RefStripes.com
Football Officiating => Texas Topics => Topic started by: Arbitrator on March 08, 2012, 02:09:32 PM
-
^flag
Several TASO Chapters, for many years, have been inviting head football coaches to some chapter meetings to speak to the chapter members regarding coaches evaluations and what the coaches expectations are of a football officiating crew that is working one of their games. Do you feel, in any way, that those coaches are eminently qualified to render viable information on that given subject matter? Why or why not? z^
-
90% of the time there is too much variation in their evaluation simply based on if one call in a game was seen as "bad" (right or wrong) and if they win or lose the game.
You could have a crew that went out and yucked it up with a coach, were sloppy mechanically, and as long as there weren't any big plays or tough calls and the coach wins the game they are going to get a 1 or a 100, or whatever the top grade is.
Now you take a crew that is all business, but not aloof, great mechanics and have one questionable call (right or wrong by the crew, doesn't matter it is the perception of the coach) and the coach lose and they are going to get downgraded, most likely.
It is the nature of the beast, they don't know our mechanics, they don't know what different officials are looking at, and many know only a smattering of the rules, work the wings and hear a coach ask questions about one thing or another and it doesn't take long to figure these things out.
So the ratings/grades aren't really worth much except to make them feel like they have input on something, if they really feel you did a bad job, they will scratch you and you can go on and work the multitude of other schools that every chapter services.
-
Here's what I know from the TASO State meeting up in Arlington a couple years ago.
One of the head coaches presenting his offense said what he wanted from officials was that we knew something about their program and that he was going to get some calls that benefitted him.
That spoke volumes.
-
Fence hits it on the head. It is all on emotion and they do not know enough.
-
I wouldnt mind input, because even if they dont know EXACTLY what we're looking at or why, they still have an opinion that holds some weight. They, like us, are IN the game and can offer valuable criticism to help us improve. However, I agree with most of y'all that the coaches opinions should be taken with a grain of salt. I sure care more what a coach has to say than what a FAN has to say, that's for darn sure
-
^flag
The way I look at it, it makes just about as much sense for Coaches to evaluate us on mechanics and/or judgment as it would be for us to evaluate the Coaches on areas such as play-calling, clock management, and their affibility toward officials. In essence, they are adversarial and we are judicial. Seems to me that it's kind of like having attorneys and judges grading each other. z^
-
I went to the coaches office to do the pregame one game and noticed on his desk was the crew rating card. It was already filled out and we didn't even work the game yet. Out of all the coaches evaluations I have received I can think of only about 3 that have had any benefit to me in the past 12 years.
-
I voted no because the evaluation is done based on to many variables. Could coaches give an honest evaluation based on rule knowledge, mechanics, and philosophy? Of course some could, but very seldom is that ever done. I have known coaches (like Jason referred to) that simply put a number on the card. I have known some who based the rating strictly on win/lose and some who base it on one call (again right or wrong).
A few coaches will actually lose the game on a close call and give a good rating, most wil not.
-
When I get a good rating, I think the coach is a genius and recognizes real talent. When he gives a poor rating, I think he's a sore loser.
-
I believe that if a coach were to turn in their HUDL video and list out the 5-10 penalties or questionable plays that it could go a long ways in crew and coach development. Once a coach turns in the plays an evaluator can look at them and grade the crew and grade the coaches ability to critique. Coaches that are productive in their evaluations will get more leadway in their complaints down the road. Coaches that just complain to complain will be treated like such.
Until we start tracking coaches complaints (which really would not be that hard with Hudl) this is all a moot point.
-
Some coaches respond to the chapters with video clips and reqest the chapter board review. Most however do not.
-
Isn't this precisely why the NFL and the colleges have officials, not coaches, grading film? I'm sure the coaches in the big time still contact the supervisor and [edit] complain, but it is other officials assigning the grades, not the coaches. Unfortunately, that is a luxury most high school chapters don't have, except maybe Houston, but Lordy don't tell them they are JUST a high school chapter! :sTiR:
-
Just remember one thing. The individual who is grading you is the same one a Federal Judge called "Hopelessly Childish." Thats the type of feedback I can use to be a better official.
As part of their job, they have a right to an opinion on the officials, and thats all it is. An opinion. Same as we don't have a right to grade them, just have an opinion of them.
-
Just remember one thing. The individual who is grading you is the same one a Federal Judge called "Hopelessly Childish." Thats the type of feedback I can use to be a better official.
As part of their job, they have a right to an opinion on the officials, and thats all it is. An opinion. Same as we don't have a right to grade them, just have an opinion of them.
^flag
Now for me to have my crew duly graded by a representative from :bOW tiphat: Manor Road cRaZy just speaks volumes! Now if the grading is indeed being done by cRaZy "Mr. Hopelessly Childish," then that's just spectacular! I mean, his experience is so vast! In addition to his actually having seen a football game once, rumor has it that he was a grizzled old intramural touch-football official at some small West Texas institution of higher education for all 13 years that it took him to get outta there! z^
-
Here's the printout of the UIL coaches evaluation sent by UIL to the chapter. This was forwarded to me for last night's game. I have removed the personal info and ratings -- here is simply the questions asked just in case anyone is interested:
The UIL Sports Officials Department has received a performance evaluation for
officials from the ___ officials chapter.
This evaluation was submitted by a coach, (coach)
-----------------------------------
CONTEST INFORMATION:
Date: ()
Sport: Varsity Football
Home school: (home)
Visiting school: (visitor)
Game site: (home)
OFFICIALS:
Names or description: (officials names)
Chapter: (chapter)
EVALUATION:
Overall Grade: (letter grade)
Comments:
Evaluation details:
(all have listed Agree or disagree by the comment or question; removed for this post)
Official did not know the rules.
Official was consistent in foul calling from the beginning to the end.
Official showed favoritism for one team or student-athlete.
Officials calls were made when needed.
Official did not apply rules correctly.
Official made too many calls for the level of the contest.
Official does not understand the contest.
Official used proper signals to communicate fouls, infractions, etc.
Official had the courage to make needed calls during critical times.
Official did not display confidence when making calls.
Official was able to justify and explain calls.
Official made too few calls for the level of the contest.
Official was in proper position to see action.
Official let emotions get in the way of his/her performance.
Official was consistent in officiating the same for both teams.
Official did not appear to be physically fit.
Official did not involve game administrators when needed.
Official displayed professional demeanor in overseeing contest.
Official did not wear proper uniform.
Official did not arrive on site at proper time.
Official was courteous and willing to listen to participants.
Official did not listen to questions or concerns from coaches/team
captains.
Official did not hustle throughout contest.
Official had the ability to cover plays and be in proper position.
Official could not keep up with the pace of the contest.
Official worked well with co-officials.
Official communicated with co-officials in order to get the correct
call.
Official addressed sportsmanship issues in a timely and professional
manner.
Official communicated, when needed, to players and coaches.
Official gave the impression they were the most important part of the
contest.
-----------------------------------
Thank you,
Tony Timmons
UIL Director of Officials
-
Some of the problems we have ran into are that if the coach gave the crew a bad eval it was all the same comment for every official. You can't tell me every official made every call on every play. We always ask for game film at the pregame with each coach. We tell them we like to see what we do on the field so we can get better. Then the coach gets beat blames it on the officials, bad eval, no film. The reason he doesn't want to give film is because it will prove him wrong. Evals from some coaches are just not worth the paper they write them on. We all know when we gave both teams a good game. Learn from each other get better as a crew and move on.
-
Here's the printout of the UIL coaches evaluation sent by UIL to the chapter. This was forwarded to me for last night's game.
For what its worth..this poorly worded evaluation form is available to any drunk with an internet connection at: https://www.uiltexas.org/form/officials-evaluation/submit.php?sport=Football
Anyone can submit an "eval". Not sure what UIL does with those not from "real" coaches.
-
And for each sport, the evaluation is identical.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Some of the problems we have ran into are that if the coach gave the crew a bad eval it was all the same comment for every official. You can't tell me every official made every call on every play. We always ask for game film at the pregame with each coach. We tell them we like to see what we do on the field so we can get better. Then the coach gets beat blames it on the officials, bad eval, no film. The reason he doesn't want to give film is because it will prove him wrong. Evals from some coaches are just not worth the paper they write them on. We all know when we gave both teams a good game. Learn from each other get better as a crew and move on.
Our chapter started using HUDL just last week and we have gotten pretty much all the games since the first week. I sent a letter to all of our coaches and they were very supportive to allowing us access to their game film. Once I receive the film I share it with the members on that crew. I then watch the game myself and make clips of interesting plays and then create a training tape to send out to the chapter each week. If your chapter is not already using HUDL then it may be something you bring up to your leadership.
-
JasonTX. We have set up our crew Hudl account but have had coaches not add us after they give bad eval. We love Hudl and have used it this season.
-
This is going to be a long but important post. I have received a zebra ware evaluation by at least one coach every week. I listed them out below. I look at the chapter over all zebra ware summary and my 7 evaluations make up like 12 percent of the total evaluations. Do you not ask coaches to fill out the zebra ware evaluations? I make that and HUDL as part of my pregame and I have always received at least 1 after every game.
What does your chapter do with these evaluations?
What is the point of having the option if the chapter brass is not going to incorporate it into training or rankings?
All of mine have been positive so far. I think the evaluations should count towards something with regards to crew rankings. We should not charge a school to cover one of their scrimmages if they always send a HUDL film and fill out an evaluation.
LOOSING COACH
5 Field Presence/Professionalism R 100 Crew was one of most professional crews I have had. Very professional from before to end of game.
WINNING COACH
1 Game Management R
100 Good enjoyed the lineman on my sideline
2 Communication R
100 very good explained fouls and reported numbers. Clear communication before the game
3 Field Presence/Professionalism R
100 were part of the game but not the game- very impressed- referee sent the most professional pre-game correspondence I have ever received.
Winning Coach
4 Rules Knowledge R
100 made some very good tough calls that did not go in our favor but were correct on film
5 Mechanics/Position R
100 back judge was good- made one outstanding call that cost a TD reception but was correct
6 Physical Condition/Appearance R
100 very good- referee was clear and obviously had a good relationship with his crew
Loosing Coach
4 Rules Knowledge R
100 handed out a great little sheet of rule changes for this year and went over them.
Winning Coach
1 Game Management R
100 Excellent game management.
2 Communication R
l 100 Communicated penalties when needed and did a good job!
3 Field Presence/Professionalism R
100 Best crew we have had all year
4 Rules Knowledge R
100 Excellent
5 Mechanics/Position R
100 Top notch. Always in position communicated before making big calls...
6 Physical Condition/Appearance R
100
-
Coby, I'm not sure of the numbers, but I would guess there are more chapter using Arbiter than ZW, and Arbiter does not have an evaluation section for coaches.
To your point about a coaches evaluation "meaning something," I could not disagree more. Their "evaluation" is very subjected and uneducated (as it relates to what officials should be graded on). A true evaluation must be done by an unbiased observer educated in the rules and mechanics of high school football in Texas. All else is garbage.
-
For what its worth..this poorly worded evaluation form is available to any drunk with an internet connection at: https://www.uiltexas.org/form/officials-evaluation/submit.php?sport=Football
Anyone can submit an "eval". Not sure what UIL does with those not from "real" coaches.
MIke, you are being too nice when you say "poorly written." The author is sending a HORRIBLE message and must have had a very unhappy childhood. Beep, beep... no matter what kind of game you worked, here comes the bus!
And yes, while I have an internet connection, I am not drunk... at least not at the moment. ;D
-
Yep and this is the guy that danged near became our "boss"
-
Search this forum and you might find the evaluation authors email reply to my questioning whether this "evaluation" was a joke.
-
Coby, I'm not sure of the numbers, but I would guess there are more chapter using Arbiter than ZW, and Arbiter does not have an evaluation section for coaches.
To your point about a coaches evaluation "meaning something," I could not disagree more. Their "evaluation" is very subjected and uneducated (as it relates to what officials should be graded on). A true evaluation must be done by an unbiased observer educated in the rules and mechanics of high school football in Texas. All else is garbage.
Actually Arbiter does have an evaluation section. We get about 95% response from our games. It is much better than what the UIL rating card has. Each official gets their own score. You can then view what the average is for the whole chapter as a whole and what each official is averaging. It is set up to where if a coach puts a low score he must include a comment before it will let him submit it.
-
When I get a good rating, I think the coach is a genius and recognizes real talent. When he gives a poor rating, I think he's a sore loser.
Hahaha, exactly.
I think its great that they have a venue to give us feedback, but I also think MOST officials know better than most coaches whether we did a good job or not that night.
I do wish more coaches would provide comments with their evaluations. (Except for those time where you already have an evaluation by the time you drive back from your game!)
-
Same story, ? Verse----we have one coach that has scratched everyone in the chapter, then relented and picked a few to work his games, then his hand picked officials don't get him the results he expected and the low evaluations come hard and heavy.
Has the div 4 s mainly, except the white hat, and latest gripe is the officials getting worked by the coaches.
Can't help but think the inexperience will blow up one night, and at a critical point too no doubt.
-
Actually Arbiter does have an evaluation section. We get about 95% response from our games. It is much better than what the UIL rating card has. Each official gets their own score. You can then view what the average is for the whole chapter as a whole and what each official is averaging. It is set up to where if a coach puts a low score he must include a comment before it will let him submit it.
Well you learn something every day. As far as I know, our chapter does not have that option enabled. I wonder if it comes with an additional expense. The only reason I could see using it is to appease coaches or if a crew or an official consistently gets low grades. Otherwise, it isn't worth any time spent looking at them.
To take another angle on this issue, I would like to, as an official, give an evaluation of the coaches on a team to the UIL. If the UIL sees a trend of coaches misbehaving, they can start asking questions of the coaching staff. It should be a dual edged sword.
-
Based on past history (sideline control) I suspect UIL will say...did you penalize them? If not then they must not have been all that bad.
(You could always file a UIL Incident Report, even if there were no flags. Not sure how much attention it would receive)
-
I just think that it is very funny/hypercritical that my chapter: Allows coaches to pick officials for regular season games therefore giving them the power to make that decision. However, when it comes time to have a board assigned playoff game those same coaches comments and evaluations are not used in the magic formula.
We can not have it both ways. If they are "expert enough" to pick a crew for a regular season game then they should be "expert enough" to have their evaluations and rankings mean something in the ranking of crews.
-
(You could always file a UIL Incident Report, even if there were no flags. Not sure how much attention it would receive)
Doc receiving attention? Well knock me over with a feather LOL
-
We're the same way. What does it take to get coaches out of the selections?
-
Balls.
-
We're the same way. What does it take to get coaches out of the selections?
Hope and change?
-
Balls.
I'm afraid you're right.
-
Balls.
:bOW :bOW :bOW :bOW LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL pHiNzuP pHiNzuP pHiNzuP pHiNzuP pHiNzuP
-
We're the same way. What does it take to get coaches out of the selections?
As a good friend of mine says "The Inmates are running the asylum."
A question out of ignorance: Do all chapters let the coaches pick crews? I thought it was a statewide thing.
-
No not all.
-
No, there are still some sane chapters out there. Austin, North Texas and some others I think.
-
Based on past history (sideline control) I suspect UIL will say...did you penalize them? If not then they must not have been all that bad.
Forget UIL. TASO has done that. At least, their former President.
I submitted a game report about a coach and CLEARLY explained why I did not assess a Technical foul (basketball game, obviously) -- hell, I spent more time explaining why I didn't give a T than what the coach had done (which was a pretty long list, and made a LONG report). Response was that I should have given one or perhaps 2 T's. Didn't even read the report. It would have been much better had they responded specifically to my comments even if they did disagree (like our chapter President actually DID)! As far as I know, UIL did nothing about a totally out of control coach who desperately needs to change professions.
-
As a good friend of mine says "The Inmates are running the asylum."
A question out of ignorance: Do all chapters let the coaches pick crews? I thought it was a statewide thing.
If there are some chapters that have somehow managed to cajole the schools into letting their assignor make assignments truly independent of institutional input, then let's stand and applaud. But do it quietly. Don't attract attention, because the individual institutions have the UIL-given right to "mutually" select officials. If the schools have voluntarily given up that right to those chapters - hats off tiphat: to those chapters. Perhaps they could share how they managed to make that happen.
But, the fact remains, all UIL schools have the right to select officials by mutual agreement. At any minute, those schools that are allowing chapters to make all assignments without school involvement could change their minds and insist on having "mutual consent," and the chapter(s) would have no recourse.
That will only change when the pool of officials that allow this practice to continue grows so small that the UIL would have no choice but to change the policy. That will only happen if officials across Texas shows solidarity and refuse to work unless the policy is changed. It wouldn't take 6 weeks, as in the NFL. It would only take 1 week. And it ain't like this is a union thing where the rank and file are asking for pensions, big pay raises, etc. No. Just stop allowing coaches to select officials.
UIL: Keep the varsity fee shcedule as it is, work with TASO to develop a viable two-way system of accountability, with some level of due process (for schools and officials), and give 100% assignment authority to TASO. Everybody will win, I guarantee it.
-
Our coaches do not get to pick their officials. Coaches can view their crews 14 days in advance. We allow for 2 scratches. We have very few coaches that scratch. We do consider requests if we ever get any but we don't always fulfill those requests due to chapter policy. Officials cannot work for a school again until 14 days have elapsed. Officials cannot work for the same school more than 3 times in the season. Regular season games are assigned by the secretary. Playoff games are assigned by the President, Vice President, and Secretary with only those who meet the requirements being available for assignment. We do allow for coaches picks for playoffs but only if that official meets the requirement. Off the top of my head: 1. Officials cannot miss more than 3 chapter meetings. 2. Must work at least 3 varsity games at the position being considered. (wing officials are interchangeable). 3. To qualify for 6 man, you must work at least 3 varsity games at the position being considered. 4. Attend a TASO certified clinic or district meeting.
Each year we work hard at putting the max number of officials in. Some do get more than 1 in the year due to the qualifiers above eliminating some officials who would have otherwise been assigned. I think last year we were close to 50% of our members getting a playoff game and somewhere around 5-10% of them worked their first one.
-
If there are some chapters that have somehow managed to cajole the schools into letting their assignor make assignments truly independent of institutional input, then let's stand and applaud. But do it quietly. Don't attract attention, because the individual institutions have the UIL-given right to "mutually" select officials. If the schools have voluntarily given up that right to those chapters - hats off tiphat: to those chapters. Perhaps they could share how they managed to make that happen.
But, the fact remains, all UIL schools have the right to select officials by mutual agreement. At any minute, those schools that are allowing chapters to make all assignments without school involvement could change their minds and insist on having "mutual consent," and the chapter(s) would have no recourse.
That will only change when the pool of officials that allow this practice to continue grows so small that the UIL would have no choice but to change the policy. That will only happen if officials across Texas shows solidarity and refuse to work unless the policy is changed. It wouldn't take 6 weeks, as in the NFL. It would only take 1 week. And it ain't like this is a union thing where the rank and file are asking for pensions, big pay raises, etc. No. Just stop allowing coaches to select officials.
UIL: Keep the varsity fee shcedule as it is, work with TASO to develop a viable two-way system of accountability, with some level of due process (for schools and officials), and give 100% assignment authority to TASO. Everybody will win, I guarantee it.
I may be getting overly technical, but coaches don't have the right to mutually select officials at all. What they do have is the permission to scratch at will. I think the chapters just decided it was easier to just let them select.
-
I may be getting overly technical, but coaches don't have the right to mutually select officials at all. What they do have is the permission to scratch at will. I think the chapters just decided it was easier to just let them select.
Incorrect. Quoting the 2012 UIL Football Manual: "Officials must be mutually agreed upon in advance."
You may be referring to the UIL assignment portion of the manual, for use when the schools can't mutually agree. Then the UIL office steps in and contacs a 'neutral' chapter and requests officials. The schools are still offered the opportunity to scratch folks in that chapter (no limit), then the chapter can assign from those remaining.
The schools have the right to mutually select officials. The conflict of interest is staggering.
-
I may be getting overly technical, but coaches don't have the right to mutually select officials at all. What they do have is the permission to scratch at will. I think the chapters just decided it was easier to just let them select.
What we have decided was that if you didn't scratch them then you have agreed to use them. Previously I posted we allow 2 scratches, but obviously if a coach really don't want someone then I won't send them.
-
Incorrect. Quoting the 2012 UIL Football Manual: "Officials must be mutually agreed upon in advance."
You may be referring to the UIL assignment portion of the manual, for use when the schools can't mutually agree. Then the UIL office steps in and contacs a 'neutral' chapter and requests officials. The schools are still offered the opportunity to scratch folks in that chapter (no limit), then the chapter can assign from those remaining.
The schools have the right to mutually select officials. The conflict of interest is staggering.
Seems to me "mutually agreed upon" is not synonomous with "mutually selected." A chapter can assign officials and coaches can scratch "not agree upon."
-
The schools have the right to mutually select officials. The conflict of interest is staggering.
Yup, what you get instead is a lot of talk about "game management decisions" as a way of justifying things like not ejecting players for obvious fighting. In other words, "We want to get picked next year so we're not going to eject his player."
As much as I love the state of Texas, this is one thing that they got absolutely wrong.
-
"Officials must be mutually agreed upon in advance."
This says nothing about being hand selected, only that the officials assigned to the game are agreeable to both parties. If what you're saying is that coaches must select officials, than there are bunch of chapters not doing it right. I really don't think that's the case. Officials do not have to be selected by coaches, I'm quite sure of that.
-
"Officials must be mutually agreed upon in advance."
This says nothing about being hand selected, only that the officials assigned to the game are agreeable to both parties. If what you're saying is that coaches must select officials, than there are bunch of chapters not doing it right. I really don't think that's the case. Officials do not have to be selected by coaches, I'm quite sure of that.
There has to be mutual agreement, and there is no effective difference between "mutual agreement" and "hand selected." The institutions can approach a chapter and say, "We mutually agree to use these 5 guys from your chapter. If they aren't available, then we'll go to another chapter." That has happened, and is still happening. It is completely in compliance with UIL policy. And, if the relationship with those institutions is needed enough, the chapter will find a way to comply.
Is that the predominant culture? Thankfully, no. As many are indicating, many of their institutions typically cooperate by making a limited number of pre-season scratches, and then allow the chapter to make assignments. By doing so, the institutions imply their "mutual consent." But they are cooperating. Unless you have a written contract binding the institutions to specific assignments, then, at any time, those institutions can stop cooperating and invoke their UIL-given right to "mutually agree," and can hand pick (or mass-scratch, however you choose to look at it) officials to work their contests.
But right here is TASO's problem. Instead of seeing the elephant in the room and trying to get rid of it, so many TASO folks just try to clean up the crap it leaves on the carpet. When someone points out the error of their understanding, instead of acceding and looking for a real, permanent solution for ALL of TASO, their feelings get hurt and they get defensive, and refuse to accept that they didn't correctly understand the UIL policy - which is the heart of this issue. Somehow they lose sight of the elephant in the room, even though it is threatening to trample them into oblivion.
See the big picture. The problem isn't that coaches can "mutually agree" or "scratch." The problem is that they are involved in official selection at all! The conflict of interest is so great that I can't find an appropriate adjective. Mind-boggling. Staggering. Flabbergasting. Of Biblical proportions. None of those are even adequate. Let's let the citizenry select which police officers will be on duty at any given time. Let's let the defendant select the prosecutor, the judge, and the jury. Let's let the convicts select the corrections officers.
Until coaches are 100% OUT of the official selection process, Texas high school officiating will never be as good as it can be.
The UIL says they want accountability. Easy enough. Establish a three-person review board for each sport, with a TASO member, a UIL member, and a former or standing judge that has never been a coach or official. If an institution wants to bring issue with a game, a play, or an individual official, they may do so by putting up a $5,000 cash 'bond.' If they receive a favorable judgment, the bond is refunded, and the related official(s) will receive some sort of sanctioning - from a letter of reprimand to suspension (details - that can be worked out). If they receive an unfavorable judgment, they lose the bond (to whom? I don't care - they just lose the money). That will discourage irrational sour-grapes gripes. The sitting judge can receive a stipend paid equally by the UIL and TASO.
In exchange, require that all UIL get out of the officiating business entirely, require schools to use TASO officials, and keep the current UIL compensation schedule for varsity contests. They may go to any chapter they want, for any assignment. They will be allowed a maximum 10% pre-season scratch of officials in any chapter (for fixed crews, scratch one individual, and you are scratching the whole crew, and they all count against the 10%). But, they may not request any official. And, they may not scratch any official during the season, without going through the accountability process mentioned above.
There. I have presented the problem, and how to fix it. Rather like the coach that asks about a rule, you give him the answer, and then he wants to argue about it. Coach, you asked a question; I gave you the answer; if you don't believe me, I can't help you. Fellas, I given you a plan; if you won't put it (or some comparable plan) to work, I can't help you. Doing nothing will change nothing.
If not me, who? If not now, when?
-
"...there is no effective difference between "mutual agreement" and "hand selected."
I still disagree. If the officials are assigned, the coaches have a chance to say they agree with the assignment or that they don't. It says nothing about being able to hand select officials. And, that was never the intent. If that were true, then why have chapters that have fought having coaches actually select officials always won the fight when the issue is presented to the UIL? And it has! It takes testicular fortitude within the chapters to make the change.
I don't have any problem with coaches being able to scratch a given number of officials, and then they accept all else. I think that would be a good compromise. This works both ways as well. Officials should always be able to scratch coaches/schools/locations.
-
Back to the topic.
We should agree that besides another official a coach is probably the most qualified to critique officials. Yes they can be biased. Yes they can grind an ax. It is one of the few sources we have. What does the State, UIL, local chapter do with the evaluations? If they do nothing with it why do we keep asking for them?
-
I never ask for a coach feedback. Since they seldom know all the rules, spirit of the rules or our mechanics, they are in no position to make meaningful comment. As in your case, they would be able to comment in how well a crew member interacted with the coach, but that's about it.
-
Back to the topic.
We should agree that besides another official a coach is probably the most qualified to critique officials. Yes they can be biased. Yes they can grind an ax. It is one of the few sources we have. What does the State, UIL, local chapter do with the evaluations? If they do nothing with it why do we keep asking for them?
The problem is that if we agree, and I think we do, that coaches really don't have a clue when it comes to evaluating us...then why should Chapters take anything they say too seriously? It cuts both ways. Even if they say the crew is really great and should be working the State Champ game, who cares? We do not believe him if he says another crew is the worst on the face of the earth so why believe him about this?
-
After having been on the receiving end of a couple of low ratings this year, I would like to propose that any coach, who submits a failing grade to a crew or crew member, be required to submit film or Hudl access to video of the crew's performance. No video, the bad rating gets thrown out.
One of the coaches that didn't care for us this year wrote on the evaluation, "The crew missed several calls. I am not going to submit video because it does me no good. I just won't use them again."
Wow! How do we get better...and how do we assure that you just aren't mad and taking it out on us? That evaluation isn't worth the paper (or electricity) it took to do it. It just says...you guys stink...that is all...leave me alone. OK...No Problem!
-
Hudl is a great tool that is under-utilized. I would love to have coaches submit video through Hudl with their evaluations. Unfortunately, I doubt it will ever happen. We can't even get coaches to comment on a couple of plays that they have issues with. One coach has scratched two very good crews because his assistants didn't like something. Eventually, he will end up with the bottom tier of officials in a meaningful game, but that is his prerogative.
-
Hudl is a great tool that is under-utilized.
One reason might be the expense. Hudl isn't free.
-
Don't do crews here, if you take the coaches evaluations, blend in the foul report, and you get a fairly good idea of how the game went. 1 div1 white hat, a d3 hl, and 4s and 5s to finish the crew, plus back judge had 6 of 9 fouls you can bet there were problems. Add that to a avg score of 60 and their evaluation was probably on target.
5a game, 12 fouls total, 4 false starts, 1 Bbw, 3 offsides, 2holding, and 2 late hit out of bounds and grades are 95 avg from winning coach and 65 from losing coach, you can bet the crew did a pretty decent job.
When 1 official has more than 1/2 the fouls, might be a concern.
-
When 1 official has more than 1/2 the fouls, might be a concern.
Or it might be just a crappy game.
-
Saw something new on this weeks evaluation (that being an apology from a coach).
"I apologize for my assistant coach who went beserk last night. It was a professional performance by all five of the crew. Thanks!"
tiphat:
-
Saw something new on this weeks evaluation (that being an apology from a coach).
"I apologize for my assistant coach who went beserk last night. It was a professional performance by all five of the crew. Thanks!"
tiphat:
Don't buy into that. He probably sees that you guys have his game in 2 weeks and wanted to butter you up. ;D
-
Lol, we don't.
However, he is known to be a pretty classy coach by reputation (they made a movie about him if you need a hint), and they did win a close game which may have helped his perspective.
Regardless, that was something new for me to see on an evaluation.
-
I had my only double header of the season. Both loosing coaches filled out an evaluation.
This coach lost 49-0. My only failing report in 3 years and my only non 100 this year.
1 Game Management R Coby Rhoden 60
2 Communication R Coby Rhoden 80
3 Field Presence/Professionalism R Coby Rhoden 60
4 Rules Knowledge R Coby Rhoden 60
5 Mechanics/Position R Coby Rhoden 60
6 Physical Condition/Appearance R Coby Rhoden 60
This coach lost 77-0
1 Game Management R Coby Rhoden 100 This crew always manages the game in a profeshional manner
2 Communication R Coby Rhoden 100 Communication before during
3 Field Presence/Professionalism R Coby Rhoden 100 and after the games is always consistant
4 Rules Knowledge R Coby Rhoden 100
5 Mechanics/Position R Coby Rhoden 100
6 Physical Condition/Appearance R Coby Rhoden 100
-
Coby,
That is exactly why the evaluations are useless.
I have never seen you or your crew work but I am sure you will agree that you did not work a perfect game to receive a perfect score of "100".
Likewise I am sure you and your crew are much better than 60's & 80's. You did not have that bad of a game.
If TASO had the money to have evaluators review game films of crews, it would be a perfect world, but sadly they do not have the time or money to review film of every crew, every week. The coaches are the least likely to give an evaluation regarding mechanics, rules knowledge.
I had one coach downgrade me on "communication" because after his third conference in the game and making up things to complain about I walked away after telling him we had a ball game to play. Most coaches do not take the time to honestly evaluate a crew (even if they had the knowledge to do so.)
Rick
-
My question is why are the evaluations converted after submission. What the coach sees is
1- excellent
2 - good
3 - average
4 - poor
5 - unacceptable
What comes to the official is on a 20 to 100 scale. So when the coach says the crew is average, they see a 60 which in most people's mind is a failing grade. My crew has had very good ratings this year but the system is confusing.
-
Just to further the point, we've had coaches who gave 0's for communication if the official is not on their sideline.
-
My question is why are the evaluations converted after submission. What the coach sees is
1- excellent
2 - good
3 - average
4 - poor
5 - unacceptable
What comes to the official is on a 20 to 100 scale. So when the coach says the crew is average, they see a 60 which in most people's mind is a failing grade. My crew has had very good ratings this year but the system is confusing.
I could live with those but not the number grades
-
Most coaches here use 60's straight across, never been in a 100 game and never saw one.
The one to check out is the 40's if it's the div 5 rookie then use it as such, if the div 2 with 8 yrs experience he is probably the genius that never makes meetings, and 50 lbs overweight.
-
Most coaches here use 60's straight across...
Why even bother?
-
Just to further the point, we've had coaches who gave 0's for communication if the official is not on their sideline.
Start yelling accross the field to communicate and that grade will go up. ;D
-
Why even bother?
Because Coach is King.
-
Because Coach is King.
Why?
-
You're asking the wrong guy, Welpe is simply pawn in game of life.
-
You're asking the wrong guy, Welpe is simply pawn in game of life.
Therein lies the problem. If "coach is king," it is because you/we give him permission. We can remove that permission, if we'll stop just accepting this as being our lot in life, and re-claim our position as an 'equal.'
-
I don't give him permission, I don't have that kind of power. It will take a groundswell of movement to change that paradigm and as has been shown to me time and again, officials are looked upon as nothing more than a necessary but unfortunate annoyance. Leadership seems to be content with the status quo. Much like the political climate in this country, the little guy has very little actual voice.
-
I know this is a loaded question, no pun intended, but is anyone holding a gun to your head forcing you to work?
-
Therein lies the problem. If "coach is king," it is because you/we give him permission. We can remove that permission, if we'll stop just accepting this as being our lot in life, and re-claim our position as an 'equal.'
Welpe and Mongo, just pawns in the game of life...
-
Welpe and Mongo, just pawns in the game of life...
:)
Rulesman, since you already know the answer to your rhetorical question, I'll ask you one in return. Are we not allowed to want something better?
-
:)
Rulesman, since you already know the answer to your rhetorical question, I'll ask you one in return. Are we not allowed to want something better?
By all means are you allowed. But I also don't believe for a minute you cannot do anything about it. Change is slow and can only come with cooperative effort. Key word is "cooperative."
-
I'm dragging this up again because our crew has received our first UIL evaluation from a coach.
Let's just say it was full of so much fiction and one sided spin that it would make any political pundit proud. Not to mention ignorance of basic rules.
We are humbly claiming title as the worst crew of the year. Y'all can pack it up and go home. We've got this one in the bag.
-
This evaluation is written so poorly that it is very hard to imagine that an entity charged with overseeing educational contests between our public schools could possibly come up with something this bad.
You can completely ignore anything on these evaluations, good, bad or otherwise. They mean absolutely nothing without video and verbiage.
-
Damn Welpe you let another kid slug another kid with a helmet again nAnA
After seeing about 40 alleged "worse calls of all time in my 42 years of coaching" penalties a week for the past 4 years via HUDL it is honestly a third a third a third. 1/3 coach right, 1/3 ref right, 1/3 not enough visual evidence. You would think that a coach would only send in the play if he was 100% sure he was right so that is a bit damming onto coaches. Would my other TASOHUDLVIDEOMAFIA members agree with those percentages?
-
Yep
-
I had one this year that made me chuckle and get on board with the general sentiment of this thread. Non-district game and one of the visiting team kids has a rough, rough lot in life. Head coach has actually taken him in because one night, he found out this kid had been sleeping in the baseball field dugout because he was homeless. As you would expect from someone in this situation, kid has some 'issues' and is a bit of a loose plug. A few times in this game we had to flag him for random stupid stuff...pushing well after the whistle, I got him for UNS when he waved 'bye-bye' to an opponent after a tackle. About 5 mins before the end of the half, the home team had enough of him. Sparks flew, a little bit of a skirmish broke out that we were able to solve and get everyone situated. Couple days later, we get the coaches review...50s-60s across the board and in "Game management" we got blasted for not controlling the players. SMDH hEaDbAnG
-
DARN Welpe you let another kid slug another kid with a helmet again nAnA
After seeing about 40 alleged "worse calls of all time in my 42 years of coaching" penalties a week for the past 4 years via HUDL it is honestly a third a third a third. 1/3 coach right, 1/3 ref right, 1/3 not enough visual evidence. You would think that a coach would only send in the play if he was 100% sure he was right so that is a bit damming onto coaches. Would my other TASOHUDLVIDEOMAFIA members agree with those percentages?
That is a real good percentage breakdown Coby. Based on what I see I would say about the same breakdown.
-
I may be a sadist but I love it when coaches turn in plays where the video proves them wrong. Most of the time it's because they don't know a rule, or are begging for a call they wouldn't want if the shoe were on the other foot. ::)
-
DARN Welpe you let another kid slug another kid with a helmet again nAnA
Hey this is Texas high school football! If he can't handle that, he needs to go play checkers. ;)
I think that is a fair breakdown, Coby. We need to get more coaches to embrace Hudl and get the videos to the crew.
-
I get a kick out of hearing guys talk about the A or B they got and how great they are but when they get a D or F the coach does not know what he talking about. These things are terrible indicators of true performance 1 - this particular one is too confusing and 2 - coaches have more important thins to do then do a fair and complete evaluation on officials.
-
We were raked over the coals in our evaluation from last nights game for not running the clock continuously. He wanted the clock running during timeouts, player injuries and never stop. We did run at times to not be obvious. Incomplete passes we killed the clock, then cranked it after it was spotted, etc. We received a 50 for not operating the clock way he wanted. He was right, we wouldn't do it!
-
Most coach evaluations are not worth the time to read them
-
The odd thing about UIL eval system is that ANYONE can evaluate a crew. Band parents, player parents, fellow officials etc.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk