. . . Jurassic's sense of humor, Dan_ref's hair. . .

You'd best be leaving Dan alone. The man is <i><b>suave</b></i>. <i><b>Suave</b></i>, I tell ya! the very epitome of <i><b>suave</b></i>-ness; the apex of <i><b>suave</b></i>-ity.
http://www.uselessgraphics.com/itch.gif

Welmer was pulling his pants up every time down the court in Ann Arbor last night. Didn't look very god-like.
It was a brutal game from the view in my living room. :)

I think its time to see Steve Welmer at the Final Four. You see him on all the big games in the Big 12 and Big 10 but he has never got the call for the final four and I would say its time. My list:

Steve Welmer
Verne Harris
Scott Thornley
Mark Whitehead
Mike Thibedoux
Jim Burr - of course
Mike Kitts
Tim Higgins
Mike Sanzere- good official not sure final 4 material yet?- alternate
Ted Hillary

Question: where is Ed Hightower? I haven't saw him working anywhere since early January. Most seasons he is every where in the Big Ten, Big 12 and Big East. Just wondering?

He blew out his knee in a game about a month ago. He is done for the year. I do not know much more than that.

Peace

Why is it time to see Welmer at the Final Four?

Tom - I'm curious as to why you have your feelings about Welmer?

I may have mentioned this before, but since we are in a Big 10 town, our local paper has done a "end-of-season" survey and article of various Big 10 players at the end of both football and basketball seasons. They ask all the standard questions, like "Who's the best player?" "Who's the best coach?" and "What team has the best fans?". They even ask some off-the-wall questions, like, "Which player would you least like to meet in a dark alley?" But one question they've asked is "Who's your favorite referee?" And it seems like for the last 3 or 4 years, Steve Welmer has been at the top of that list, usually by a wide margin over the next person listed. The comments associated usually include things like, "He's fair", or, "He'll talk to you and let you know what you did."

Granted, this is a survey of players, not supervisors. But it does say there's something about him that puts him in a positive light with the players on the court. And supervisors must like him, because you see him all the time. So, he must be doing something right?

final four talk???
 

I think it is a little premature to talk about who will make the final four isn't it. As I understand it, what you did during the season gets you to the tournament, but your performance during the tournament is what advances you? If that isn't correct I would certainly like to know the correct procedure.

You are exactly right. You cannot go to a Final Four without being first recommended by a conference. Then once picked is is like an elimination tournament. The officials that do a good job at the first round are advance to the second round and so on.

Peace

I just had a long-winded response, but I don't want to totally throw someone under the bus. I will just say that I'm the type person that likes to do things right and I want what is right for the game. Making/keeping one side happy means things are fair for the other side. Welmer isn't even my least favorite D1 official.

Let me preface by saying Welmer isn't my favorite official (and I'm not sure I really have a favorite, like a favorite team), I'm just trying to get a better handle on what you're trying to say. When you say, "do things right", are you talking from a mechanics standpoint, or something else? I don't think he has "textbook" mechanics, but that can be said of quite a few successful D-1 officials. But, like I said, he's seen quite a bit, and the players like him as well, so what is he doing that makes him successful? Maybe it's his personality? So, because he is successful, shouldn't that make him a candidate for a Final 4 assignment?

As all of us know the advancement isn't solely based upon performance in the tournament. A large factor is years of experience and prior tournament performance. There is no way that everyone starts on equal footing in the first round of the NCAA.

When I was talking about mechanics, I was referring to three man mechanics.
What I'm trying to say is this, getting along with everyone and ONLY calling the obvious does not make for someone I would look at as one of my favorites.

I do not think all of us know anything for sure unless we are sitting directly in the room when these decisions are made. Also I did not say that was the only reason people advanced, but it is an elimination tournament. Maybe if all things are equal I would agree past performance or resume would play a role. Either way it goes, this has been the NCAA's public stance on the issue.

Peace

I would like to put a dog in this fight and ask a question? If skill plays a part in who advances, why is the tournament the source of the NCAA video every year? A video that mostly tells us what NOT to do.