How does your state rank?
 

I am sure across the country we have anything from good ole boys network to 3rd party anonymous evaluators to determine a referees ranking.

I would love to hear one thing you like and one thing you dislike about your current HS or College system for ranking your areas officials. Or even how you would do it if you were the person responsible for changing things up.

Thanks in advance

I would put myself at the top of the list and then I would have cage matches to determine the rest of the order. Person with the most wins gets 2nd and then we work our way down from there.

Our system is the worst one except for all of the others.

Fundamentally, you're NEVER going to have a system that a lot of people think is fair. Almost every official thinks they they should be in the top. It doesn't' really matter how they are rated, many of them will always think they're getting cheated or overlooked. Change the system all you want, and you'll still have people that think they are better than they are. Surveys that have been conducted in the past show that 80%+ of the people think they are in the top 50%....at least 30% of them are wrong and that doesn't even consider where they think they fell within the top 50% or where those actually in the top 50% believed they should be within that range.

Of course, that doesn't mean that all systems are the same, just that if your goal is to make people happy with it, forget about it.

I have no idea how, or if, my state ranks officials. I've only seen state observers after the regional play-offs start.

College-wise, I assume the amount of games someone works for a supervisor is indicative of his ranking. Of course I have no way of knowing how many games someone else works unless I scour every box score and keep a running tabulation. ;)

I never cared what kind of schedule other officials worked. If you work hard to constantly improve and be the best official you can be...that is all you can do. If someone wants to think highly of you they will.

Every evaluator has his/her personal preferences. Just because you do not fit into the mold of one does not mean you want be a star to someone else.

I honestly believe that if you work hard and do your best (be it officiating, work, etc.) opportunities will come you way. Control what you can control and don't worry about everything else.

But that's just me...

The Land Of Steady Habits ...
 

Rating, and ranking, system in my local board here in my little corner of Connecticut:

All four officials (two person games) junior varsity, and varsity, at the game site secretly (numeric system through Arbiter) rate each other. Rating is based on appearance (we are allowed to wear black belts) and conditioning, mechanics, team work, judgment, and game management. Varsity officials should arrive at the game site no later than the beginning of the second period of the junior varsity game. Junior varsity officials should stay and observe the varsity game until at least halftime of the varsity game. Many varsity officials try to show up for the beginning of the junior varsity game, and many junior varsity officials will often stay to observe the entire varsity game. Officials working middle school, and freshman, games will usually only rate their partners.

Peer ratings count 80% of your overall rating. The remaining 20% is based on interpretation (new rules), and business, meetings attendance, refresher exam workshop attendance, and assignment commissioner availability, and cooperating with the assignment commissioner.

A three year (most recent) average rating produces a ranking.

The level (varsity, or subvarsity) of regular season games assigned, and number of regular season games assigned, is based on ranking.

Generally, the top eighty officials are considered "full varsity", and will only work varsity games. The next thirty are considered "split" officials, and will work both varsity, and subvarsity games. The rest are considered subvarsity officials, who will only work subvarsity games.

Three subvarsity years (first probationary year doesn't count) are needed to move up to a "split" ranking (both subvarsity and varsity games). Three "split" years are needed to move up to a "full varsity" ranking. Both moves assume that good ratings improve an official's ranking, it may take longer than three years, or it may never happen.

Officials can move up, or they can move down. They aren't Supreme Court justices, nor are any of our officials the pope.

Connecticut state tournament ranking system:

State tournament assignments are only based on voting of all varsity coaches. Coaches can select (vote for) up to about a dozen officials for their state tournament "list", even those coaches who do not qualify the tournament by winning 40% of their regular season games. Generally, the more votes an official receives, the farther he works into the state tournament. Officials from my local board can only work state tournament games in which both teams are from my local board's geographic area, or in which neither team is from my local board geographic area. If a state tournament game involves one team from my local geographic area, and another team from outside my local geographic area, then we won't work that game.

Thank you. I know most officials want to be ranked higher or think they are better than they are.

I just wanted to hear how some places do it. I know someone said they had 3rd party people evaluate to help with rankings. If you work Varsity and you want to work a lot of games why would you want more varsity officials. You are going to slow down people moving up.

Thanks again for this level of detail and I hope to hear more.

I had a friend who has been refereeing mostly rec ball and running a charter HS league. He moves to Texas and works one JV scrimmage and gets a Varsity schedule. Maybe that is how it can work in Texas.

I just love hearing about systems because some are better than others.

This is the first year IL is solely using Coaches ratings. To my knowledge there isn't a lot of guidance for how this will actually shake out. My association is currently drafting a letter the IHSA with our concerns. The old numerical system factored in points for being selected in the top 15 of your association, and ratings by other certified officials. The coaches in my opinion have never done a good job in rating varsity officials after games (In a timely manner, or at all). Even though I have 20+ in basketball, this is only my 6th year here in IL. I am only recognized at this point. Until I can take my test to be certified next year I won’t get a sniff of the tournament no matter how well I am rated. No system is perfect and I believe without max participation this will be a step backwards. Talking to many Varsity coaches a big complaint is seeing many of the same officials year after year. However, when the rubber meets the road they rate many of same guys at the top each year. I guess familiarity is preferred over taking a chance on someone new. I also believe this is why many good young officials move toward putting more effort in small college basketball. Theory being if you have to put as much effort into cementing yourself in the High School scene, why not use that time to advance to the next level. After what happened in the 2A championship I am sure they are looking for ways to mitigate this from happening again. JMO

I think that is happening here too. Thanks for letting us know more about IL.

So what exactly are you advocating for? According to you, the same guys are working the playoffs year after year. I hate to tell you, but that has been going on since before officials could rate each other and associations could submit top 15 lists, while officials could rate each other and associations submitted top 15 lists, and will continue now that officials and associations no longer have that power.

I hate to burst your bubble, but the same thing happens in college basketball as well. Coaches can and will complain all the time about some guys being too old, past their prime, or working and traveling to too many games. They will insist that the system needs to change. Guess what happens when they see new guys or young guys on their games.....they are on the phone telling the assignor they want the old familiar guys back on their games. Work the other guys on someone else's games.

You can't assume that all of Texas does the same thing just because of this one alleged situation. Each association (they call them chapters here) in the state is independent in how they assign and rank. Each one covers a certain geographic/district area. Some are very small and some are very big. The association I am a member of happens to be one of the best in the state (based on the state final assignments of the recent past) and every official is evaluated and ranked prior to the season. It's not a perfect system, but it's about as good as any other I've seen. With over 400 members, it's very difficult. The assignor makes it very clear that on any given night he will put the best available officials in the most important games. The word important can be based on different factors for different games.

1. None of this is according to me. I believe I stated that these are based on conversations with coaches/officials who have been a part of IL basketball for a long time. I moved here from Indianapolis in 2007. The exact same complaints and gripes were going on there regardless of what system was in place. Coaches and officials year after year talk about the same issues.

2. I am not really an advocate of any system. If I eventually get a game in the HS playoffs great, and if I don't that's ok. Personally as a full time Soldier I move around a lot. I have lived as far north as Loves Park, IL and as far south as Benton, IL. Currently I have moved back to the Central part of the state in Champaign. Each time I have to join associations that will help me start over (nature of the beast).

3. As far as the good ole boy system, that's life. Sometimes is helps you and sometimes it hurts you. Basketball aside this is how business get conducted every day. I couldn't get anything accomplished if it weren't for the personal relationships I collected over the years. So why should basketball be any different? Not sure if you’re aware, but the military has a few type A personalities in it as well (Coaches/Officials). None of this affects me directly.

Are you somehow connected to the decision making involving the assigning of IL HS basketball officials? If so, maybe you are taking exception to my comments. Otherwise, nothing you said was news to anyone who works in a competitive field.

I am not involved in assigning or decision making for IHSA in any manner. I was just responding to your statement that your association was writing a letter regarding the groups concerns about the new rating system and connecting that to your conversations with coaches/officials that complain that the same people continue to do all the playoff games. My point was that those same people were doing all the playoff games in the old system, in the previous system that just ended, and most likely in the new system just implemented. So I wasn't sure exactly what or how your association wants the IHSA to change.

My second point, was that things are not much different at the college level as far as guys getting games and other officials/coaches complaining about how many games they work.

My last point, and I think we agree here, is that the same people doing most of the complaining (i.e. coaches) are the ones that have the most ability to change the situation and yet do the least to effect change or complain even louder when the change affects them.

from the pan to the fire
 

j51969, looks like you ended up in the same situation that you left in IN. It was great last year, my State Assoc. made a few changes that allowed us to have a say in our rating. They pretty much took that away this year and we are in a worst case scenario now. The only advantage anyone has is how far you have gone in the post season. So it knocks the new guys back even farther.

johnny d, you are spot on. It has been going on forever at all levels and will continue to go on.

Here is the caveat; It fits the State Associations perfectly and there is no reason to change. And, there shouldn't be reason to change. It is not our games as refs. It is the schools games and we are just part of it. We are there to accomodate the schools and the State Associations. It is the field that we play on.

yea, I figure caveat needs some of those French thing-a-ma-jigs in there somewhere but I haven't any idea how to do that. :o

Call the game that you feel is proper and everything else takes care of itself. If that doesn't provide what you are after, change the game you call. Or go fight the battle elsewhere, but it will be much the same.

The OhioHSAA has a system where the varsity coaches tell the assigners what officials are acceptabale to officiate. Kind of like letting the inmates run the prison. Camron, this is the system that is better than yours, LOL!

MTD, Sr.

attitudes are optional
 

Just to expand on Mark's comments, at one time the OHSAA used a system based solely on voting by the coaches and have since changed to a system/formula that takes input from coaches, assignors, AD's and local officials associations. I got a bit of a late start and am now entering my
30th season at age 64. I have been rewarded very well under both systems (for which I am very grateful) basically by doing what BatteryPowered and Scratch85 have suggested and maintaining a positive mental attitude.

Didnt mean to sound like this was how it worked for all of Texas. I thought it was kewl his ability could be evaluated so quickly and be given that kind of schedule.

Who ranks them? What are they evaluated on? What do you like and dislike about the system?

There is an evaluation committee that consists of top tier officials from within the chapter. During camp, all the evaluators were there watching games (usually 2 per game) and they had a form they filled out for everyone with basic things they were looking for. We are evaluated on things like appearance, hustle, game management, getting plays right, attitude, etc. At halftime and after each game you would get feedback. All evaluations were looked at for each person. If you didn't go to camp, there were summer tourneys that were used for evaluations. We were all given plenty of opportunities to get evaluated - it's on us to ensure we get looked at.

Here's where it gets iffy - there are 2 people assigned to various groups of officials, based on the first letter of your last name. So A-E will have 2 specific evaluators, F-I will have two others, etc. These people will give out the final rank to their assigned officials. How they determine it is based on general guidelines that they decided upon. Officials in my chapter are not assigned a rank from 1 to 400 - it's not like that. We are all tiered as follows:

100 Can officiate as the crew chief at every level of play
200 Can officiate every level of play as the crew chief with exception of 5A/4A boys
300 Can officiate all levels of play - crew chief up to 3A boys/girls
400 Can officiate up to 3A boys girls - crew chief at the 1A/2A level
500 Can officiate up to 1A/2A level - cannot be a crew chief
600 Can officiate up to JV boys
700 Can officiate up to JV girls
800 Junior high only
900 New official - generally can only officiate 7th grade level with an experienced official
999 Has not been ranked

I would love a lot more states involved with this discussion. How does your state rank referees?

I seem to recall seeing a website a few years ago that could tell you at least where most of the big names were on any given night. Or at least where they had been. Don't recall the site though.

Was it this? College Basketball Referees - StatSheet.com

Indiana does not rank for regular season assignments. Those who have enough qualifying games can apply for the tournament. The state association has a formula which incorporates 50% coaches vote (average rating 0-5 with a multiplier), and 50% things like years licensed, years worked the tournament, number of association meetings attended, etc. The system used to be 100% coaches vote, but now it is a little more balanced.

The system in Illinois is based on a Power Rating system, not a coach's rating system. And right or wrong that system is only a way to objectively compile some numbers and information about what an official has done during their season or career. The system is based on 40 point system which only 5 points are dedicated to coach's ratings. And I can tell you for a fact that officials are observed and evaluated for further playoff advancement. And the same officials working the playoffs is often a myth. Yes, some of the same officials work year after year, but they usually are the top people at least on the boy's side that are consistently doing the bigger games by their conference or tournament assignors. That is not much different than the NCAA level. Watch who works the bigger tournaments or games, chances are they are working deep in the NCAA tournament. Also in Illinois the genders and classes are separated. You get a different rating for each gendar and if you work very little of one class, you are not likely to work playoffs. I live in the Chicago area, I am not likely going to work the smaller classes because we do not have the same access to the amount of smaller schools. And the assignments for the entire state are made by one person per gender as well. And they can consider factors that have nothing to do with the Power Rating like geography, years of experience and what kind of games you work like rivalries or top teams in your area.

Peace

JRut, I agree with you on most of your points on the system in Illinois. Also, I don't have a dog in this show......I do many more college games now than HS so it doesn't really matter to me one way or the other whether I ever go further in the playoffs than I do now. That being said, it is not a myth that the same guys work every year. They might not be doing supers or going down state, but they continue to work regionals and sectionals. Once you get a full regional you will continue to get a full regional until you are dead or quit officiating. Look at some of the names. There are guys that have been officiating for 25+ years and who are well past their prime still working those rounds of the playoffs. If I was a good, young official hoping to make a run in the state playoffs, it would be discouraging to see that.

Wow, I remember someone making such a statement about another region of the country.

You could have a brand new official do Varsity or JV and a vet doing Freshman?

I don't think state rankings have anything to do with the regular season Friday night assignments.

And I doubt there is a state tournament for JV and Freshman ball.

On some level, when is that not the case? For one there are also a lot of officials that do nothing to dedicate their careers to any high school, then want someone to give them post season games when they not only did not deserve them or will not make themselves available. A lot of officials want it both ways. They want all the assignments, but if the better offer comes that is where they go. And whether you like it or not, many of those that work years after you think they are in their prime, are wanted by many coaches. I see guys in the college ranks with the same issue. That is why certain big names continued to work and continued to work the Conference Championships in the Major Conferences.

And I know many young guys that always get assignments and get assigned regional championships when they make themselves available. One of my best friends got one last year and he is a young guy in his late 20s and he even moved to this area. I know I have been working playoffs for almost 10 years and I know I am not past my prime. If anything I am better now than I was when I started.

Peace

I agree with you JRut. The problem is that people want to believe there is a system out there whereby the best officials are working deep into the playoffs. That is simply not the case. That system doesn't exist. So rather than saying that they are trying to get the best officials to work the playoff games, the IHSA and I would imagine any other group or person involved in assigning should just be upfront and admit there are other factors that go into assigning these games rather than just ability. You can ignore it or deny it all you want, but the objective of the IHSA is not to put the best officials on playoff games. Their goal is to put mediocre or better officials on these games and to reward people for years of service. If it was, people like McKenna, mcnellis, okeefe, and others would not being doing the games they are doing and people like your friend (probably works in intramurals and outdoor rec at DePaul), you and others would go further than you have. At the same time, officials need to stop obsessing about ratings and who works what games and just concentrate on working hard and getting better. We as a group also need to realize that no matter who runs the system or what the system is there is always going to be people that think the system isn't working.

Wow, talk about a 180 degree...SMH

Who the best officials are is always going to be subjective. What is the basis for who is the best anyway?

I think a lot of guys who claim they should be at a certain point often are not very deserving or are not as good as they think they are.

And actually I have never heard anyone from the IHSA say that only the best work the playoffs. I have only heard what the criteria is and if you follow the criteria you will be considered. And guys thank that means working college or working other levels. Well it is one thing to work a college game with some very decent athletes in a gym with 10 people watching. It is quite another to work a HS game with 3000 and on TV. As much as I love working college games, I have never been as nervous working any of those games at the NAIA or JUCO level that I am working a big time high school game.

And I did not want to mention names, but a couple of those people you mentioned have not worked any further than me. Actually some of those individuals are not holding me back at all.

Peace

Best is subjective.

There are so many factors that go into what makes a good official. I'd put play calling as number 1, but there are some intangibles such as game management that are very hard to quantify.

Why is it discouraging? Because those officials may have to wait a few more years to get their shot at the brass ring?

One of the biggest problems I see are guys who think they should get a state final in their fifth season.

I have worked 3 State Finals in sports other than basketball. I can tell you that I was not ready even close after my 5th year. I had no perspective of the games I was involved in before and if I had the same catch/no catch call 5 or 6 years earlier in my football state final, I would not have been able to handle the criticism that came with that call. There is a lot more to working State Finals than just working the game. You also have to handle people wondering why you are where you are and wondering why you did not do the things they would have done if in the same position. That is not an easy thing to handle. Calling the game is easy, but having people be openly critical in this day and age is not something everyone can or has handled well.

Just look at the 2A State Finals for example and how what happen might follow those officials for the rest of their careers. And not all the officials were directly involved in some of the crap that happened. Even we posted plays here of what took place and this place goes to the world, not just Illinois.

Peace

We're singing from the same hymn book.

It's easy to work a game where there's no controversy, no crap, no defining moment where the spotlight is on you when you'd rather it be somewhere else.

Maybe it sounds like I'm just an old guy, but "good" experience counts for something.

That said, it sure does make it hard to break in for some really deserving people. It's not a knock on the guys, though, that have been doing it well for a long time.

What's funny is the most pressure I've felt was umpiring a Little League game. Then again, I'd never worked a plate job on ESPN before, knowing I was going to be criticized by people all over the country if I screwed up.

Agreed. ;)

Peace

Whether you screwed up or not. :D

Yes. Regular season assignments are all determined by the schools. Either AD's assign themselves, have someone else at the school assign, or hire an assigner. There are probably about 50+ assigners in the state, most with just a handful of schools. There are 3 big assigners that have maybe 30% of the total schools combined. About 50% of schools assign for themselves to save money, so getting games from them involves knowing the AD or making cold calls.

I agree. But there does come a point when a persons inability to get plays right deteriorates to the point where all the intangibles in the world cannot make up for it. The tangibles are much easier to measure and it is pretty evident when watching that a person can no longer handle the level of game they are being asked to work.


One of the biggest problems I see are guys who think they should get a state final in their fifth season

This might be true for the majority, but there are always guys out there that are capable of doing so. We have guys from the Chicago area that were doing mid-major D1 basketball by their 5th year officiating. You think they couldn't handle a state final game?

This is a load of crap. You are either ready to work the game or not. That might take some training and experience to get to the point where you can handle the on the court stuff. After that there is nothing one can do to practice or simulate working games in front of big crowds other than going out there and doing it. Some people will be able to handle this and others wont, but working more games in front of small crowds isn't going to make you any more prepared to handle this situation when it arises.

I'm sorry, but I don't see anything in there that would lead one to believe Rut's comments were a load of crap. Was there a point in his post that you're disagreeing with? If so, I don't see it here.

Actually...I thought this was one of JRut's most insightful posts ever.;)

Nope. Not a load of crap at all. Right on the mark. I can tell you from first hand experience there is a WORLD of difference.

There are a lot of guys that are working D1 you could make a case are not that good either. And if you listen to some veterans (who you may know) some never should have gotten there at all. So it is still subjective what or who is the best.

Peace

I was disagree with the statement that it makes a difference if there are 10 people in the stands or 3000 and that one can better handle working in front of 3000 with more experience. The experience one gains by working games can make your judgment better, you can learn to be in better positions, work on your mechanics, and manage a game better. But it doesn't matter how many games you work in front of small crowds you will not get better at working in front of big crowds. You will never know if you can or cannot handle working in front of big crowds until you are put in that situation and if you cant handle it, all the experience in the world will not make you any better at it. The ability to not care or worry about the stuff that is going on outside of the game on the court is innate. You either have it or you don't.

You are right, just because they are working D1 doesn't mean they are good. However, regardless of whether or not they are good, they would not last at the D1 level if they were intimidated or overwhelmed by the experience. Therefore, the young official can be as good, better, or worse than the more experienced official and be just as capable of working the state final game.

It does not matter how good you are, you just do not all of a sudden work the State Finals. Just like you do not all of a sudden work the Final Four. And there are many more not working the Final Four than working a State Final in Illinois.

Peace

The Roar Of The Crowd ...
 

I'm not sure if I agree, or disagree, with you.

(Full disclosure: I've never worked a state tournament game, conference playoffs, yes; public high school state tournament, no.)

We work all kinds of games here in my little corner of Connecticut. One night we could be working a "big" intracity rivalry game, in front of thousands, and the next night, a small rural school game, in front of a crowd of dozens, with their John Deere tractors parked in parking lot.

Over the years I have been able to completely "tune out" the crowd. My mind is on the players, my partner, the table crew, the coaches, the scoreboard, and the benches.

Maybe, as you say, I have it, or maybe, it was learned over thirty-three years. I'm not sure which.

Crowd size may/may not make a difference to some but one thing that can have an effect is experience. Or I should say experiences. Five years in I know I couldn't have handled the opportunity I had this past March. Frankly, I wasn't sure I was going to handle it properly once I was there. Those are the times 20+ years of experiences come back to me and remind me why I was selected to do a game in the first place. That's an advantage I'll have over a five-year guy if/when the $%&! hits the fan during a game.

or this:

I'll take my cow town school on a Friday night that seats 500 (only because the fire marshal works the clock). It is 80 degrees in the gym with 90% humidity. By the start of the 4th quarter of JV game the crowd grows exponentially, and is giving those guys all they want. We arrive on the court for the Varsity game and the gym is at capacity. Half of them just spent the last 3 hours across the street at the Legion or VFW hall. That my friend is 90 minutes of pure awesome! :D You can't just be a good official and handle this environment either.

Why can't a "good" official work these kinds of games? I like those gyms, too, but typically (here anyway) these are assigned as 2-man games. A good official can handle this easily. That is significantly different than 2 highly ranked 4A schools with thousands of people in the stands.

Maybe I didn't explain myself very well. Good officials can certainly work these games (and most likely do). Certain people may, or may not have been exposed to varying levels of competitive situations. Even in a small town one's ability to manage a game and exorcize good conflict resolution can be challenged (whether its 3000, or 500 many of the same variables apply). Plus the added feature of having everyone in such close proximity IMO adds a slightly different element.

That’s all I was getting at…..

A packed house, regardless of size, often creates a different atmosphere, which may create a problem in the performance of some officials.

As much as you and I disagree here, I agree with all you said (in this post and the others in this thread). Even for my first state tourney, in 2008, I was simply not ready. I struggled. It wasn't the games...they were all at a lower level than my normal week-to-week schedule, but it was the environment and the pressure of the tourney....all eyes on you at a level of scrutiny like never before and loser goes home. In my next two opportunities, after a bit more experience and reflection on the first strip, I did very, very well and was rewarded quite nicely for it.