UIL/Coaches Evaluations of Officials

[Arbitrator]

 

So now that the  Dancing Monkey of Manor Road has improvised this "new and improved" UIL Officials Evaluation Form which can be used for virtually all UIL sports by anyone ranging from the Coaches, their Administrators, Uncle Lester and Aunt Martha; and basically anyone that can meander their way into the Manor Road website. Now there isn't anybody who can't rate the "Stripes" on Friday nights. And the questions are so objective that I'm all too positive that we'll all grow and flourish from having read the quality evaluations that we are currently receiving. Even the Zebraware form leaves much to be desired, making it so that if a coach doesn't like one call from any given crew member, he can richly "ding" the entire crew for just one bad call. Now if the  Good UIL Dr. were going to try to get this format right, then why didn't he invite the TASO leadership into their planning session? So he just turns it over to some moron down the hall, hoping that they'd come up with something better than the previously used "UIL 1-5 Coaches Evaluation Cards."

From having been evaluated on that "most objective" new UIL form, one cannot help but think that the  Dancing Monkey consulted with some of his Simian friends down I-35 at the San Antonio Zoo. But with all due respect, I think that even those chimpanzees could have come up with something far better all by themselves without  L'il Tony's chairmanship.

And now there's reports of Head Coaches that are delegating the filling-out of that form to their Assistants and even to their Secretaries. Now how's that for being objective? I am now of the opinion that there are really no benefits to an "officials evaluation" by the coaches. While a few of them do use their time in giving us useful information, the vast majority either refuses/neglects to fill it out or just uses it for political purposes to "ding" officials who have had their losing games. Like a plethora of our officiating cohorts, I now firmly believe that you just can't put any credibility into any of the available officials evaluation forms.

If  Manor Road truly wants to entertain doing something fruitful, then they should come up with a form for sports officials to rate their UIL Coaches. But in retrospect, I really don't think that that would be beneficial either!   

[TexDoc]

I don't put any more credence into this new form than I ever did the old form the coaches filled out and mailed in.  It is all a waste of time.

[refsmitty]

In Michigan - our ratings come from the coaches - and our playoff chances as well... doesn't make much sense to me but I don't have a better idea either!

[TXMike]

Does any college conference or the NFL permit coach's comments/evaluations to be a significant part of an official's evaluation?

[GoodScout]

Until the day the majority of coaches become well-versed in the rules and mechanics that officials are expected to follow, any evaluation by coaches is useless. Evaluations by coaches serve one purpose: To make coaches feel better. And those states that give them the power to decide playoff officials are doing the coaches, players and officials a huge disservice.

Much better to have an evaluation from someone who can sit in the stands or watch film, has a standardized criteria to follow, and can dispassionately evaluate how officials conduct themselves on the field. Considering that he's focused on a million other things during the course of a game, head coach is in perhaps the worst position to provide that evaluation.

"Was the official polite?" "Did he keep me informed?" Yes, a coach can answer that. Was an official in the correct position to make a illegal forward pass call or did he administer under the all-but-one principle? No way.

[Welpe]

And those states that give them the power to decide playoff officials are doing the coaches, players and officials a huge disservice.

What about the places that allow coaches to pick their officials for each of their games..... 

[Arbitrator]

What about the places that allow coaches to pick their officials for each of their games..... 

 

As long as the selection process is mutually done between the two competing coaches, I can't really see a problem with it!   

[TXMike]

  Of course you don't, you are probably one of those 34 game hogs     

[Arbitrator]

 

Not even remotely close!   

[JasonTX]

Brand new uniforms, spit shined shoes, fresh shaved face, and in good physical condition, and the losing coach gives me a ding on Appearance?  How so?

[Arbitrator]

Brand new uniforms, spit shined shoes, fresh shaved face, and in good physical condition, and the losing coach gives me a ding on Appearance?  How so?

 

Could it possibly be that appearance-wise, you look far better than the coach does? Just a thought!   

[TexDoc]

Brand new uniforms, spit shined shoes, fresh shaved face, and in good physical condition, and the losing coach gives me a ding on Appearance?  How so?

Maybe you're just ugly and  he was looking for more than just an official?

[Coby]

Brand new uniforms, spit shined shoes, fresh shaved face, and in good physical condition, and the losing coach gives me a ding on Appearance?  How so?

You should know that it is impolite to turn down the dip the loosing coach offered you during the post game handshake.  It is obvious that you think you are better then him.  I purposely black out a couple of teeth when I talk to coaches so they dont think I am showing them up.

[rickref]

Brand new uniforms, spit shined shoes, fresh shaved face, and in good physical condition, and the losing coach gives me a ding on Appearance?  How so?

Dude had a coach one week game me a 100 on appearance and everything else. He looses another week and I am a 60. Really, I got that fat and ugly in two weeks?

[Etref]

Dude had a coach one week game me a 100 on appearance and everything else. He looses another week and I am a 60. Really, I got that fat and ugly in two weeks?

Maybe he was thinking about your referee.....................

[Welpe]

Dude had a coach one week game me a 100 on appearance and everything else. He looses another week and I am a 60. Really, I got that fat and ugly in two weeks?

Maybe it's one of those 2 at 10 and 10 at 2 type of things but in reverse.

[110]

Dude had a coach one week game me a 100 on appearance and everything else. He looses another week and I am a 60. Really, I got that fat and ugly in two weeks?

Now you know how your wife feels once a month.

[El Macman]

Does any college conference or the NFL permit coach's comments/evaluations to be a significant part of an official's evaluation?

No, not directly. That 's the job of the coordinator (NCAA) and Director of Officiating (NFL), each of whom reports directly to the commissioner of their respective organizations. They have unilateral authority to hire & fire officials. Coaches/ADs/presidents/chancellors/commissioners/owners/any other team personnel can (and do) contact those folks to complain about calls and/or performance of individuals, and even entire crews. But the coordinator/director is there to insulate the officials from the complainers, and to objectively evaluate specific rulings, as well as the overall performance of individuals and crews. Egregious, frequent, or repeated errors by an individual or a crew are addressed by the coordinator/director. Likewise, staff failures are the responsibility of the coordinator/director. The commissioner is responsible to the schools/teams to ensure the coordinator/director is meeting the requirements of the position.
No team personnel should ever have the ability to hire, fire, or influence an official in any way, even by mutual consent of the participants. Just as police, prosecutors, judges and juries must be insulated from those they serve, so must sports officials be insulated from the teams they serve. Unless a conflict of interest can be shown, no prosecutor or defendant can select the judge that will preside over a trial. Analagous relationship for sports officials - teams simply can not be allowed to directly select the officials. There must be a qualified intermediary of some kind. NCAA and professional sports recognize and embrace that fact. So must the UIL.

[blindref757]

Our crew has received 3 evaluations this year on ZebraWare.  Twice we all got 100 from the losing coach that was on the road.  We thought that was a pretty good evaluation!  Then, we have an absolute barn burner and the winning home coach gives us an 80 on rules knowledge because his receiver who was lined up off the line of scrimmage-outside the tackle was flagged for blocking below the waist back toward the center of the field.

We know that this evaluation is incorrect, but if we are going to disregard that, we also must disregard the 100's when we know deep down that we weren't perfect.  It is a BS system.  Some coaches try to be fair, but mostly it just depends on the W or the L.

[GoodScout]

Some coaches try to be fair, but mostly it just depends on the W or the L coach's knowledge of the rules.

FTFY

[Arbitrator]

"...some coaches try to be fair, but mostly it just depends on the W or the L coaches knowledge of the rules."

FTFY

 

... or quite possibly the coaches inherent lack thereof!   

[foureyedzebra]

"Are Evaluations of Officials by Coaches Absolutely Necessary?"


Only to those who are willing to use every avenue afforded them to help them improve.


I believe that there is something to be gained from every evaluation that we receive, no matter how subjective or objective it may be. No matter how complementary or derogatory, no matter whether the coach won or lost.
 
We must be able to look at these evaluations with an open mind and glean from them any and all helpful information that we can use to help our self and our crew get better. We must use all tools at our disposal to objectively evaluate our crew both as a unit and as individuals. In order for us to get better we first and foremost have to be honest with ourselves and be able to accept with an open mind any corrective criticism that we might receive.
 
If I receive an evaluation from a coach that says that I have horrible judgment and that I have inept communication skills; I need to evaluate myself and be completely honest with myself. Maybe he was right or maybe not. Maybe I got screened out on a face mask play and was almost certain that his player got face masked but did not actually see the act and therefore passed on the flag. Maybe I talked to the opposing coach after a penalty enforcement and failed to explain it to this coach. If I had done these things in a game you were coaching, you may have been inclined to give me a similar evaluation. Even though this coach's evaluation sounds very harsh, we must put ourselves in his shoes and see it from his perspective in order to try to understand the true meaning of a one sentence (sometimes less) evaluation that usually has further reaching implications.
 
The point is, to not take the evaluation personal even though it may sometimes seem to be. The point is to try to determine why a coach may have given you such an evaluation and to commit to making any improvements that you can make so as to reduce the likelihood of that same negative evaluation from reoccurring.
 
In the case of my example above, I would need to re-read the when in question memo to see if I was correct or incorrect by passing on this possible foul. I would also need to make sure that if I gave an explanation to one coach, I would need to give the other coach the same courtesy or at least make sure he was not expecting a visit from me before putting the ball in play after the explanation to the other coach.
 
 
I am a big proponent of film review and I believe it is the single most important tool that we have. However, the film does not show every official on every play; not to mention what goes on on during dead ball action. It also does not usually convey attitudes or intention very well. I know that these evaluations and game films are not the best, but let's use what we can from them to help us all get better. If we just keep an open mind, we should be able to use all of these tools to help us get better. I hope that this is the goal of each official. If not, it should be.

I think if we are honest with ourselves and evaluate ourselves, we will know when a coach just has an axe to grind or if the evaluation he submitted should be given it's due diligence.

[Arbitrator]

 

With all due respect, I can readily see that the intent of the original evaluations was a token gesture on the part of the UIL to simply let their coaches have the opportunity to grade the TASO football officials on only a handful of generic criteria, albeit on a 1-5 scale. As set forth, it left quite a bit to be desired and rapidly evolved into just another sordid piece of UIL recommended/mandated paperwork that the coaches were implored to fill out and submit. These carried so much importance that most football officiating crews were extremely lucky if they got a return ratio from the coaches exceeding 50%.

Sensing this, someone in a leadership role over on  Manor Road thought that it would be a grand idea if they were to implement a "new and improved" officials evaluation form, one that could be used for all UIL sanctioned sports ranging from football to tiddley-winks, asking a series of jaded questions that could pretty much accenuate the negative connotations from the legitimate evaluators(coaches/administrators) to the pseudo-evaluators(friends/family/et. al.) who in all probability wouldn't know an NCAA football rule or a prescibed mechanic if it bit them on the backside. This new version has richly established itself as being nothingmore than a sheer waste of taxpayer revenue in order to promote the seedy self-serving agenda purported by the  Manor Road Ringmaster.

Now there are a handful of head coaches over the years that I have come to know and trust who will either submit written attachments to those reports that I can benefit from. But the most beneficial critique that I could ever get from the coaching community are their notes and observations that they submit along with the DVD of the game film. More often than not, these coaches seem to have more rules/mechanics questions than anything else.

Seeing that there are no viable evaluation forms for coaches to grade officials either at the NCAA or at the NFL level, should speak volumes about what good that such UIL-sponsered evaluations even offer. Are there any other state athletic organizations who would even offer a similar or even a more viable form? If so, I'd like to see it posted on here for our due examination and consideration. But until such time that that comes to happen, I for one, feel that it's imperative for the coaches to get out of the officiating business, just as it would be for officials to not get involved in the coaching profession! TASO is far better equipped to run an officials evaluation program either at the state, regional, or the local level: and certainly not those over-educated  state-funded charlitans in residence over there on Manor Road. JMHO!   

[TexDoc]

With all due respect, I can readily see that the intent of the original evaluations was a token gesture on the part of the UIL to simply let their coaches have the opportunity to grade the TASO football officials on only a handful of generic criteria, albeit on a 1-5 scale. As set forth, it left quite a bit to be desired and rapidly evolved into just another sordid piece of UIL recommended/mandated paperwork that the coaches were implored to fill out and submit. These carried so much importance that most football officiating crews were extremely lucky if they got a return ratio from the coaches exceeding 50%.

Sensing this, someone in a leadership role over on  Manor Road thought that it would be a grand idea if they were to implement a "new and improved" officials evaluation form, one that could be used for all UIL sanctioned sports ranging from football to tiddley-winks, asking a series of jaded questions that could pretty much accenuate the negative connotations from the legitimate evaluators(coaches/administrators) to the pseudo-evaluators(friends/family/et. al.) who in all probability wouldn't know an NCAA football rule or a prescibed mechanic if it bit them on the backside. This new version has richly established itself as being nothingmore than a sheer waste of taxpayer revenue in order to promote the seedy self-serving agenda purported by the  Manor Road Ringmaster.

Seeing that there are no viable evaluation forms for coaches to grade officials either at the NCAA or at the NFL level, should speak volumes about what good that such UIL-sponsered evaluations even offer. Are there any other state athletic organizations who would even offer a similar or even a more viable form? If so, I'd like to see it posted on here for our due examination and consideration. But until such time that that comes to happen, I for one, feel that it's imperative for the coaches to get out of the officiating business, just as it would be for officials to not get involved in the coaching profession! TASO is far better equipped to run an officials evaluation program either at the state, regional, or the local level: and certainly not those over-educated  state-funded charlitans in residence over there on Manor Road. JMHO!   

One problem with your fantasy, it isn't just the official being "evaluated" by the coach that reads these.  People in positions of authority within a chapter read these also, and those are the ones that have to take these coaches evaluations for what they are, garbage.

I just don't agree with you that there is much to be gained by a coach's eval of officials.  And if you think any and all eval are good, then you must think that the UIL's idea to allow anyone, fan, parent, player, water boy, etc, to evaluate is a good idea also.  Nope, cannot agree.  It serves nothing other than allowing someone to vent.

[Arbitrator]

One problem with your fantasy, it isn't just the official being "evaluated" by the coach that reads these.  People in positions of authority within a chapter read these also, and those are the ones that have to take these coaches evaluations for what they are, garbage.

I just don't agree with you that there is much to be gained by a coach's eval of officials.  And if you think any and all eval are good, then you must think that the UIL's idea to allow anyone, fan, parent, player, water boy, etc, to evaluate is a good idea also.  Nope, cannot agree.  It serves nothing other than allowing someone to vent.

 

Doc: We're on the exact same page inasfar as coaches evalutions are concerned; they are nothing more than a venting tool on their part and can richly be viewed as nothingmore than a popularity contest on the part of both coaches and officials. As is, they serve no useful purpose whatsoever! I can't ever recall that I even remotely agreed with the UIL evalution process of officials even from the git-go; not 32 years ago and certainly not now. There is no "fantasy" on my part inasfar as the evaluation process is concerned. The only real credence that I would even possibly offer is that a head coach recently sent me a film with something of an egregious nature that either I or a member of my crew had missed. Case in point: said coach returned a DVD with a note enclosed where there was some extremely ugly "head-to-head" contact on a particular block that was almost right in front of yours truly. I didn't see it at the time but after viewing the film, I stood totally convicted. I learned a hell of a lot more from that than I would if I had just looked at some standardized UIL Evaluation or Zebraware Evaluation form. And I would wager that a lot of other officiating folks would have as well.

I'm strictly attempting to point out that the evaluation process as is, whether it is put forth by the UIL or by Zebraware, or anyone else in coaching circles is inherently flawed. If I must be graded, then I would much rather be done so by my learned brethren in stripes through an organization like TASO.

And if  Manor Road continues to persist in its evaluationary pursuit of officials, then by golly, we as officials should be able to grade coaches/coaching staffs in some form of binding procedure. Even though I don't exactly see whether something of this nature would be any more fruitful than officials evaluations, I would bet the farm that that particular idea hasn't quite hit any of the overpaid and over-worked brain cells that Manor Road has to offer!