Tim Higgins?

[GoodwillRef]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

I don't understand why people get picked year after year when there are so many good D-I officials out there. Anything to get new faces opportunities is a good change, as far as I'm concerned.

I would totally disagree with you on this...if the best officials each year are the same officials then they should be assigned to work the NCAA tournament and any HS State Tournament. The assigning for the NCAA tourney is a very complicated process hoping to put the "best" officials to work in the Tournament. If you are good enough to work you will get your shot to work at all levels...IMO!

[tomegun]

Originally Posted by GoodwillRef

I would totally disagree with you on this...if the best officials each year are the same officials then they should be assigned to work the NCAA tournament and any HS State Tournament. The assigning for the NCAA tourney is a very complicated process hoping to put the "best" officials to work in the Tournament. If you are good enough to work you will get your shot to work at all levels...IMO!

Define best in this case then I have another question/comment for you.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by tomegun

Define best in this case then I have another question/comment for you.

It's my belief that 'best' often means "most comfortable"/"more familiar"/"more credible" with the coaches.

[tomegun]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

It's my belief that 'best' often means "most comfortable"/"more familiar"/"more credible" with the coaches.

So you are saying the best doesn't mean the best?

[JRutledge]

No, the best means whatever "I think is the best." It does not account for what others may or may not think. And since that is subjective, it only matters what John Adams and the committee thinks. What we think does not mean anything.

Peace

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by tomegun

Define best in this case then I have another question/comment for you.

Despite what anyone would like to be the case, every type of skill has a very few who are truly the best....the basic bell curve holds true in just about any endeavor. You've got a lot of average officials, a moderate amount of pretty good and fairly poor officials, and a few that are pathetic and a few that are outstanding.

The funny thing is that 80% of a group, when surveyed will think they are above average (several studies have shown this sort of inflated sense of a person's own abilities). But, that can't, in normal situations, be true. At least 30% of the officials are worse than they think they are....probably more as a few humble officials are actually better than average that don't think so.

THe real question is whether you want the best on the tournaments or those that are "good enough". The difference between the best and the "good enough" will not always be visible and will matter even less, but it will eventually matter.

The difference shows up in the number of mistakes. The best still make them, but make fewer (or smaller mistakes). Most time, such mistakes don't have any material impact...but if you make enough more, eventually one will happen in a situation that matters.

Many of the average officials would probably do a fine job on most of the games....but the odds of a problem increase. How "deep" you go really depends on the acceptability of the increased risk of an unfavorable situation.

Of course, determining the "best" is a difficult proposition...and an entirely different question.

[Jurassic Referee]

Good article on Tim Higgins here.....

Basketballrefs.com

Just click on the link for the story.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Good article on Tim Higgins here.....

Basketballrefs.com

Just click on the link for the story.

I thought that Senator Kennedy passed away.

[tomegun]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Despite what anyone would like to be the case, every type of skill has a very few who are truly the best....the basic bell curve holds true in just about any endeavor. You've got a lot of average officials, a moderate amount of pretty good and fairly poor officials, and a few that are pathetic and a few that are outstanding.

The funny thing is that 80% of a group, when surveyed will think they are above average (several studies have shown this sort of inflated sense of a person's own abilities). But, that can't, in normal situations, be true. At least 30% of the officials are worse than they think they are....probably more as a few humble officials are actually better than average that don't think so.

THe real question is whether you want the best on the tournaments or those that are "good enough". The difference between the best and the "good enough" will not always be visible and will matter even less, but it will eventually matter.

The difference shows up in the number of mistakes. The best still make them, but make fewer (or smaller mistakes). Most time, such mistakes don't have any material impact...but if you make enough more, eventually one will happen in a situation that matters.

Many of the average officials would probably do a fine job on most of the games....but the odds of a problem increase. How "deep" you go really depends on the acceptability of the increased risk of an unfavorable situation.

Of course, determining the "best" is a difficult proposition...and an entirely different question.

Alrighty then...

[Nevadaref]

Tonight ESPN Classic showed the Big East conference tournament quarterfinal game between Pittsburgh and Georgetown played on March 6, 1986.

Seeing nothing better on TV, I decided to watch it for a few minutes. I noticed a few things.
1. The players were far less muscular, especially in the upper body than we see today.
2. First year of the shot clock. It was 45 seconds.
3. No three point shot. (NCAA adopted it nationally for the 1986-87 season.)
4. The C sometimes administered a FT.
5. Dick Vitale was one of the broadcasters.
6. Tim Higgins was one of the officials. He was MUCH younger, but I had no doubt due to the way that he moved and his signals.

For conclusive proof, I decided to search the internet for a copy of the box score. Here it is: http://www.bigeast.org/fls/19400/sta...B_OEM_ID=19400
Yep, there's his name.

[biz]

Higgins has been reffing college ball since the 70's and he was, along with Jim Burr, one of the original members of the Big East officiating staff when the conference formed in 1979-1980 season (the conference formed in May of 1979 after the hoop season ended).

There has never been a Big East basketball season that did not see Higgins or Burr on the floor working games in the conference. It's pretty amazing!

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by big jake

This new NCAA super needs his head examined, Higgins is still able to call any game that is played anywhere!!!!!!

I will just say this. Then why does Higgins get about 10 feet in front of the ball as the new trail? I only say this because those are not the mechanics and those are not acceptable by many. In other words, if I were to do this as a camper, I would get told about it.

Peace

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by big jake

This new NCAA super needs his head examined, Higgins is still able to call any game that is played anywhere!!!!!!

So can a lot of officials, why should Mr. Higgins get preference over the other qualified officials?

[Rich]

Originally Posted by GoodwillRef

I would totally disagree with you on this...if the best officials each year are the same officials then they should be assigned to work the NCAA tournament and any HS State Tournament. The assigning for the NCAA tourney is a very complicated process hoping to put the "best" officials to work in the Tournament. If you are good enough to work you will get your shot to work at all levels...IMO!

Best is subjective. Who's to say one official is better than another? What are the objective criteria?

It's easy to say this when you're on the inside and there are many officials trying to pound on the (seemingly) locked door. When some officials have been to the state tourney 5, 6, 10 times and there are outstanding officials who never get a shot at it, I think the system is broken. There is nothing about the officials I saw on TV last week (and I admit I didn't watch much as I'd rather watch the NCAA tourney) head and shoulders above the varsity officials I see with 25+ years experience who've never gotten the call. I think it's just easier to pick the same people year after year than try to identify new people and give them their shot.

[bradfordwilkins]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

There is nothing about the officials I saw on TV last week (and I admit I didn't watch much as I'd rather watch the NCAA tourney) head and shoulders above the varsity officials I see with 25+ years experience who've never gotten the call. I think it's just easier to pick the same people year after year than try to identify new people and give them their shot.

Right, you're also going on what you see on TV which doesn't factor in a LOT of variables including rules knowledge, game management, etc. Or even a lot of the minor things like signals, etc that you rarely see on TV (I always scream for them not to cut away when they go to report but they almost always do :-( )

Of course all of it is still subjective -- but there is a lot of that subjective we are not privy too either.