Quote from Veteran Official that's seen the most A-11 Games in the Nation

[Rich]

Originally Posted by ajmc

I had hoped once the Presidential election was over, the lunatic fringe would crawl back into their hole and all the vile chatracter assassination BS would melt away. I guess not.

Apparently JayBird, you don't even know if this official exists or anything about him, but you are quick and eager to trash him and 50 years of service to football. You should be embarrassed, but I doubt you have enough class to know why.

Let's add some more smoke about the evils of copyright infringement. The way these discussions are spiraling, I think hyenas might have a legitimate gripe.

I was hoping KB and the lunatic fringe WOULD go away. But you're still here. Pity.

Tick tock on the A-11. It will be all gone and forgotten soon enough. Boo hoo.

[Rich]

Sam is 79 and apparently is the assignor of the East Bay Officials. It is unclear in 5 minutes of Googling if he is still an active official.

What is clear is that Sam is the only official widely quoted in different articles about this offense. He must be KB's example of an official who "likes" the offense.

[waltjp]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

Sam is 79 and apparently is the assignor of the East Bay Officials. It is unclear in 5 minutes of Googling if he is still an active official.

What is clear is that Sam is the only official widely quoted in different articles about this offense. He must be KB's example of an official who "likes" the offense.

Would it be fair to ask Sam if he's being compensated for his endorsement?

[TXMike]

And is there anything in that short snippet from KB that even proves the claim of the post headline. i.e. that he has seen more A-11 games than any other official? ? ? ? ? If he is an assignor, I doubt he has actually seen (and more importantly, OFFICIATED) many games of ANY offense.

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by TXMike

And is there anything in that short snippet from KB that even proves the claim of the post headline. i.e. that he has seen more A-11 games than any other official? ? ? ? ? If he is an assignor, I doubt he has actually seen (and more importantly, OFFICIATED) many games of ANY offense.

Do any of you bother to read the garbage you write. This is getting insane. You are so wrapped up in this A-11 contoversy you'd rather jump to all sorts of negative speculations, presume the absolute worst about an individual you don't know and make all sorts of asinne accusations without any thing to back them up aside from your imaginations.

If you don't believe what coach Bryan, or anybody else has claimed, you are totally free to ignore it, but personally attacking someone you don't even know is what little girls do throwing a hissy-fit.

RichMSN is ready to call this man a liar, and questions whether or not he's still active. Based on what?

Waltjp seems ready to question his integrity presuming he's getting paid to say certain things, whether they're true, or not. Where does that suspicion come from?

Daggo66 seems eager to questions the man's competence over a 50 year career. ("being old doesn't mean you're good"), and somehow feels competent to demand a resume' to prove what?? That his 50 years satisfyies Daggo66's standards? Just who the hell are you to define standards for judging anyone competent, Daggo66?

I am so glad I don't have to worry about ever stepping on a field with any of you. You are so quick, so eager to slash and burn a man who has spent 50 years on the field, for what? Because this man has rendered an opinion of doing something that doesn't fit your view of how something so stupid as this argument, over a formation whose legality and appropriateness is currently under discussion, may yet turn out.

What happened to the "3rd team on the field" concept, the idea of respecting those who do what we do, of supporting fellow officials because we understand the difficulty of the job and the unreasonable expectations we face.

I don't think petty sniping, throwing unsubstantiated allegations against the wall and spreading rumors as a defense against a differing perspective is what anyone had in mind when they speak of courage, honesty and the ability to remain calm and the force of reason and composure when everyone around us is being over emotional is all about.

Some of you are way, WAY too full of yourselves.

[HLin NC]

now get back to ironing Kurt's shirts!

[TXMike]

Originally Posted by ajmc

If you don't believe what coach Bryan, or anybody else has claimed, you are totally free to ignore it, but personally attacking someone you don't even know is what little girls do throwing a hissy-fit.

Seems to me if someone makes a claim like KB did, that this official has seen more A11 games than any other official, and uses that to give the fellow some sort of credibility in addition to his credibility as an experienced official, he ought to be able to back it up. The A-11 is all over the country KB would have us believe. So how does he know who has seen the most games. And an assignor would likely not be watching the games of one team. If he is any kind of assignor, he is looking at all the teams he assigns for.

[waltjp]

AJ, you become more amusing with each passing day.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Do any of you bother to read the garbage you write. This is getting insane. You are so wrapped up in this A-11 contoversy you'd rather jump to all sorts of negative speculations, presume the absolute worst about an individual you don't know and make all sorts of asinne accusations without any thing to back them up aside from your imaginations.

If you don't believe what coach Bryan, or anybody else has claimed, you are totally free to ignore it, but personally attacking someone you don't even know is what little girls do throwing a hissy-fit.

RichMSN is ready to call this man a liar, and questions whether or not he's still active. Based on what?

Waltjp seems ready to question his integrity presuming he's getting paid to say certain things, whether they're true, or not. Where does that suspicion come from?

Daggo66 seems eager to questions the man's competence over a 50 year career. ("being old doesn't mean you're good"), and somehow feels competent to demand a resume' to prove what?? That his 50 years satisfyies Daggo66's standards? Just who the hell are you to define standards for judging anyone competent, Daggo66?

I am so glad I don't have to worry about ever stepping on a field with any of you. You are so quick, so eager to slash and burn a man who has spent 50 years on the field, for what? Because this man has rendered an opinion of doing something that doesn't fit your view of how something so stupid as this argument, over a formation whose legality and appropriateness is currently under discussion, may yet turn out.

What happened to the "3rd team on the field" concept, the idea of respecting those who do what we do, of supporting fellow officials because we understand the difficulty of the job and the unreasonable expectations we face.

I don't think petty sniping, throwing unsubstantiated allegations against the wall and spreading rumors as a defense against a differing perspective is what anyone had in mind when they speak of courage, honesty and the ability to remain calm and the force of reason and composure when everyone around us is being over emotional is all about.

Some of you are way, WAY too full of yourselves.

I'd rather be full of myself than what you are, sir.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Do any of you bother to read the garbage you write. This is getting insane. You are so wrapped up in this A-11 contoversy you'd rather jump to all sorts of negative speculations, presume the absolute worst about an individual you don't know and make all sorts of asinne accusations without any thing to back them up aside from your imaginations.

If you don't believe what coach Bryan, or anybody else has claimed, you are totally free to ignore it, but personally attacking someone you don't even know is what little girls do throwing a hissy-fit.

Let me get this straight. BTW, this is my real name and first initial of my first name. Are you telling me, that if I am using my real name and I say that I worked the Big Ten for 20 years and I worked in the NFL this past season, no one is supposed to not only try to verify that information, but just ignore it on its face? Then I keep coming back to give more evidence as to why I have to be listened to or evidence that I actually working in the Big Ten or NFL, with more evidence that cannot be verified?

If you honestly believe that, something is seriously wrong with you. Not because I say so, because there is not an area in society that if I make a claim that is not true, my credibility is going to be in question. And if I have a history of making claims that are not true, then people are going to challenge my motives. They are doing that when it comes to politics and our leaders, to our sports figures and the way the media challenges claims of accomplishment or how they got to where they are today. There is nothing about that childish, unprofessional or out of line to question the evidence that someone claims.

All of this would really go away if KB would just let the issue go. No one told him or me to post this information about this official and based on "experience" which you do not seem to have much of, many of us do not see a team in a two year period of time so much more than anyone else. Not unless you only work one school every single game you work during that period.

Dude, wake up already.

Peace

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Are you telling me, that if I am using my real name and I say that I worked the Big Ten for 20 years and I worked in the NFL this past season, no one is supposed to not only try to verify that information, but just ignore it on its face?
And if I have a history of making claims that are not true, then people are going to challenge my motives.

Dude, wake up already.

Peace

I wouldn't presume to "tell" you anything, but I would never even think about verifying whatever you claim is your history or accomplishments. I choose, rather, to base how much attention and credibility I'll apply to what you say, to what I find the value of what you've said, actually is.

You seem to be awfully insecure about your credibility and what others think of your observations. I might suggest that if you're comfortable and secure with your credibility, and believe your observations have value, that's really all that you can do, and all that should be necessary.

I've read your input on multiple issues for several years and find it most often to be relevant, appropriate and instructive, because you usually stick to the salient specifics of whatever point or subject is being discussed. Occassionally you do tend to drift a little towards overbearing and pompous, but usually not to the extent of eliminating the basic value of your observations.

I've found most of your suggestions, even those I may not totally agee with, rational and reasonable and hope you wouldn't reject my right to disagee, should I feel disagreement was appropriate. However, I would hope I'm smart enough to offer any disagreement respectfully, and in such a manner that I might hope to persuade you, or others, to consider my perspective or create a discussion from which I might be persuaded to consider a different perspective. Otherwise what's the point in responding. Whatever my response might be, the manner in which it was delivered only reflects on me.

These discussions, on this subject, turned sour when some (I'm not going to bother to specify who said what, when) got off the track of the issue and went after the messenger. You mention our political process, which has over the past few decades, largely seen the political debate hijacked by spin masters, on both sides, who use rumor, innuendo, unsubstantiated accusations to slime and slander opponents for the express purpose of blowing smoke in voters eyes, unfortunately, often successfully.

I just hate to see these, normally valuable exchanges about very specific, relevant topics follow down the same road of, "if you don't see it my way, you're the devil". A lot of the pure garbage that has been offered in these recent discussions is nothing to be proud of, and what is saddest, is totally unproductive and unnecessary.

Don't roll your eyes, look in your mirror. I look in mine and what I see is always a long way from perfection looking back, and no matter how much I yell at the image to change it won't improve until I do.

[daggo66]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Do any of you bother to read the garbage you write. This is getting insane. You are so wrapped up in this A-11 contoversy you'd rather jump to all sorts of negative speculations, presume the absolute worst about an individual you don't know and make all sorts of asinne accusations without any thing to back them up aside from your imaginations.

If you don't believe what coach Bryan, or anybody else has claimed, you are totally free to ignore it, but personally attacking someone you don't even know is what little girls do throwing a hissy-fit..

Why am I not allowed to dispute what someone has "claimed". Why must I ignore it? Does KB's right to make a statement superscede my right to dispute it?

Originally Posted by ajmc

RichMSN is ready to call this man a liar, and questions whether or not he's still active. Based on what?

Based on the same standard we use for everything here. If someone posts a ruling, we will ask for the rule reference. If someone makes a claim they should be prepared to have a reference.

Originally Posted by ajmc

Waltjp seems ready to question his integrity presuming he's getting paid to say certain things, whether they're true, or not. Where does that suspicion come from? .

The information is posted as a testimonial. Quite often testimonials are paid.

Originally Posted by ajmc

Daggo66 seems eager to questions the man's competence over a 50 year career. ("being old doesn't mean you're good"), and somehow feels competent to demand a resume' to prove what?? That his 50 years satisfyies Daggo66's standards? Just who the hell are you to define standards for judging anyone competent, Daggo66?

You never cease to amaze me! We are not allowed to dispute someone's statement since you feel it is personally attacking someone, yet that is exactly what you do each and every time you post here. The difference between you and me is that I will answer your question. You can't go into a job interview and state that you graduated at the top of your class in Harvard unless it is on your resume and it can be verified. As far as me being able to define standards, I have trained many officials over the years. My basic standard is whether or not I would accept that person on my crew. Our organization has officials that have been working for over 15 years that I would not accept, yet there are some with less than 3 years experience that I would accept in a heartbeat.

This is no different than requesting the rule reference. I don't care how long someone has been officiating, I want to know how good they are.

Originally Posted by ajmc

I am so glad I don't have to worry about ever stepping on a field with any of you. You are so quick, so eager to slash and burn a man who has spent 50 years on the field, for what? Because this man has rendered an opinion of doing something that doesn't fit your view of how something so stupid as this argument, over a formation whose legality and appropriateness is currently under discussion, may yet turn out.

What happened to the "3rd team on the field" concept, the idea of respecting those who do what we do, of supporting fellow officials because we understand the difficulty of the job and the unreasonable expectations we face.

I don't think petty sniping, throwing unsubstantiated allegations against the wall and spreading rumors as a defense against a differing perspective is what anyone had in mind when they speak of courage, honesty and the ability to remain calm and the force of reason and composure when everyone around us is being over emotional is all about.

Some of you are way, WAY too full of yourselves.

I think that I can safely speak for most of the members on this forum, that we are equally glad that we don't have to worry about stepping on the field with you!

[Rich]

Originally Posted by daggo66

Our organization has officials that have been working for over 15 years that I would not accept, yet there are some with less than 3 years experience that I would accept in a heartbeat.

The old saying is that some people have 15 years of experience and some have one year of experience 15 times. I'm with you - there are 30 year vets in this area I would not accept on my crew. They know it all.

(OT: My football crew consists of one guy who's got 5 years (all on my crew), one who has 4 years (all on my crew), one who has 3 years (all on my crew), and a 10 year guy who filled in when I sacked 2 other guys from my crew 3 years ago. I'd take this crew ANYWHERE.)

[ajmc]

Daggo66, allow me to offer you some sound advice; when you say something stupid, and it's pointed out to you, you have 3 options; consider the criticism, ignore the criticism or defend what you've said with even more stupid observations. You seem stuck in repeatedly choosing the latter.

I'm tired of saying there is nothing wrong with disputing what someone has said, disagreeing with anything you feel needs to be disagreed with or challenging something. The key is how you go about disagreeing or challenging something.

Again, you get to make choices, you can question, disagree with or challenge the subject matter with logic and common sense or you can attack the person who hold a differing opinion with ridiculous personal attacks, imanginary presumptions and smart alec little barbs, or demand ridiculous requirements to satisfy some higher sense of purpose that somehow you think you've been anointed to set.

I'm just guessing, but I imagine you've been doing this, thing we do, for somewhere between 3 and 7-10 years, because you seem stuck in that phase of officiating, we all have to get though, when we realize that we actually do know and understand more than most idiots who buy tickets and stoll along some sidelines, and think that makes us important.

If you last long enough to get through this phase, you'll realize that although you know and understand a lot more than you did, it's not nearly enough or anywhere close to knowing and understanding what you ultimately need to. You'll eventually realize that you still leave an oder in the bathroom, and you might understand that the reason God gave you two ears, and only one mouth was to teach a lesson. Unfortunately, some officials never get past that phase where they think they know everything and have become smarter than everone else.

Rather than direct all your focus on nit picling everything someone with a different perspective offers, you might consider that those tidbits, right or wrong, have been offered respectfully and usually stick to the subject matter, rather than attack or demonize some imaginary motivation for your disagreeing. The negative emphasis in these discussions has come from only one direction.

There's nothing wrong with disagreeing, so long as you don't become disageeable or insulting. Manners and civility are things your parents were supposed to teach you, and although they may have tried valiantly, that message doesn't seem to have taken. I don't really care what your "basic standard" is, or need to know your specific objectives, because, as one official to another, I presume it's to be as good as you can be.

Here's another flash, you may someday grow to understand, some officials are actually a lot better at what we do than others, and you may actually not be as high up on that general list as you think you are. That doesn't mean you're not working as hard as you can to be the best you can be, or deserve less respect for your efforts.

I'll give you another piece of sound advice, don't presume you speak for anyone but yourself, because invariably you don't.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by waltjp

Would it be fair to ask Sam if he's being compensated for his endorsement?

That would be character assassination. Shame on you.