TASO/UIL Proposal

[Etref]

Sometimes I wonder if you even have a clue what you are talking about.

The"Big 5" did not make any decision. The proposal was presented to the TASO board which is elected by all TASO members.

[504coach]

This post speaks volumes as to the "Big 5's" attitude about the smaller chapters - No need for every chapter to be represented since we "Big 5" were there - The organization as a whole was represented since we "Big 5" were there.  I've said many times before that a large part of the fight against the UIL has to do with the "Big 5's" fear of losing the strangle hold they have on the rest of the state.  It's a shame some from smaller chapters are buying into the propaganda - rest assured small chapters - this fight is not about you - its about the largest chapters maintaining their monopoly. 

Cry me a river all of you...  If you think the UIL will not be run by the big 5 you are sadly mistaken.  If you think the UIL gives 2 hoots about officials you are sadly mistaken.  Why dont you propose a way to fix the problem that is financially feasible if it is such a problem?  I wonder what group is bigger Houston or the rest of TASO minus the Big 5?  IF you do not want to be strangled then create a crew that is worthy enough to call high level games and the coaches will find you.  Fix what you can control, look in the mirror first.

[TXMike]

This post speaks volumes as to the "Big 5's" attitude about the smaller chapters - No need for every chapter to be represented since we "Big 5" were there - The organization as a whole was represented since we "Big 5" were there.  I've said many times before that a large part of the fight against the UIL has to do with the "Big 5's" fear of losing the strangle hold they have on the rest of the state.  It's a shame some from smaller chapters are buying into the propaganda - rest assured small chapters - this fight is not about you - its about the largest chapters maintaining their monopoly. 

"Stranglehold"  ?  WTF??? Why not just come out and say it.  You are bitter because you think the majority of playoff games are worked by larger Chapters.  WE HAVE BEEN THROUGH THIS AD NAUSEUM...If you have more members or you service an area with more schools shouldn't the percentage of games you receive be more???   

Smaller chapters service smaller numbers of schools.  How many smaller chapters compete against larger chapters for schools to cover???  And how many smaller chapters can even dare go out and try to get a larger coverage area knowing they have a very limited number of officials available?  What percentage of guys in a smaller chapter gets 5 or more varsity games a year?  What percentage of guys in a larger chapter gets 5 or more varsity games in a year?   It is a much smaller number than in the smaller chapters.  Is that fair?

You are buying into the UIL "bribe" that all chapters will receive state championship games (which is not even possible!!)   Ask some of the basketball guys how that worked for them.

[Etref]

"Stranglehold"  ?  WTF??? Why not just come out and say it.  You are bitter because you think the majority of playoff games are worked by larger Chapters.  WE HAVE BEEN THROUGH THIS AD NAUSEUM...If you have more members or you service an area with more schools shouldn't the percentage of games you receive be more???   

Smaller chapters service smaller numbers of schools.  How many smaller chapters compete against larger chapters for schools to cover???  And how many smaller chapters can even dare go out and try to get a larger coverage area knowing they have a very limited number of officials available?  What percentage of guys in a smaller chapter gets 5 or more varsity games a year?  What percentage of guys in a larger chapter gets 5 or more varsity games in a year?   It is a much smaller number than in the smaller chapters.  Is that fair?

You are buying into the UIL "bribe" that all chapters will receive state championship games (which is not even possible!!)   Ask some of the basketball guys how that worked for them.

Heck of it is Mike, the chapter Cooter is in worked two State Finals this last year and has worked State Finals nearly every year for the last 10 years of so.


Not sure what his beef is but he has been one to bow to UIL from the beginning of this deal.

[JasonTX]

This post speaks volumes as to the "Big 5's" attitude about the smaller chapters - No need for every chapter to be represented since we "Big 5" were there - The organization as a whole was represented since we "Big 5" were there.  I've said many times before that a large part of the fight against the UIL has to do with the "Big 5's" fear of losing the strangle hold they have on the rest of the state.  It's a shame some from smaller chapters are buying into the propaganda - rest assured small chapters - this fight is not about you - its about the largest chapters maintaining their monopoly. 

I'm from a small chapter and I don't see any problem with the "Big 5" meeting.  As long as the information is communicated back to each chapter that is fine.  If you were the UIL and seen that only the "small 5" were meeting that would not be showing them much muscle but when you see the "Big 5" then that would make me a little nervous if I were UIL because there is no way the UIL could takeover anything if the "Big 5" are banding together.  There is no monopoly.  If you go back an look at last years playoff games you will see that Houston had the most and that a vast majority of those were between the schools they cover in the regular season.  You take those schools out of the picture and Houston is left with no more playoff games than one of the "small 5" chapters.

[ballhog]

This post speaks volumes as to the "Big 5's" attitude about the smaller chapters - No need for every chapter to be represented since we "Big 5" were there - The organization as a whole was represented since we "Big 5" were there.  I've said many times before that a large part of the fight against the UIL has to do with the "Big 5's" fear of losing the strangle hold they have on the rest of the state.  It's a shame some from smaller chapters are buying into the propaganda - rest assured small chapters - this fight is not about you - its about the largest chapters maintaining their monopoly. 

So this is going to denigrate into a us vs them issue? Last I looked we are all part of the same organization. We all share the success when a member does well and we bear the burden when a member screws up. I am from the smallest of the "Big 5" and we have been under represented in play off games for a few seasons. Instead of blaming big 'ol "H" town our BOD looked within to see what we are missing and what we can do to make ourselves more appealing to other schools. We have revamped training and communication and our expectations of our membership. Face facts, when a majority of games are played in one or two areas it stands to reason those area chapters are going to work most those games. I would expect with gas prices and the budget crunch you are going to see even more of this in the coming season. Life ain't fair, sometimes you have to work a bit harder to overcome your starting position. Last I looked our football division is headed up by a "small" chapter guy, we have a  system in place that is truly represents each member equally. To paraphrase Ben Franklin," Either we all hang together or surely we will all be hung together".

[texnewref]

Training has greatly improved.  Yes communication has improved from years past, but it’s still not where it needs to be.  Why was it that I had to post the proposals and TASO didn’t?  What was there to hide? They are pretty straight forward.  Most of the TASO information we get from this site and not from TASO.  All I keep hearing is “BUSINESS AS USUAL”.  And that is exactly where we are as far as communication, business as usual.

[TXMike]

Perhaps because the "proposals" were never anything more than a draft and perhaps because neither TASO nor TASO FB agreed to them.  We members do not need to see every document or proposal that is created by another member. The better question is why did anyone think the proposal warranted publication?

[Etref]

So this is going to denigrate into a us vs them issue? Last I looked we are all part of the same organization. We all share the success when a member does well and we bear the burden when a member screws up. I am from the smallest of the "Big 5" and we have been under represented in play off games for a few seasons. Instead of blaming big 'ol "H" town our BOD looked within to see what we are missing and what we can do to make ourselves more appealing to other schools. We have revamped training and communication and our expectations of our membership. Face facts, when a majority of games are played in one or two areas it stands to reason those area chapters are going to work most those games. I would expect with gas prices and the budget crunch you are going to see even more of this in the coming season. Life ain't fair, sometimes you have to work a bit harder to overcome your starting position. Last I looked our football division is headed up by a "small" chapter guy, we have a  system in place that is truly represents each member equally. To paraphrase Ben Franklin," Either we all hang together or surely we will all be hung together".

Exactly!


For years there has been envy from one chapter to the next. Some is geographical, Amarillo may not get called to work a game in Houston because of travel expense and no one in Houston knows anything about them.
Instead of complaining about "big chapters" vs " small chapters" get off your butt and try to help your chapter get better. You may not work the big game but s omeone in your chapter may get the chance.

Being jealous of what another official, crew, chapter gets is counter productive.

[texnewref]

Perhaps because the "proposals" were never anything more than a draft and perhaps because neither TASO nor TASO FB agreed to them.  We members do not need to see every document or proposal that is created by another member. The better question is why did anyone think the proposal warranted publication?

From the site where I found the proposals it states “TO REVIEW THE AGREEMENT THAT WAS EDITED BY THE TASO-FOOTBALL BOARD AND RESUBMITTED TO TONY TIMMONS WHO DID NOT ACCEPT ITS TERMS”.  It looks it was more than just a draft.

[Cooter]

Heck of it is Mike, the chapter Cooter is in worked two State Finals this last year and has worked State Finals nearly every year for the last 10 years of so.


Not sure what his beef is but he has been one to bow to UIL from the beginning of this deal.

I guess we all have our reasons for either supporting or not supporting UIL - huh Rick???

[TXMike]

It was a document that was being worked out and negotiated before it could be submitted officially to TASO and UIL. It never got to that stage.  Businesses and organizations often try to work out agreements informally before formal submission.  This was no different.

[Etref]

I guess we all have our reasons for either supporting or not supporting UIL - huh Rick???

Yeah, I do not trust UIL. They have personally screwed me before. 

Why do you not trust TASO who you could vote for (which is another subject of apathy we have)

[rickref]

"Being jealous of what another official, crew, chapter gets is counter productive."

Too bad that stuff can not be carved away from our rankls.

Someone said it best before me. Look what you and your local organization can do better. Before you cast stones look in your own mirror and get to work. Then your crew look in the mirror. After that get bigger and truly help your local chapter. I can tell you know the vast majority of officials regardless of TASO or UIL slants do not do this and never will.

[Cooter]

Why do you not trust TASO who you could vote for (which is another subject of apathy we have)

Crew Chiefs that are caught soliciting (for a 3rd time) - and not punished (a letter in the file, excuse me) - one of the state championships I think?
Varsity Assigning Secretary that gives himself playoff games - EVERY WEEK - no recourse - other than a newly formed hand picked committee for "integrity."
TASO Football Pres arrested in a state park (on television) for lewd and salicious behavior.
No background checks - probably because of the previous bullet
**but we've heard all this before.

Then we get a good FB Pres that tried to negotiate a settlement - and because he is from a small chapter and does not kiss the Big 5 butt - they vote him down - or as one put it "a shot across his bow so he knows where the bread is buttered."  Castleberry will never be accepted or respected as FB pres because he is not from the 5.   

Some of the reasons I don't trust TASO - you asked.

[TXMike]

Who do you think elected Cooper? ?  ?

Most of the issues you cite just shows YOUR chapter did not take care of business.

And re the background check...your comment is as ignorant as Rep Gallego's.  Plenty of folks have squeeky clean records before their first offense.  Backgrd checks will NEVER stop or catch them. (And I am one who is in favor of having them)

[Cooter]

And re the background check...your comment is as ignorant as Rep Gallego's.  Plenty of folks have squeeky clean records before their first offense.  Backgrd checks will NEVER stop or catch them. (And I am one who is in favor of having them)

Are you serious?  And you are in law enforcement?  Most crimes are committed by repeat offenders - but because some might not have a record before they committed a crime we should not run checks?  Really?  Are you aware of convicted felons in your chapter?  I am aware of a felon in mine - on a crew.  Yet TASO is reluctant to run background checks.

[TXMike]

Until a person commits an offense they have no record. How would a check have prevented us from having a person as president who gets arrested? ?   If you have a known felon habve you reported it to TASO?

[rsquare]

Castleberry due to be@ our Houston chapter meeting Monday night...Perhaps live Q & A
 

[Etref]

Crew Chiefs that are caught soliciting (for a 3rd time) - and not punished (a letter in the file, excuse me) - one of the state championships I think?
Varsity Assigning Secretary that gives himself playoff games - EVERY WEEK - no recourse - other than a newly formed hand picked committee for "integrity."
TASO Football Pres arrested in a state park (on television) for lewd and salicious behavior.
No background checks - probably because of the previous bullet
**but we've heard all this before.

Then we get a good FB Pres that tried to negotiate a settlement - and because he is from a small chapter and does not kiss the Big 5 butt - they vote him down - or as one put it "a shot across his bow so he knows where the bread is buttered."  Castleberry will never be accepted or respected as FB pres because he is not from the 5.  

Some of the reasons I don't trust TASO - you asked.

Sounds like you need to run for office in your chapter and clean things up................................. I really do not believe the secretary "gives" himself games. Does he work them, yes but if the crew is selected it is selected. Does there need to be a limit on games per week, maybe.

Crew chief solicitation, bring it up in an open meeting and air the laundry. Maybe what you consider solicitation may be authorized chapter school visits during the alloted time.

Like I said earlier, maybe you do not know what you are talking about.  Again for another time "the big 5" had nothing to do with the proposal between Cooper and Timmons. That was a TASO board function. The only thing "the Big 5" did was attend an impromptu meeting with UIL to basically tell them their position. Get your facts straight.

[ballhog]

Crew Chiefs that are caught soliciting (for a 3rd time) - and not punished (a letter in the file, excuse me) - one of the state championships I think?
Varsity Assigning Secretary that gives himself playoff games - EVERY WEEK - no recourse - other than a newly formed hand picked committee for "integrity."
TASO Football Pres arrested in a state park (on television) for lewd and salicious behavior.
No background checks - probably because of the previous bullet
**but we've heard all this before.

Then we get a good FB Pres that tried to negotiate a settlement - and because he is from a small chapter and does not kiss the Big 5 butt - they vote him down - or as one put it "a shot across his bow so he knows where the bread is buttered."  Castleberry will never be accepted or respected as FB pres because he is not from the 5.   

Some of the reasons I don't trust TASO - you asked.

16,000 members in TASO there are going to be people who make bad decisions and bad people no matter what position they hold if any. If you look at the numbers the percentage of incidents is pretty small. It would be nice if everyone acted with integrity on both sides of the issue. Three years ago TASO's state leadership investigated a report of soliciting games that was substantiated and those members were removed from their leadership position and given a life ban from holding office. BTW a chapter member is who "blew the whistle". I know of members who could teach school but can not officiate because TASO will not clear them until their probation (DUI) is cleared. No we do not have a background check because 1.) like many other contractors we are not mandated to have one, we are never alone with a student athlete. (Unlike band contest where often a student and a judge are alone in a closed room without supervision)  2.) because no one has ever decided who will bear the cost. Face it background checks are a false flag, non-issue. I do not know of any member who is opposed to submitting to a background check. Been through them before, another one won't hurt; In all those cases the cost is borne by the "employer".
Since you brought it up, I think many of us who voted for our current president have been disappointed in some of his actions. His first memo to the membership sounds more like a UIL official than an elected president, he takes in upon his self to begin negotiations without any discussion with the rest of the elected membership, the counsel of our legal representation and our lobbying representation. Some would say this is a bit of an arrogant approach or at least comes across as " I am smarter than you, so I will make this work." All of this at a time when we have the UIL pinned down in court. This has nothing to do with the chapter he comes from so don't insult all of us who voted for him but are somewhat disappointed in his actions.
Coot, I understand there are issues with TASO those we (members) can fix. With the UIL, a state agency, you have two choices... quit or shut up and take it. 
 

[Etref]

16,000 members in TASO there are going to be people who make bad decisions and bad people no matter what position they hold if any. If you look at the numbers the percentage of incidents is pretty small. It would be nice if everyone acted with integrity on both sides of the issue. Three years ago TASO's state leadership investigated a report of soliciting games that was substantiated and those members were removed from their leadership position and given a life ban from holding office. BTW a chapter member is who "blew the whistle". I know of members who could teach school but can not officiate because TASO will not clear them until their probation (DUI) is cleared. No we do not have a background check because 1.) like many other contractors we are not mandated to have one, we are never alone with a student athlete. (Unlike band contest where often a student and a judge are alone in a closed room without supervision)  2.) because no one has ever decided who will bear the cost. Face it background checks are a false flag, non-issue. I do not know of any member who is opposed to submitting to a background check. Been through them before, another one won't hurt; In all those cases the cost is borne by the "employer".
Since you brought it up, I think many of us who voted for our current president have been disappointed in some of his actions. His first memo to the membership sounds more like a UIL official than an elected president, he takes in upon his self to begin negotiations without any discussion with the rest of the elected membership, the counsel of our legal representation and our lobbying representation. Some would say this is a bit of an arrogant approach or at least comes across as " I am smarter than you, so I will make this work." All of this at a time when we have the UIL pinned down in court. This has nothing to do with the chapter he comes from so don't insult all of us who voted for him but are somewhat disappointed in his actions.
Coot, I understand there are issues with TASO those we (members) can fix. With the UIL, a state agency, you have two choices... quit or shut up and take it. 
 

                

[DallasLJ]

Crew Chiefs that are caught soliciting (for a 3rd time) - and not punished (a letter in the file, excuse me) - one of the state championships I think?
Varsity Assigning Secretary that gives himself playoff games - EVERY WEEK - no recourse - other than a newly formed hand picked committee for "integrity."
TASO Football Pres arrested in a state park (on television) for lewd and salicious behavior.
No background checks - probably because of the previous bullet
**but we've heard all this before.

Then we get a good FB Pres that tried to negotiate a settlement - and because he is from a small chapter and does not kiss the Big 5 butt - they vote him down - or as one put it "a shot across his bow so he knows where the bread is buttered."  Castleberry will never be accepted or respected as FB pres because he is not from the 5.   

Some of the reasons I don't trust TASO - you asked.

  This is not (or rarely) a TASO issue -- this is a Chapter issue.  People need to have in place a solid policy and Ethics Committee to handle all violations, whether it is solicitation or morality issues.  We have suspended persons for soliciting -- first offense.  We have suspended officials for other issues.  All you need to do is be a chapter of character.  We also have policies that prohibit assigning board member from putting themselves into a playoff games.  These are chapter issues, not TASO driven.  Soliciting with the UIL may only get worse since they have no policies in place to deal with it, or any other issue.

[TXMike]

From the site where I found the proposals it states “TO REVIEW THE AGREEMENT THAT WAS EDITED BY THE TASO-FOOTBALL BOARD AND RESUBMITTED TO TONY TIMMONS WHO DID NOT ACCEPT ITS TERMS”.  It looks it was more than just a draft.

The site you are quoting from was a Chapter site which may or may not reflect actual TASO or TASO FB statements.  Chapter websites are not "blessed" by TASO so they can post what they want.  It may or moay not always be accurate. 

I have heard from someone close to the Board that the agreement was never even voted on by the FB board.  All they voted on was whether or not it should be presented to the FB chapter presidents and secretaries who were meeting with the board later.  The whole thing was a work in progress that never got out of that stage.

[texnewref]

The website is the chapter website for the chapter Castleberry is a member.  I would think he has seen the site and knows whats on it!