and will assign people he knows will do a good job to those schools. Whether I agree with that philosophy or not, I understand it. And as Camron has said, I would likely do the same thing. Earning your assigner's trust is a very important thing. I do believe that you can break into that "ring of trust" if you work hard enough and have some patience.

+1
and... those officials can be trusted to call the game exactly as the coaches want.

Good job or the job the coaches want? If a coach shows his backside, will a crew in your area hesitate to whack/eject the coach because the coach has influence over the assignor?

Bingo. And I'm sure this is exactly what happened here.

From what I have seen (in my area only) I would say a fair job. And I mean fair as unbiased, not "less than good". I believe my current association has a lot of integrity compared with the association that lost these districts. I don't agree with how much power the coaches have as far as who officiates their games. I know during district play, coaches can simply scratch an assigned official because they don't know who they are. I certainly don't like it, but I am also not prepared to join the political ranks to do anything about it either, so I would just be a hypocrite if I complained about it. It is what it is.

But I also never liked how much power the coaches have in Portland when it comes to state tourney assignments. I assume this happens all over the place. The one thing I have asked my assigner to do is get me in front of some of these coaches in the pre-season and before district play so I have a better chance to not get scratched from a district game. Then it's up to me to do a good job.

That's a sh###y system. Coaches have no such power here when it comes to state assignments. I'd have a pretty low glass ceiling if I ever had to work in a system like that.

I feel like I have little choice unless I want to run for office and "play the political games" in order to get better games faster or try and change the system. Because I've moved around a lot over the years, I have had to start over in many areas, and this one was no different. You are kind of stuck in the system you end up in. If I want to work high school games here, I can choose which association I want, but the clout that the coaches have appears to be a state thing. And since I'm new, I have to be seen and this takes time. I couldn't agree more that it's crappy to give coaches that much power.

Isn't that the political stuff that benefits you?

It's tough to say you want to stay out of the politics, but your group had to have some type of relationship in order to keep the schools you wanted. Maybe the schools wanted some variety and didn't want to see the same guys all of the time?

Funny that you mentioned that - this is one of the main reasons we were told that the school districts left Dallas. They kept sending the same crews to the same schools. There were other reasons as well, but this was near the top. I'm certain that the association was told this as well, but they likely thought they had a stronghold and were too arrogant to realize that the districts would have the nerve to switch associations. Whoops.

FYI, in Portland, we changed the vote weighting last year to not give the coaches so much power. They still have a vote but it is now unweighted....1 coach vote = 1 officials vote.

Previously, the coaches vote was weighted inversely proportional to the ratio of coaches to officials that submitted ballots. Since there are far more officials voting than coaches, under the prior system, a individual coaches vote counted 2.5-4 times as much as an individual officials vote.

I think it is good to keep the coaches involved in the process. They are our customers. The only question is how to include them and how much. We generally need to keep the coaches happy as a group (but not necessarily as individuals). The thing that keeps all things in check is that if an official goes out of their way to make one coach happy, the other coach will be pissed and that will catch up with the official.