RefStripes.com
Football Officiating => Texas Topics => Topic started by: ElvisLives on November 30, 2017, 02:19:12 PM
-
As we all know, the assignment of game officials for UIL athletic events is governed by the UIL, which is a subdivision of the University of Texas. Thus, even if indirectly, it is an organization established by the State legislature. I see two possibilities for taking the competing institutions out of the assignment process:
1) The UIL voluntarily creates a fully separate, independent arm within itself, fully staffed and funded, for the purposes of recruiting, training, and assigning game officials to its athletic contests. This 'arm' would report and answer directly to the UIL Director. In this system, the UIL would have to find some way to fund the salaries and benefits of the "arm's" staff, which I have no doubt would be highly distasteful to the member institutions. They would likely require the officials to fund the 'arm' with exorbitant membership dues and fees.
2) The State Legislature creates a completely separate and independent entity, fully staffed and funded, for the purposes of recruiting, training, and assigning game officials to UIL athletic contests. This entity might be a separate agency, reporting/answering to a high level State official, or, similar to the UIL, might be a Legislatively mandated subdivision of another State agency (perhaps a state institution of higher education), reporting/answering to a high level administrator. In this system, (hopefully) the Legislature would provide funding for the salaries and benefits of the staff (a blip in the overall State budget).
As much as I would not like to add to the State's bureaucracy, I am of the opinion that the only way to eliminate the specter of "conflict of interest" (by either game officials or competing institutions) is to totally separate the two. Similar to the NCAA and all major professional sports, the competing institutions would have no direct input on which officials are assigned to work their contests. Officials would then be free to perform their jobs without the concern of getting "scratched" by a team for nothing more than doing their jobs correctly, perhaps to the disadvantage of an institution that finds it difficult to comply with the rules they set for themselves through their governing body.
In both systems above, the officials are insulated from the institutions, to varying degrees.
In system 1), the director of the officiating organization would still be subject to undue influence from the UIL Director (who works at the pleasure of the member institutions). While better than the current system, it doesn't provide full "separation of church and state," so to speak.
In system 2), there is far better separation. The high level government official/administrator (the 'boss'), would not be nearly as likely to exhibit bias toward either institutions or game officials, and would not bother the director of the officiating organization. Effectively, it would take TASO and make it a state agency.
The UIL would not like either system, because they "lose control" of officiating. I don't believe for a moment that they have "control" of us, anyway. But that would certainly be the perception. They would believe that there would be no "accountability" of the officiating community. We can fix that. Without going into great detail, a system for filing and reviewing grievances could be set up, with real consequences for proven officiating errors. Also, allowance for limited pre-season 'scratches' could be set up. With this, they would actually have better "accountability," while eliminating any possibility of conflict of interest related to the "fear" of the scratch.
But, I honestly believe it will take Legislative action to fix this, rightly, once, and for all.
Robert
-
So, in your system, who does the actual game assignments?
-
So, in your system, who does the actual game assignments?
Greg Abbott
-
No system will ever be perfect. Not local control, no coach selection, not UIL assigned or some governing body.
It is what it is.
With the money and prestige of the playoffs, someone will always want to try to game the system.
-
And you certainly don't want politicians making these decisions. They have no business being involved on high school officiating policy making and assignment of officials. Talk about giving the wolf the master keys to the hen house.
-
ReRead his ideas. Nothing about politicians assigning officials.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
ReRead his ideas. Nothing about politicians assigning officials.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I’m referring to point #2 in the OP. I take it to mean the buck starts/stops with the legislature. They are politicians, aren’t They?
-
So, in your system, who does the actual game assignments?
In System 1), I envision that the UIL "officiating department" would continue to work with TASO, in some form.
In System 2), assuming the Legislature funds the agency in whole, I envision the agency establishing assignment groups - essentially the same as the current TASO Chapters, each of which would be funded by local dues/fees. These assignment groups could work just like the current chapter setup, just free of any input/influence from the competing institutions for making assignments. Obviously, the local assignment groups would take direction from the agency.
Lots of details to be worked out, but the goal is to eliminate the inherent conflict of interest in allowing the competitors to select the game officials. This current practice is no different than allowing a citizen to select the police officers that will be on duty at any given time; and select the prosecutor, judge and jury, should he be taken to trial. After all, those are the roles that game officials assume when they work a game. We need to be free of any possibility of influence by the "citizen."
Now, if the UIL will voluntarily change their policy to require officials to be assigned by TASO, with no allowance for institutions to approve assignments, then we could go on much like we are, but better, because no one would have to fear getting 'scratched' for flagging a coach that comes onto the field vigorously arguing a ruling, etc. That team just might see that same official two weeks later, because he is a fully qualified and competent official, regardless of what the coach thinks.
Of course, we know that ain't gonna happen. Like I said, it will take action by the Legislature to stop this conflict of interest.
Robert
-
The best thing about the coach picks system is... If the coach didn't like the crew, dont use them next time.
Your system is great and I agree with it but it will never be implemented.
With our numbers as low as they are and everyone getting older I see a lot of demographic problems coming up very quickly. If anything the haves vs have not gap is just going to get wider and wider.
-
How about simple rules.
1) No team is allowed to use any chapter that works their regular season games from 2nd round of playoffs onward. 2) No crew can work a playoff game for the same team two weeks consecutively during the playoffs.
-
How about simple rules.
1) No team is allowed to use any chapter that works their regular season games from 2nd round of playoffs onward. 2) No crew can work a playoff game for the same team two weeks consecutively during the playoffs.
Playoff games aren't the only issue. The conflict of interest extends to all contests.
Under the systems I suggested, but particularly under system 2, the officiating office or agency would have the sole responsibility to determine how all assignments would be made, with assignment policies including limiting the number of contests a crew or individual could work in a given period of time, etc. To be fair to the schools, any assignment policy would probably need to take travel distance into account, unless the UIL were to proclaim that travel distance was not to be considered in assignment of officials. (Then someone would need to pinch me to wake me out of that dream.)
Regarding assignment of officials from assignment centers that work the regular season games of the participants, that is exactly the type of thinking that needs to change. The whole point is to free officials from concern about the teams they work, and be solely concerned about the officiating - regardless of who it is. That goes for the teams, too. They should not have to be concerned about the possibility of favoritism, the potential for which is bred by the current system. Teams should be able to have officials from any assignment center, and know they are going to get a high level of quality and consistency.
The current system does nothing to promote such an environment.
Robert
-
From December 10th 2014... It is funny how this topic always comes up around that date?
After thinking about it more (which is dangerous in and of itself):
TASO State and UIL mandate that 6 of the championship games next year will be called from a pool of 6 crews. We get those 6 crews by every chapter submitting 6 crews to the state level. The state then identifies the six finalist. The coaches will then pick which of the 6 crews officiate which game.
Qualifications for the crews being submitted.... Every Crew will submit every penalty, and every coach complaints from every game thru HUDL. If you can not create a playlist with every penalty and every coach complaint you are not eligible. Turn the playlist into a presentation and the presentation is what is evaluated at local state and championship coaches.
If you call 22 games you need every penalty and every complaint from every game. If you call 7 games you need every penalty and every complaint from every game. You must make the playlist and tag the plays by penalty and position making the call. These plays are then used for all training modules created for the next year.
If you dont have a HUDL acct you can use the state account. If you do not use crews create an all star crew from your chapter for your shot.
You will be reviewing and looking at film which will make everybody better. HUDL usage will take off. Most importantly everyone will have an opportunity. There will be a system in place as opposed to the current method. Thoughts???
-
Let's think about this suggestion:
22 chapters x 6 crews = 132 crews
132 crews x 12 games each(guesstimating this, but I think it's realistic) = 1584 crew games
1584 games x 8 penalties(again, guesstimate) = 12, 672 penalties
12,672 x 90 seconds = 11,404,80 game seconds / 60 = 19,008 game minutes to review
Who are we hiring that has this time to do this job?
-
Let's think about this suggestion:
22 chapters x 6 crews = 132 crews
132 crews x 12 games each(guesstimating this, but I think it's realistic) = 1584 crew games
1584 games x 8 penalties(again, guesstimate) = 12, 672 penalties
12,672 x 90 seconds = 11,404,80 game seconds / 60 = 19,008 game minutes to review
Who are we hiring that has this time to do this job?
Most chapters are not going to prescreen to send 6 to the final stage. Also the majority of the fouls are easy yes no. Offsides/False Start. TXMike can evaluate 1 play in 20 seconds. So can I and a couple of other HUDL Guru's. I am not an evaluator!!! It is a system which is far better then what is available at this point in the game.
-
Forgive my skepticism, but of 22 chapters, 11 will send 1 crew, 11 might send 6, but after all the smoke and mirrors, the chance of working in Jerry world is about equal to winning the publishers clearinghouse sweepstakes.
-
I agree Cowman. You are asking for a system. This is a better system then what is currently available. I also agree on your numbers submitted.
-
No question, there are lots of issues to deal with regarding how assignments would be made in whatever independent system that gets created. But, the point is to achieve independence. We simply must get the institutions out of the assignment process., so that there can be no actual or perceived influence by the institutions on the on-field performance of the game officials.
Let’s get focused on that and have conversations with folks that can get this done.
Robert
-
No question, there are lots of issues to deal with regarding how assignments would be made in whatever independent system that gets created. But, the point is to achieve independence. We simply must get the institutions out of the assignment process., so that there can be no actual or perceived influence by the institutions on the on-field performance of the game officials.
Let’s get focused on that and have conversations with folks that can get this done.
Robert
I can assure you, this is a non-starter for any negotiation with the UIL. The THSCA would not support this. I've been in meetings where the current UIL director, when he was the director of athletics at the UIL, said the very foundation of the UIL is its coaches (obviously referring to football coaches) and the most important "right" they have is the right to scratch (essentially, the right to choose officials). Until coaches are convinced things need to change, they will not change. Change of this type does not come from officials or TASO. We saw what happened last time. The system we have now is what we will have. I do not see it changing in my lifetime. If you can initiate a top down approach, legislature > TEA > UIL, there might be some fighting chance, but politicians being what they are, I find that approach just being a dead end. Follow the money. It begins at the ticket booth at every high school playoff game. That may or may not be why playoffs have been expanded so much over the years.
-
I do not see it changing in my lifetime.
I see football as we know it ending before this were to happen.
-
It can be accomplished, one way or another, if the will is there. So, that is the question. Do you WANT it to happen?
To get a better feel of the crowd sentiment, I created a poll (see top of page). It is nothing but a poll of desire. Forget about HOW it might happen. Just vote whether or not you'd like to have it happen. If you really like the current system and don't want it to change, vote NO. If you'd like to see a truly independent officiating assignment system, vote YES.
What say ye?
Robert
-
It doesn't matter what we want. We aren't in charge here.
-
It doesn't matter what we want. We aren't in charge here.
^good ^good ^good
-
If I was a coach I would want to have say in who officiates my games, and I think we all would if we were the coach. We all need to remember a coach makes his living on wins and losses. Granted the coach chose this profession. We as officials are nothing more than paid volunteers. At the end of the day to us as officials it is only a game, but to the coach the games are his evaluation.
-
You certainly don't want UIL in charge hEaDbAnG
-
I agree if I were a coach I would want to too, same as most inmates would want to make the rules of the prison :-)
Perhaps play to their desire to be the best. Get the competition authority to say they want the best teams to succeed and not leave stuff to chance with crew bias.
Convince the teams that didn't win that this is the reason they lost, you'll have more teams that lost the championship and may be able to carry the majority.
-
At the end of the day to us as officials it is only a game, but to the coach the games are his evaluation.
This type of "mindset" probably accounts for the mediocrity seen in the vocation of officiating
-
No, the fact that there are not enough officials, too many games, and the cold hard fact that an official that draws a breath is the only requirement for maybe 60 percent of the games. Good or bad at it is not on the list.
-
If I was a coach I would want to have say in who officiates my games, and I think we all would if we were the coach. We all need to remember a coach makes his living on wins and losses. Granted the coach chose this profession. We as officials are nothing more than paid volunteers. At the end of the day to us as officials it is only a game, but to the coach the games are his evaluation.
That's exactly what the coaches say. The same coaches who say this, then change jobs/schools every 2 or 3 years. The argument doens't hold water. Officials have very little, if any, affect on the W/L columns. With that said, I say this argument is pure BS and point to college football as proof. Those coaches sure make a heck of a lot more money and they do not get to choose their officials.
-
It doesn't matter what we want. We aren't in charge here.
Thanks to folks like George Washington, Alexander Hamilton, the Adams, Thomas Jefferson, et al, we are no longer subjects of the British Empire. They weren't in charge when they started the American Revolution, either.
No matter how big - like a political revolution - or how small - like Texas HS officiating assignments - if people want something, they fight for it. And, if enough people fight the good fight, they win.
So, back to the poll question: Do you want a system that eliminates the competing institutions from the assignment process? Or not? You make the call.
Robert
-
If I was a coach I would want to have say in who officiates my games, and I think we all would if we were the coach. We all need to remember a coach makes his living on wins and losses. Granted the coach chose this profession. We as officials are nothing more than paid volunteers. At the end of the day to us as officials it is only a game, but to the coach the games are his evaluation.
We have a coach who won 1 game in 5 years and has no problem getting contract extensions each year. If you are a good educator that is what keeps the job. I have seen coaches go undefeated with a state championship lose their job at the end of the season. No matter how great the coach is, if you don't have athletes you lose games. You can't coach athleticism but you can coach them to be good men.
-
We have a coach who won 1 game in 5 years and has no problem getting contract extensions each year. If you are a good educator that is what keeps the job. I have seen coaches go undefeated with a state championship lose their job at the end of the season. No matter how great the coach is, if you don't have athletes you lose games. You can't coach athleticism but you can coach them to be good men.
Well said! aWaRd aWaRd aWaRd
-
Well, the poll surprises me. Of course, it is totally unscientific, and the sampling was extremely small compared to the whole body of TASO officials. But, I am surprised that ANYBODY said they DO NOT want to keep the competing institutions out of the assignment process. Not only shocking, but frightening. I can only surmise those folks want to maintain the status quo, and they fear change. They must fear their schedule will “suffer” if the system changes.
Well, I will keep spreading the gospel of independence.
Robert
-
Indiana has a crazy "assigning" process as well. For the most part the schools hire crews directly and games are scheduled as many as 5 or 6 years in advance. Our crew is booked through 2022 and we have 1 game booked in 2024. That's crazy because crews change and/or dissolve over time. Schools change ADs and don't always keep track of crews hired well and transition to the new AD so he/she ends up double booking games. School change conferences which causes schedules to change which can cause a crew to lose a game. Some schools do hire assigners to schedule their game, but they are individual people so you are just networking with a handful of individual assigners rather than the ADs.
Playoff assignments are done by the IHSAA based on a ranking that is mostly based on coaches voting on crews. Around weeks 6-8 the school are all sent a list of crews that applied for the playoffs. They are asked to vote for the crews that worked their games the last 3 years, but there is no way to enforce it since the state doesn't have any schedule info. Some crews get 20-30 votes and some crews get 80-100 votes. The ones with more votes tend to get a lot more 5s (highest rating) because they know a lot of coaches and ADs. It's ultimately a popularity score and not a quality score. For the most part the same crews cycle to the finals. We got 28 votes this year and only half the schools we worked the past 3 years voted for us. We had 6-8 votes from schools where we've never worked or haven't worked for a few years.
That being said, I think the Texas system of coaches specific games is crazy, especially in the playoffs. They should have no direct say in which crews work those games.
-
So, in Indiana, can the crews/officials call or visit schools and coaches and ADs to solicit games?
-
So, in Indiana, can the crews/officials call or visit schools and coaches and ADs to solicit games?
Add work as a ball boy in the playoffs only to be picked the following weekend by that same school.
-
Add work as a ball boy in the playoffs only to be picked the following weekend by that same school.
"Ballboy." Is that a metaphor? And for what?
LOL LOL LOL
-
Playoff assignments are done by the IHSAA based on a ranking that is mostly based on coaches voting on crews.
This seems like it would make the problem we complain about even worse. If you throw a bunch of flags against a team that is destined to go to state, you can kiss your playoffs goodbye. I've found that the only time I get good "ratings" by coaches is when A) they win and B) I dont throw flags on their players.
-
"Ballboy." Is that a metaphor? And for what?
LOL LOL LOL
Nope real talk. R worked balls for a team/sideline then that coach picked him for his game next week.
-
This seems like it would make the problem we complain about even worse. If you throw a bunch of flags against a team that is destined to go to state, you can kiss your playoffs goodbye. I've found that the only time I get good "ratings" by coaches is when A) they win and B) I dont throw flags on their players.
Each school gets 1 vote for you so the 9-0 team counts just as much as the 0-9 team. They don't get to collectively decide. Some crews are paranoid that a school will give them a bad vote if they make a call against them, but I don't think it has as big an impact as they think. It really comes down to HOW many votes you get. Theoretically the more votes you get the more "friendly" votes you are getting and the higher your average vote. As I said above, the crews that advance the final couple rounds (we have 6 rounds) tend to get 80-100 votes. Those with 30-40 votes have a lot less margin of error and the bad votes that ding a crew probably separate 1st and 2nd round crews more than preventing them from reaching the regional final or beyond.
Ultimately if you communicate in a professional manor with coaches and treat them with respect you'll get more positive votes than negative votes. You'll still get the guy who's HACKED off because you missed 30 holding calls on his opponent or you flagged them for being in your way on the sideline, but if you only get 1 or 2 of those votes it won't have a major impact on your rating. And the same thing applies to every crew, not just your crew.
-
One coach told me this year that our association was working his game because he won a coin toss. If he had lost the coin toss, the other coach would be picking who worked the game.
-
One coach told me this year that our association was working his game because he won a coin toss. If he had7 lost the coin toss, the other coach would be picking who worked the game.
They flip for everything it seems. We had a game where the winner of the toss picks the chapter and the other coach got to pick the crew from that chapter.