TO: All OCFOA members
FROM: 2011 Rating Committee
SUBJECT: Playoff List and Individual Evaluations
The Rating Committee wishes to congratulate each individual in the association for his effort on the field and in the classroom. An analysis of the evaluations often showed that members improved as the season progressed. This was the main focus of the committee.
Of course, the secondary reason for the committee’s being was to accumulate data and formulate a playoff list from that data.
You will receive an Excel spreadsheet containing 2 worksheets. The first worksheet is this year’s playoff list as approved by the Board. The Board, which has this discretion, made only 1 adjustment in the top 5 category & about 6 adjustments in roughly the 20 and below rankings from the list originally submitted.
The Board also had to adhere to the by-laws and our policies and procedures, which meant that members who failed to work 6 varsity games, were deleted from the original list and members who worked a final in the previous year could not work a final again.
Additionally, at the beginning of the year, the Rating Committee in its Rating Overview published on the OBFOA web site stated that members who ended up in the same category (e.g.; final, semi-final, playoff, etc) would be separated by their test scores. The Instructional Chair gave these scores to the Committee, and those members who had failed the classification test were noted for the Board to delete. However, the Board decided that due to unusual circumstances with this year’s on-line testing no one would be taken off the playoff list due to a failed test.
The Rating Committee, when it met to draw up the playoff list, also decided because of testing problems to forego using tests as the “separator”. Instead the Committee used the following formula to determine placement within each category. If a member received a final evaluation, he was given 4 points. If he received a semi-final, he got 3 points. A playoff, 2 points, a varsity, 1 point and no points for a low-varsity.
EXAMPLE: if a member received 3 evaluations: semi – playoff – playoff
That is a total of 7 points divided by 3 evaluations for a score of 2.33
That would place that member in the playoff category (2.00-2.99) with a 2.33 score
Those members who scored higher or lower than the 2.33 would be placed appropriately above or below him. Keep in mind that each category (final, semi, etc) had its own separate ranking.
If members were tied, then the classification and “bar” scores were used since they were the only resort available.
Thus, the list submitted to the Board was entirely made up of your field evaluations except where ties occurred.
Lastly, so that no one may think that the members who handled the evaluation paperwork have skewed the evaluations in their favor, the Rating Chair and his assistant have decided not to work any playoff games other than the 1st round which is the round where almost everyone normally works.
To those of you who have worked hard to get high marks on the list, enjoy your playoff games!
Martin Covarrubias, Rating Chairman
Aug 27, 2011
Ratings Committee Overview
In a 180-degree turn from prior years, this year’s Rating Committee has practically eliminated numbers.
For the 2011 OCFOA season, the thrust of the Committee’s focus will be to improve member on-field performance rather than just accumulate numbers in order to provide rankings for a playoff list. By stressing how members can improve their performance, it is hoped that every member will become a better official and can ultimately improve their standing on the playoff list.
Copies of the evaluation forms will be on-line for all to see. Before the first game, an evaluator’s what-to-look-for-by-position list will also be placed on-line. This should standardize how evaluators appraise performances and also familiarize members as to what is required of them. Everyone should look these over so that the membership and the evaluators are all on the same page.
As noted, the Committee’s first priority is personal improvement. Its second goal is to have evaluations processed in a timely manner. In past seasons, there often was a substantial time lag between the game date and when the official received his evaluation. Due to the relatively few games in a season, if evaluations are received late, it does not allow an official to adequately make adjustments to his game. The Committee will have in place a system whereby evaluations are completed on-line, sent on-line, checked for clerical errors (not factual), posted and then sent to the appropriate officials before their next game. This should help members make any adjustments they feel may be appropriate to elevate their on-field performances.
Unlike last season, the third goal is to assure that non-crew members who work varsity games will be evaluated. These are members who perhaps need evaluations more so than crewmembers. Timely reports are essential for them to assess their performances and make any necessary adjustments during the season. These evaluations also allow crew chiefs, looking for new crewmembers, a solid source of reference when they may not be personally knowledgeable of a prospective member’s ability.
Also, non-varsity games will utilize a non-numerical form. It will list constructive comments aimed at improving non-crew members’ performances so that these members can become crew eligible in the shortest possible time. Again, timely on-line reporting is essential for these members to improve their game. It is the feeling of the Committee that if a member wishes to advance, that member must be pro-active. Therefore, non-varsity game referees need only fill out a form if requested to do so by a non-crew member. Members who request an evaluation and who do not receive one should notify the Rating Chair after one week.
Finally, a playoff list must be constructed. It will consist of on-field evaluations and tests/quizzes. Those members who fail to meet qualifying criteria as designated by our by-laws, policies and procedures and any Board rulings will be removed from the list regardless of officiating expertise.
Member on-field performances will fall into a handful of categories. All members in a category will be ranked by their test scores. The tests that will be used are the qualifying exam, the “bar exam” and classroom quizzes given by the Instructional Chair as he sees fit. The Rating Committee will not use the Study Guide. Thus, if you miss a meeting and fail to take the classroom quiz for that meeting, you had better make up the quiz or you will be given a zero. The “bar exam” does not have to be taken to be a qualified official. However, for the purposes of ratings, it is HIGHLY recommended that you take the “bar” in order to elevate your test scores. Otherwise, as with the quizzes, you will be given a zero.
Thus, if you miss a meeting and fail to take the classroom quiz for that meeting, you had better make up the quiz or you will be given a zero.
To summarize, all members of the same on-field performance category are ranked by test scores. No member of a category that falls below a higher category can move ahead of you even though they may have had higher test scores. In short, on-field performance trumps tests.
Some ground rules:
No TV evaluations will be accepted. An evaluator must attend the game. An evaluator may support his comments by reviewing a tape of the game in order to get the facts of a situation correct.
Evaluators are requested to not meet with a crew at any time UNLESS there is a play, enforcement or mechanic that may need clarification. The evaluator should ask why the crew did what it did, get the explanation, thank them and leave. The evaluation form will speak for the evaluator.
In order to give each member due process, the committee will allow appeals. Appeals MUST be made by e-mail to the Rating Chair within 14 days of the receipt of your evaluation. Furthermore, the member within that time frame must provide a CD of the game. The Rating Committee will meet on Oct. 25th to draw up a recommended playoff list to be given to the Board. Therefore, appeals for games evaluated on Oct. 13 – 22 must be appealed by the start of the Committee meeting that night, preferably sooner.
Members, who are evaluated at more than one position and make the playoff list at each, must choose which position they prefer to work.
The committee hopes that this years evaluations give every OCFOA member an opportunity to become a better football official; may the average become good and the good become great.