State Board Meeting

[ETXZebra]

Any reports from the State Board Meeting this past weekend?

[JasonTX]

I expect your chapter leadership should pass along all the smaller details, but the bigger details are:

April 5 is the last date for paying dues at the normal rate.  The late fee kicks in on April 6.

In Mid-March there will be some training webinars that will get the offseason training started.  Around the first week in April there will be some weekly mini quizzes that will be available.

The rules test will be available by July 15 and likely well before then.  Once the NCAA rules changes come out and any UIL exceptions finalized, those can be implemented onto the test.  The passing score has changed for the test.  A passing grade is now an 80 or above.  For playoffs, you have to score a 90 or above.  You get 20 attempts.  For new members, they have a separate test still and their score stayed at 70 or above for new members to work subvarsity.

The state meeting will be July 23 at The Woodlands.
July 29 an online clinic will be posted.
November 8 the test and clinic will be closed.

A new app called Sports You will be something TASO will be utilizing and it's an opt-in app for anyone that wants to sign up for it.  It's not required.

Recruiting and Retention:  Lots of work has been taking place over the past year with a committee of members across the state assisting and the committee was given the approval to work up a budget to begin utilizing social media to send out targeted ads over the whole state.  As those leads come in, they will be distributed to the chapters, who will all be required to have a recruiting coordinator to follow up on the leads in their area.  On the retention, the biggest part of that was that chapters will be developing a mentorship program.  They will be provided some suggested guidelines, and again each chapter will have to have a retention coordinator. 

[ETXZebra]

Thanks for the info Jason.  Much appreciated!

[TexDoc]

I expect your chapter leadership should pass along all the smaller details, but the bigger details are:

April 5 is the last date for paying dues at the normal rate.  The late fee kicks in on April 6.

In Mid-March there will be some training webinars that will get the offseason training started.  Around the first week in April there will be some weekly mini quizzes that will be available.

The rules test will be available by July 15 and likely well before then.  Once the NCAA rules changes come out and any UIL exceptions finalized, those can be implemented onto the test.  The passing score has changed for the test.  A passing grade is now an 80 or above.  For playoffs, you have to score a 90 or above.  You get 20 attempts.  For new members, they have a separate test still and their score stayed at 70 or above for new members to work subvarsity.

The state meeting will be July 23 at The Woodlands.
July 29 an online clinic will be posted.
November 8 the test and clinic will be closed.

A new app called Sports You will be something TASO will be utilizing and it's an opt-in app for anyone that wants to sign up for it.  It's not required.

Recruiting and Retention:  Lots of work has been taking place over the past year with a committee of members across the state assisting and the committee was given the approval to work up a budget to begin utilizing social media to send out targeted ads over the whole state.  As those leads come in, they will be distributed to the chapters, who will all be required to have a recruiting coordinator to follow up on the leads in their area.  On the retention, the biggest part of that was that chapters will be developing a mentorship program.  They will be provided some suggested guidelines, and again each chapter will have to have a retention coordinator.

What was the thinking behind raising the test score requirement?

[dammitbobby]

I'm curious about that as well, given that it's an open-book test. 

[JasonTX]

I'm curious about that as well, given that it's an open-book test.

Raising the bar to encourage more people to open the book.  The other thought was to create a separate test specifically for the playoffs with more advanced questions.

[TexDoc]

I have no issue with the score requirements but I will say, I hope they board has studied this issue well enough to ensure there are enough officials that can hit the 90 threshold for the first round of the playoffs.  It is almost like another regular week. 

[ilyazhito]

I expect your chapter leadership should pass along all the smaller details, but the bigger details are:

April 5 is the last date for paying dues at the normal rate.  The late fee kicks in on April 6.

In Mid-March there will be some training webinars that will get the offseason training started.  Around the first week in April there will be some weekly mini quizzes that will be available.

The rules test will be available by July 15 and likely well before then.  Once the NCAA rules changes come out and any UIL exceptions finalized, those can be implemented onto the test.  The passing score has changed for the test.  A passing grade is now an 80 or above.  For playoffs, you have to score a 90 or above.  You get 20 attempts.  For new members, they have a separate test still and their score stayed at 70 or above for new members to work subvarsity.

The state meeting will be July 23 at The Woodlands.
July 29 an online clinic will be posted.
November 8 the test and clinic will be closed.

A new app called Sports You will be something TASO will be utilizing and it's an opt-in app for anyone that wants to sign up for it.  It's not required.

Recruiting and Retention:  Lots of work has been taking place over the past year with a committee of members across the state assisting and the committee was given the approval to work up a budget to begin utilizing social media to send out targeted ads over the whole state.  As those leads come in, they will be distributed to the chapters, who will all be required to have a recruiting coordinator to follow up on the leads in their area.  On the retention, the biggest part of that was that chapters will be developing a mentorship program.  They will be provided some suggested guidelines, and again each chapter will have to have a retention coordinator.

How would this apply if someone moves to Texas from out of state?

[JasonTX]

How would this apply if someone moves to Texas from out of state?

You'd be a first-year member in Texas.  If you only wanted to work sub-varsity you would be able to take the new members test and score a 70.  If you want to work Varsity, then 80 or above on the regular test and 90 for playoffs.

We also have a points system that places members into different divisions.  I don't know of too many chapters that actually use the divisions for anything.  Back a long time ago some coaches may have requested that they get higher division officials for their games but those days a pretty much gone, but we still have the system for collecting points.  There is a procedure in place where you can get credit for games worked in another state and be placed in a higher division.  As for my chapter, if you have experience and we see your quality of work on the field, you will not be treated like a brand new rookie.  You'll find a spot on the proverbial ladder pretty quickly.

[ElvisLives]

You'd be a first-year member in Texas.  If you only wanted to work sub-varsity you would be able to take the new members test and score a 70.  If you want to work Varsity, then 80 or above on the regular test and 90 for playoffs.

We also have a points system that places members into different divisions.  I don't know of too many chapters that actually use the divisions for anything.  Back a long time ago some coaches may have requested that they get higher division officials for their games but those days a pretty much gone, but we still have the system for collecting points.  There is a procedure in place where you can get credit for games worked in another state and be placed in a higher division.  As for my chapter, if you have experience and we see your quality of work on the field, you will not be treated like a brand new rookie.  You'll find a spot on the proverbial ladder pretty quickly.

What he said. 

[dammitbobby]

I have no issue with the score requirements but I will say, I hope they board has studied this issue well enough to ensure there are enough officials that can hit the 90 threshold for the first round of the playoffs.  It is almost like another regular week.

The more I think about this, the more I am in favor of it... I worked 15 varsity games through 11 weeks this past year (one playoff game where I got injured, and took a week off for vacation) so at least in our area, there's enough of a shortage that we couldn't get every game covered every week, on Fridays, and I don't know if eligibility was a factor in not having enough officials, but if we're already at the point of playing 15-30% of games on days that end in Y that don't start with F,  I see no issues with maybe a first round game being played on a Thursday due to lack of officials.  Both teams get shorted on that game but get an extra day to recover and prepare for the next week.

Only thing I don't like, is that it makes it much less likely to eventually get 7-man crews for all playoff games.  I personally think it should be a requirement.  And I'm sorry but the 'we're too broke to pay for two extra refs' excuse is nonsense.  If you're in the playoffs, you're almost certainly generating more revenue at the gate at all levels even with Big Daddy UIL skimming their cut off the top to cover the additional fees. 

Just my .02

ETA:  Championship game crews should be required to have 96+ scores. 

[CosmoKramer]

I have no issue with the score requirements but I will say, I hope they board has studied this issue well enough to ensure there are enough officials that can hit the 90 threshold for the first round of the playoffs.  It is almost like another regular week.

I'm going to add my $.02 as well.  I love the change from 80 to 90. But it will be irrelevant for a couple of reasons:

1.  Too many will cheat for their buddies by taking the test for them and ensuring they score over 90. 
2.  It's next to impossible for TASO to police the assignments to make sure those getting scheduled a playoff game are compliant.  I believe there's a check on all officials for the state games but that's as far as it goes.  Some, not all, assignors will overlook the score to make sure their chapter keeps the game.  Especially rounds 1-3 where there's no checking of the score by TASO.  Now, for argument sake, let's say TASO does implement a process to check round 1 assignments.  Then what?  There never seems to be any punishment handed down for being out of compliance.  I'm all in favor of punishment too.  Punishment that has teeth.  I.E. TASO does a spot check in round 1 and finds an official worked a playoff game, that chapter is no longer eligible for playoffs the remainder of the season.  I know that sounds extreme but it will get every other chapters attention to be compliant when the word spreads. 

PLEASE don't get me wrong.  As stated I love the change and 100% in favor of it.  I will have myself compliant.  I greatly appreciate the effort and intent for game knowledge and improvement.  Regardless of the shortage if an individual cannot make a 90 or above with 20 attempts do we really need them as an official!

[MowerMan]

How is it cheating when it’s an open book test? I would hope the test is taking with the entire crew together.
This way you know as a crew, your weakness.
The point of the test is to get better.

[dammitbobby]

Let's face it:  this is not an NCAA-caliber test in terms of difficulty (not a criticism, as it shouldn't be. Although we would all be better officials if it were, as it would make us dig in more, to learn more. Beside the point though.)

Taking a 'group test' will only mask those weak areas.  And while a crew may be able to skate by with one or two or three having good knowledge of penalties and enforcements, that's not going to help how we get to that point - for example, with keys, you're essentially on your own - if you're a wing and you don't have a good grasp of BBW rules, no one is going to help you or bail you out on the call.  They can on the enforcement, sure.  But getting to that stage of enforcement, requires all crew members to know their rules AND their mechanics to get the initial call right.  Then, the crew can work on getting the enforcement correct.

I wouldn't mind seeing either mechanics concepts and keys incorporated into the test, or even a separate test over just those.  Heard a stat last week for NCAA officiating - 90% of errors are ultimately from mechanics, not errors - not being in the right position, to see the right things.

[CosmoKramer]

How is it cheating when it’s an open book test? I would hope the test is taking with the entire crew together.
This way you know as a crew, your weakness.
The point of the test is to get better.

By cheating I meant that someone logs in for someone else and takes the test for them.  Said person never reads a question or opens the rule book to even attempt to take the test.  I agree with you the point of the test is to get better. 

[DieHardCubFan]

How is it cheating when it’s an open book test? I would hope the test is taking with the entire crew together.
This way you know as a crew, your weakness.
The point of the test is to get better.

I agree.  How is it cheating when it is an open book exam?

I can tell you that our crew works together and we even meet, have food brought in, and take the exams together (even though no one ever has the same questions).

[CosmoKramer]

I agree.  How is it cheating when it is an open book exam?

I can tell you that our crew works together and we even meet, have food brought in, and take the exams together (even though no one ever has the same questions).

Geez people....there's a difference between it being an open book test and not taking the test yourself.  Why is that so hard to understand?  I agree that if you take the test yourself, using your rule book, it's not cheating.  But what if someone doesn't take the test themselves at all?  What do you call that if it's not "cheating"? 

[TexDoc]

I'm going to add my $.02 as well.  I love the change from 80 to 90. But it will be irrelevant for a couple of reasons:

1.  Too many will cheat for their buddies by taking the test for them and ensuring they score over 90. 
2.  It's next to impossible for TASO to police the assignments to make sure those getting scheduled a playoff game are compliant.  I believe there's a check on all officials for the state games but that's as far as it goes.  Some, not all, assignors will overlook the score to make sure their chapter keeps the game.  Especially rounds 1-3 where there's no checking of the score by TASO.  Now, for argument sake, let's say TASO does implement a process to check round 1 assignments.  Then what?  There never seems to be any punishment handed down for being out of compliance.  I'm all in favor of punishment too.  Punishment that has teeth.  I.E. TASO does a spot check in round 1 and finds an official worked a playoff game, that chapter is no longer eligible for playoffs the remainder of the season.  I know that sounds extreme but it will get every other chapters attention to be compliant when the word spreads. 

PLEASE don't get me wrong.  As stated I love the change and 100% in favor of it.  I will have myself compliant.  I greatly appreciate the effort and intent for game knowledge and improvement.  Regardless of the shortage if an individual cannot make a 90 or above with 20 attempts do we really need them as an official!

This brings up a good point.  Who polices this?  The chapters will have to, at least in the first few rounds, but I'm fairly sure TASO does not get a list of names for who is working all of the games. 

[TexDoc]

I made the suggestion to the committee that they list the rule references with each question.  Seems crazy, but think about it.  If each individual official knows exactly where to look, they are much more likely to actually open the book, read, and give an answer on what they read.  The questions can remain the same.  Take the test up to 100 questions since the rule references are provided, and you get each guy opening the book 100 times instead of guessing the right answer when they can't find the exact rule in the rule book.  Let's face it, the rule book can be a little challenging to find things.  I usually use the pdf version and do a word search.  When someone asks me for help, I never give them an answer, I give them a rule reference so they can find out for themselves.  Most of the guys doing poorly probably just don't have very good "book" skills, if that makes sense.  Since the objective is to get them to open the book and read, I like this proposal.  If you don't get at least an 80 with the rule reference, you need to be officiating water polo, soccer, tiddly winks, badminton....something other than football.

[CosmoKramer]

I made the suggestion to the committee that they list the rule references with each question.  Seems crazy, but think about it.  If each individual official knows exactly where to look, they are much more likely to actually open the book, read, and give an answer on what they read.  The questions can remain the same.  Take the test up to 100 questions since the rule references are provided, and you get each guy opening the book 100 times instead of guessing the right answer when they can't find the exact rule in the rule book.  Let's face it, the rule book can be a little challenging to find things.  I usually use pdf and do a work search.  When someone asks me for help, I never give them an answer, I give them a rule reference so they can find out for themselves.  Most of the guys doing poorly probably just don't have very good "book" skills, if that makes sense.  Since the objective is to get them to open the book and read, I like this proposal.  If you don't get at least an 80 with the rule reference, you need to be officiating water polo, soccer, tiddly winks, badminton....something other than football.

I couldn't agree with you more, Doc.  There are many very good officials who are not good at "book" skills but are fantastic at overall game management and officiating skills on the field.  IMO, the latter being more important at the end of the day.  Especially if a crew can have a few of the book guys on the crew. 

[DieHardCubFan]

Geez people....there's a difference between it being an open book test and not taking the test yourself.  Why is that so hard to understand?  I agree that if you take the test yourself, using your rule book, it's not cheating.  But what if someone doesn't take the test themselves at all?  What do you call that if it's not "cheating"?

Cosmo, I completely understand what the difference is. I was just making the observation. To say that there are not officials who have someone else take the exam for them is obviously naive.