Points Overhaul

[Welpe]

We got the word from our chapter secretary today on the TASO Board making some major changes to the points system.

The highlights:

No cap on education points.

The limit on scrimmage points has been removed.

And the biggie: Varsity game requirements to make D2 and D1 have been removed.

[Coby]

I dont really know what to think about the new rule change.  Over the past 6 years I doubt there is anyone else in the state that has been more affected by this rule then me and my crew.  I complained about the stupidity of this rule to anyone who would listen.  Now the year I finally become a d1 and everyone on my crew is at least a 2 they change the rule.  The system as it was worked.  There just are not enough officials that are willing to put in the time.  It is kinda like in education when not enough of the kids pass a state test it is easier and cheaper to just create another test rather then fix the problem.  Here the problem is not enough young officials so they think this will fix the problem.  I am really against the doing away with the 15 varsity game maximum for points.  I think it just promotes greed.  I mean really how many d2/3 officials really call more then 15 games?  The one positive from this is I think I can really make a good run at the top 10 Taso points of all time with these new rules.  I suppose people like welpewill benefit so it is good.  I just think the board is going to use this as a way to say, " look what we did for new officials" when in reality I do not see this helping out the problem of a lack of young officials in TASO

[rsquare]

I totally agrre with you Coby.
They are  really "selling out" on this.
Even in my work vocation to attain ceratin professional designations and certifications you have to have a combination of CE credits, mininum scoring on professional exams and certain numbers of years experience.
This is like playing the game - everyone is a winner - no scores kept - everyone gets a big trophy and pizza.
I think the value of dedicated effort is diluted with this new change.
Also, I noticed that a D3 can be a crew chief.
I thought the Houston chapter adopted the policy that a crew chief had to be a D1 or D2.
I saw it in the members's section.
Nothing surprises me anymore....

[JasonTX]

The intent was to not punish the many officials in the state that work a ton of subvarsity games but not that many varsity games.  In some of the larger chapters where getting a varsity games is few and far between.  Many officials had the points to move into D2 or D1 but they didn't have the number of varsity games that was required.  Now they can move up because they have been working all those subvarsity games that should count for something.

The same goes for education points.  Dropping the max on those we can hope this will encourage officials to attend as many clinics as they can.  In the past officials would get the max points at 1 clinic and not go to any others.  Now they may go out and attend numerous clinics.  The same for scrimmages.  If you can go out and work 10, then you should get 10 points.

The State Meeting points will no longer be called "Bonus Points".  It will be standard for all state meetings that for each 1 hour of classroom instruction you will get 1 point. 

[TexDoc]

The intent was to not punish the many officials in the state that work a ton of subvarsity games but not that many varsity games.  In some of the larger chapters where getting a varsity games is few and far between.  Many officials had the points to move into D2 or D1 but they didn't have the number of varsity games that was required.  Now they can move up because they have been working all those subvarsity games that should count for something.

The same goes for education points.  Dropping the max on those we can hope this will encourage officials to attend as many clinics as they can.  In the past officials would get the max points at 1 clinic and not go to any others.  Now they may go out and attend numerous clinics.  The same for scrimmages.  If you can go out and work 10, then you should get 10 points.

The State Meeting points will no longer be called "Bonus Points".  It will be standard for all state meetings that for each 1 hour of classroom instruction you will get 1 point.

One problem Jason, when it is easier to get to D1, thus D1 grows even larger, then what happens?  What is the motivation of all those D1 members to get out and work sv or attend clinics?  I think this change will have the opposite affect of what the TASO board is trying to do.  What they really need to do now and raise the points required to move from one division to the next.

[Etref]

Several years ago when the "points rule" was amended, I thought it was dumb. Why make the change for the state wide system just to fit Houston ( or whoever)? Houston should change their way of doing things and have a system to integrate the newer officials into games to get them experience. Most chapters do this either by design or necessity.

[Coby]

Rickwts agree 99%

Jason you proved my point.  This action is not going to make it easier for young/new officials to get varsity games (which is what I believe the intent of this change is, atleast I want to believe).  The problem of a glass ceiling for new officials will still be there fundamentally in the bigger chapters Houston especially.

Texdoc:  I agree it will have the opposite effect of what they intend.  Unfortunately in the email I received they just state what the changes are not the reasonings behind the changes so we will not know what their intent is.

What is the answer?  I believe a once every 3 years portfolio review would be a neat concept.  This way if you would like to bust your butt and work hard you could move up to the top level in 7-8 years.  Also this would prevent the people who have been at D1 for 20 years who have just coasted and never attempted to get better a reason to get better.  Make it where the local chapter can only assign the highest ranking to 20 percent of the chapter.  But the state can give out an additional 250 top grades during an interview or portfolio review at the state meeting.  This would make a lot of people more accountable.

[rickref]

"What is the answer?  I believe a once every 3 years portfolio review would be a neat concept.  This way if you would like to bust your butt and work hard you could move up to the top level in 7-8 years.  Also this would prevent the people who have been at D1 for 20 years who have just coasted and never attempted to get better a reason to get better.  Make it where the local chapter can only assign the highest ranking to 20 percent of the chapter.  But the state can give out an additional 250 top grades during an interview or portfolio review at the state meeting.  This would make a lot of people more accountable."

This won't work in rural chapters. Bottom line is this. Most people on this site are an example of those getting better. Regardless of how many adjustments you make to a points system there are guys who put on the uniform in August and take it off in Novemeber and are done. They do not care to get any better. I know a lot of Division 1 officials who have been there a long time who never go to camps, clinics, or try to even work with young guys. They do not go to scrimmages and still will not no matter how many points you allow to their end of year reports.

Locally your division only allows you to be on crews that are selectable for 4a and 5a games. Even then we have rules around the point make ups of those crews. Crew chiefs have to have been calling a certain number of years. So here in theory you could have a ten year WH who is a D3 because he just did not have points for a two or one yet. So long as rest crew has point make up they get a chance to be picked by 4a 5a coaches.

Games motivate in the end and not the division or points. I am not certain a state agnecy telling certain officials as a D1 they can not be, that based on a portfolio reviews etc makes any difference in motivating me or anyone else to "get better." If an official is on the "right" crew I will get my game. For me personally I care about my performance and review film etc to be better so this is moot for me. For the August to Novemebr guy not much does motivate them but "is the game big"?

[Welpe]

The problem of a glass ceiling for new officials will still be there fundamentally in the bigger chapters Houston especially.

You're not kidding there.

[Coby]

Rick you are proving my point for a portfolio approach.  The local chapter knows (for the most part) who is coasting and not trying to get better.  They can only give a top ranking to the top 20%.  They can assign their own evaluation protocol as they seem fit.  Anyone who does not like it or chapters where there are more quality officials then the top 20% can have their credentials evaluated at the state meeting or committee.  Taso state can then give additional top rankings as they deem nescessary.  Credentials evaluated does not mean games worked, sure that should be part of the evaluation.  They could design a rules test, or physical fitness test, or number of post on refstripes it can change as the state board sees fit.  This will cause a lot of smaller rural chapters to step up their training game.  If I am a coach outside of the assigning area and I go to small chapter A and ask for a top 20% crew from the small chapter and they come out and do my game.  If they are no good I am going to say, "damn they were a top 20% crew from small chapter A and that is what I got".  Same thing with the big chapters.  If they send me crap I will say damn that is what they sent me.  Competition is the key to a better product not complacency.

[TexDoc]

One thing is quite obvious, the division system TASO employs is a measure of experience, not quality or ability.  Coaches, especially during the playoffs, want D1 only officials at times because, real or not, they believe asking for D1 will provide them with quality and experience.  Although not mutually exclusive, the two measures are seen as one in the same by coaches when they see Division this or that next to an official's name.

In the end, the coaches will still select who they want for their games and will always be affording the opportunity to scratch.  A true rating that combines experience and ability is what we need, but is not cheap to implement.

[rsquare]

This new TASO directive is kinda akin to "Obama Care"
The intent is well but it sure is a crazy way to get there...

[Welpe]

In the end, the coaches will still select who they want for their games

There's the real problem...just my $0.02...

[rsquare]

Waitin' to hear how my friend, Arbitrator weighs in.
Haven't heard from him lately.
Betcha he got on one of those exotic cruises to the Med 
or he's busy watching and counting as his big stock portfolio skies upward 

[rickref]

"If I am a coach outside of the assigning area and I go to small chapter A and ask for a top 20% crew from the small chapter and they come out and do my game.  If they are no good I am going to say, "damn they were a top 20% crew from small chapter A and that is what I got".  Same thing with the big chapters.  If they send me crap I will say damn that is what they sent me.  Competition is the key to a better product not complacency."

This happens now without the official program in place. Coaches select at the end of the day. I do not see any program being implemented that ties experiance and ability statewide well. There is lack of man power to grade in small chapters. There is lack of caring and initiative State level wise. It seems these same discussions happen year in and year out. It always comes back to at least locally, guys/crews who get better get noticed by coaches and get punished by them when they are not picked. Sad but thats the system we live with here. Not much will make it better. On rare occasion we see crews who are a problem with performance. Board will act and discuss with them. Then when they refuse to fix it they find themselves with no games at higher levels. I have seen this.

I do not disagree something can be improved on. I do not think a persons division level will be what motivates them.

[Coby]

One thing is quite obvious, the division system TASO employs is a measure of experience, not quality or ability.  Coaches, especially during the playoffs, want D1 only officials at times because, real or not, they believe asking for D1 will provide them with quality and experience.  Although not mutually exclusive, the two measures are seen as one in the same by coaches when they see Division this or that next to an official's name.

In the end, the coaches will still select who they want for their games and will always be affording the opportunity to scratch.  A true rating that combines experience and ability is what we need, but is not cheap to implement.

I always thought a good way to test this theory is to put a completely fictional crew of all D1 officials in the book and available at the picks.  Every school that picks them would then get board assigned a crew in their place.

[JasonTX]

Some of our officials will purposesly not turn in their points just so they can stay in D2.  I have asked why they prefer to stay D2 and they tell me that some coaches don't pick D1 because they fear they might be getting someone higher in age.  I am not sure if there is any truth to that because I don't ask the coaches for the reasoning behind their requests.

At the meeting TASO showed some stats on the ages of officials.  The average age of TASO football members is 47.  I don't remember the exact range, but something like ages 45 - 50 has the most ammount of members.  What we are lacking is young officials.  Officials in the low 20's only had 250 members in the state.  A large portion of those that are 45-50 were also D5 and D4 officials.  You can do the math as to what age some of those will be when they make it to D1.  At this point in time I think we don't even need to worry about points, but instead we need to find a way to get some younger people to become officials and then get them educated.  In my chapter, most of our guys don't even care about the points because they know at the end of the day, they get assigned based upon their ability and not their division.  As someone already pointed out, divisions are not always relative to ability.

[Welpe]

The other issue is retention of younger officials. I'm only starting my 5th year of footbal officiating but I'm not nearly as enthusiastic about it as I was my first couple of years. Some of that is natural progression, but most of it is getting tired of it. I like working games but all of the other garbage that goes with officiating football is beginning to take its toll. Especially since I have a little one at home, finding a hard time justifying being gone as much as I am.

Paying dues is one thing but I'm really not looking forward to another year of chasing six man and subvarsity games all over the sticks in order to get noticed. I'll quit complaining now but that's where I'm at and I know I'm not the only one.

[rickref]

The other issue is retention of younger officials. I'm only starting my 5th year of footbal officiating but I'm not nearly as enthusiastic about it as I was my first couple of years. Some of that is natural progression, but most of it is getting tired of it. I like working games but all of the other garbage that goes with officiating football is beginning to take its toll. Especially since I have a little one at home, finding a hard time justifying being gone as much as I am.

Paying dues is one thing but I'm really not looking forward to another year of chasing six man and subvarsity games all over the sticks in order to get noticed. I'll quit complaining now but that's where I'm at and I know I'm not the only one.

I have been where you are now. I understand what you are going through.

[Coby]

Some of our officials will purposesly not turn in their points just so they can stay in D2.  I have asked why they prefer to stay D2 and they tell me that some coaches don't pick D1 because they fear they might be getting someone higher in age.  I am not sure if there is any truth to that because I don't ask the coaches for the reasoning behind their requests.

At the meeting TASO showed some stats on the ages of officials.  The average age of TASO football members is 47.  I don't remember the exact range, but something like ages 45 - 50 has the most ammount of members.  What we are lacking is young officials.  Officials in the low 20's only had 250 members in the state.  A large portion of those that are 45-50 were also D5 and D4 officials.  You can do the math as to what age some of those will be when they make it to D1.  At this point in time I think we don't even need to worry about points, but instead we need to find a way to get some younger people to become officials and then get them educated.  In my chapter, most of our guys don't even care about the points because they know at the end of the day, they get assigned based upon their ability and not their division.  As someone already pointed out, divisions are not always relative to ability.

Jason-  What is really going to suck is in 15 years you and I are dealing with this issue.  In Houston for example by my best age guessing/knowing there are about 400 members on crews.  I put the number of white hats over the age of 60 at 27 (very generous).  I put the number of members on a crew (in any position) that are under the age of 40 at 24. The majority of those officials under the age of 40 had dads that were also officials.  So when I presented the findings to my superiors I suggested that they either start recruiting young officials or provide subsidies to officials to breed more children.

So I always try to present a solution when I notice a problem.  Jason I think you and I should co-chair a roundtable discussion at the state meeting of TASO officials under the age of 40.  Where we discuss the concerns of our age group and our perspective.  I want to try to stay away from getting more games, and focus more on technology, recruiting, demographics and retention.  Then invite all of the board members to sit in with us.  Right now what I know is a "young guns clinic" is not an answer.  Let me know what you think.  What is the process of getting on the agenda for a session?

[JasonTX]

Jason-  What is really going to suck is in 15 years you and I are dealing with this issue.  In Houston for example by my best age guessing/knowing there are about 400 members on crews.  I put the number of white hats over the age of 60 at 27 (very generous).  I put the number of members on a crew (in any position) that are under the age of 40 at 24. The majority of those officials under the age of 40 had dads that were also officials.  So when I presented the findings to my superiors I suggested that they either start recruiting young officials or provide subsidies to officials to breed more children.

So I always try to present a solution when I notice a problem.  Jason I think you and I should co-chair a roundtable discussion at the state meeting of TASO officials under the age of 40.  Where we discuss the concerns of our age group and our perspective.  I want to try to stay away from getting more games, and focus more on technology, recruiting, demographics and retention.  Then invite all of the board members to sit in with us.  Right now what I know is a "young guns clinic" is not an answer.  Let me know what you think.  What is the process of getting on the agenda for a session?

I would start with the president of Houston chapter.  All the things you mentioned were brought up by him.  Your district director can also help you put something on the agenda.  The board meetings are also open to the membership until they go into closed session.  Retention was a hot topic.  Some think that getting varsity games to new officials is the key.  It may help, but once a new official gets varsity games, he then is expecting a playoff game.  Once that don't happen, we run into retention problems as a smaller chapter.  TASO doesn't get involved with how crews are picked or how games are assigned, but there was discussion about the need to get younger officials involved and make it easier for them to get some games.

[Arbitrator]

Waitin' to hear how my friend, Arbitrator weighs in.
Haven't heard from him lately.
Betcha he got on one of those exotic cruises to the Med 
or he's busy watching and counting as his big stock portfolio skies upward 

 

Correct...Wrong... and Wrong!

Correct in that you haven't heard from me as I just got back from hobnobing with barristers.  Wrong... that wasn't me on the Mediterreanean cruise ship that went aground, when HoustonUmp, stumbled to the starboard side and caused that ship to list. Wrong... even at 13,000, my stock portfolio is a joke. But thanks for thinking of me rsquare, cause I know that HoustonUmp would never ever do that! Can't wait until he works for my crew again! He'll get some exercise!

Regarding the TASO football points change, I cannot help but feel that this change should put everybody on the same footing. Granted, the major metropolitan chapters, strictly as a matter of logistics, will continue to dominate the vast number of those games/points because they are physically located in the population centers. Historically speaking, there have been changes made over the years that was done to cap the points of the larger chapters and try to make the smaller chapters more equivalent. The only thing I wish they would do is to go back to giving 1/4 points to the D5's, D4's and D3's for peanut games, as that would be beneficial to the young people doing those.

Whether or not this change was implemented does not detract from the fact that we are/will be very top-heavy with D1's in a very short period of time. And a couple of years from now, we'll be visiting about busting D1 up into a "super-division." I can already see it coming!   

[rsquare]

Perhaps we can set up a school/organization sorta like the "Universal Life Church".
Remeber during the draft  - you could send them $35 to get your theology degree and set up a church. Get your conscientious objection deferment
Uh oh - I guess I am dating myself as one of those 50 + D1 geezeers
Oh well
Send me $19.95 plus $6.95 S/H and you can get your D1 certification from UOI (Universal Officiating Institute) -  - wait - that is way to close to UIL intials - they may beat me to the gun! 

[Welpe]

Careful, keep that up and Arbitrator will start calling you a Manor Roadie... 

[TexDoc]

I guess I am dating myself as one of those 50 + D1 geezeers

I resemble that remark, just barely (age-wise that is, been D1 for 12 or 13 years or so and have about 1,400 pts)