I found this in the MLS forum and thought it should be here also. Enjoy: http://www.foxsports.com/content/view?contentId=2301874
I would be very curious to know the details on the evaluations -- most importantly who is doing the evaulations. Is MLS doing its own evaluations or are they using the assessments that USSF assessors perform on every game? If MLS is doing its own evals, are the coaches involved at all? The reason that I ask is that around here, referees are rated in high school by the coaches. Getting the best (or even any) post season assignment is based upon those coaches ratings. So you have situations where several referees will never red card some coaches players because those coaches have strong reputations within the state. If you get a bad rating from one of the "powerful" coaches, you are very unlikely to get playoffs -- or at a minimum, you won't get the choice playoffs, you'll get shipped a couple hours way out in timbuktu somewhere. We get a card each fall showing our ratings and it lists the number of 1's, 2's, etc that we get. It then lists what schools have rated us. In my ratings, it was interesting that the number of 1's that I received was exactly the same as the number of foul language red cards I gave out during the season -- and each of those coaches submitted evaluations on me. So with the MLS referees actually having a SUBSTANTIAL financial incentive in their ratings, it would be interesting to know how those ratings occur. Also, I wonder if MLS would ever tell us who the top 5, next 5 and next 3 are so we'd know who they rated strong. That would make for some good discussion on the BS boards.
It's never going to happen--and it shouldn't. In fact, I don't think the pay scale should exist, nevermind be public knowledge. There should be two scales--either you're up to par for MLS caliber officiating, or you're not. If you make the cut, you should be paid the same as all the other CRs. The business of paying certain referees more than others and paying SARs more than JARs and paying those with FIFA badges more than Nationals is foolish in my eyes. Rating the referees for the sake of deciding who should get the most important matches is one thing. I believe in it and it makes perfect sense--the best performing refs get the biggest games. However, paying people differently for performing the exact same job doesn't sit well with me. If someone's performance as a referee is bad, you drop them from the league (not underpay them). The only legitimate justification I can envisage for a pay scale is seniority in the league (the longer you last in the league, the more you deserve to make). Other than that, I think the pay scale should go. Ultimately, it's really just an excuse from MLS to pay some refs less. (And before anyone attacks me from a political angle, fear not, I am a capitalist. I understand that certain players get paid more than others, based on skill. But, I don't think that should apply to referees. If you're in the MLS CR pool, it's inherent that you've been deemed qualified to officiate league matches. If 'excellent' performances mean anything other than better assignments (and maybe the OSI Ref of the Year award), then referees might be tempted to 'please' their evaulators (as Kevbrunton alluded to) in order to increase their pay. I just think it's a slippery slope and it could breed contention amongst the referees -- especially if a more experienced ref like Hall or Stott dropped from the top tier)
I agree with you MassRef -- that it will never be made public. I was surprised to find out that there are different levels of pay. And I agree that it does set up the opportunity for abuse. I think that setting up a bump in pay after a certain amount of seniority would be ok. For example, once you've been a league referee for a certain amount of time or a certain number of games, then you should move up the pay scale. The theory being that if you are continuing to get assignments after showing your ability in the league, you should get a bump in pay. Until you've proven yourself, the smaller wages should be acceptable.
To me, it seems as if the pay is not consistent with the expectation. They want to keep the pay low, but want the calls to be top shelf. While we would like to have this benefit for ourselves whenever we make a purchase, where else does this really happen? The MLS wants the best ref, but think of the pool from which they have to choose. The MLS ref must be able to travel on short notice across the country, have a job that allows him/her to liberally take off from work, be in great physical and mental condition, and put in the time and effort to rise to the top level of the referees The only reason they get the good refs that they do is that these refs love the game and what they do so much that they are willing to make the sacrifice to do this level of game. If I did all that to be able to do MLS games, and then I was not one of the top 5 or 10 refs in someone's opinion, it would be hard to maintain one's enthusiasm for the MLS. I agree that it would be better to maybe have a seniority or referee grade based pay rate, not based on someone's subjective evaluation. Just my view from the youth ref perspective.
They do the same thing in michigan and of course the best officials dont get good ratings, only the ones that never make a call that ticks anyone off......You cant be a good official and NEVER make anyone mad. The best part about being an officer in an approved officials association in Michigan is that when a coach complains about the complete IDIOT he saw in the state semi-final is I can say "hey, you picked him, not me!!""""