All a part of the plot.

 

They wanted to put Louisville in there to, just couldn't figure out how to make the seedings work. I'm kind of surprised Utah wasn't in there as well.:lol2:

I saw a tweet that said that they hoped those officials last night didn't own a business with a website or telephone number...:sssh:

My problem with the notion that the Officials are in the backpocket of the Tar Heels is WHY?

 

Why would they be so? (if true)

 

The NCAA did not want UNC to win it because it was like watching the old Raiders win it in 1980's and Pete Rozelle detested Al Davis.

 

The NCAA is investigating the National Champs. Do you think they want them to win?

I don't know if and why UNC got the benefit of bad officiating. Who knows, maybe it's because of how they lost last year, maybe it's because they aren't filled with a bunch of one and dones. Who knows why and I'm not saying it is any type of conspiracy, all I'm saying is they benefitted from a lot of bad officiating in their last few games. Was it on purpose? I don't know. It just happened and it left a sour taste in my mouth because the teams should be the reason they win or not and not the officiating.

UNC fans don't like Emerit.

 

Other fans don't like UNC.

 

Seems logical to get boos for both.

 

The boos were DEFINITELY coming for Emerit. They started when he was introduced over the microphone, and ended when he handed the mic back to Jim Nantz.

When your players don't go to class and struggle with math, you give a math lesson after a game Twitter

One team seems to get the friendly whistle each year. This year it was North Carolina. I have no problem with that. The issue for the NCAA is how do you find consistency within your officiating. Most people acknowledge there is a problem, but nobody has a practical solution. Best to accept the fact that the officials are gonna be adequate at best.

One team seems to get the friendly whistle each year. This year it was North Carolina. I have no problem with that. The issue for the NCAA is how do you find consistency within your officiating. Most people acknowledge there is a problem, but nobody has a practical solution. Best to accept the fact that the officials are gonna be adequate at best.

 

Just a though, but, is it possible to have a 3rd party evaluate them?

Two days embedded with a Big Ten officiating crew: These guys love their job - Chicago Tribune

 

The problem isn't with the evaluation process. By the time you get to this level and most levels of college officiating the evaluation process is pretty thorough with every call and non call broken down on high def super slow mo.

 

This article from the Chicago Tribune gives pretty good insight as to what these crews go through on a game by game basis

Just a though, but, is it possible to have a 3rd party evaluate them?

 

Possibly. However I'm not sure that is part of the solution. I'm of the belief that during any given game the human element will rear it's ugly head. These guys aren't robots, they don't see plays in slow motion, they get excited, angry, frustrated, tired and experience the entire gamut of human emotions. This can never be eliminated.

 

If we evaluate officials at this level on a scale of 10, most nights they will rate out between 5 and 8 on average. I don't think 9 or 10 is attainable on a regular basis. During the championship game for example we debate a number of calls that occur that could go either way. There is no definitive right or wrong call. However, the one call that everyone knows was missed is the play where Meeks' hand is out of bounds. How do we eliminate these missed calls?

 

I would like to see an official added that is responsible for these types of calls. This official would use a monitor with discretion to override certaint calls on the floor. I also believe that a coach should get two challenges during a game. If a challenge is won you retain both challenges. This is being done in other sports, so really nothing new.

When your players don't go to class and struggle with math, you give a math lesson after a game Twitter

Lol!!! That is too funny. What a bunch of rock heads lol.

Possibly. However I'm not sure that is part of the solution. I'm of the belief that during any given game the human element will rear it's ugly head. These guys aren't robots, they don't see plays in slow motion, they get excited, angry, frustrated, tired and experience the entire gamut of human emotions. This can never be eliminated.

 

If we evaluate officials at this level on a scale of 10, most nights they will rate out between 5 and 8 on average. I don't think 9 or 10 is attainable on a regular basis. During the championship game for example we debate a number of calls that occur that could go either way. There is no definitive right or wrong call. However, the one call that everyone knows was missed is the play where Meeks' hand is out of bounds. How do we eliminate these missed calls?

 

I would like to see an official added that is responsible for these types of calls. This official would use a monitor with discretion to override certaint calls on the floor. I also believe that a coach should get two challenges during a game. If a challenge is won you retain both challenges. This is being done in other sports, so really nothing new.

 

Interesting,, hmm, at first glance I like your idea, will need time to think on it tho, but off the bat, I like it.

That game was ugly, I ran out of Bourbon! I really wish UK could keep some of those kids beyond 1 year. That would be an amazing team with 2 or 3 years of maturity!

 

The players were ugly and the officiating was worse. The Flagrent 1 called on Gonzaga's big man was ridiculous. Absolutely no intent at all. Their arms just got hooked up. I bet Gonzaga missed 10 three footers. No flow to the game. Just bad. Espicially after the semis were such good, entertaining games.