Give the coach this loss

[jleves]

Marquette was 0-14 from three - Cadougan was 0-2 from three and 4-24 from three on the season. You live with that shot all day long and you do not foul. There was a kid in his face and he was 3 feet beyond the arc. He makes that shot one out of 20 times at best under the circumstances.

The only thing I think you do is get the time out to set up a defense instead of allowing a helter skelter play.

 

[Huskies4ever]

ok??have we ever seen it actually backfire for uconn or anyone? how many times have we seen letting a team shoot the 3 backfire? it cost washington a win against us in 2006 tourney

I forget who it was, and which year (I believe 2011), but a coach who believes you foul in this scenario, did so in an NCAA tourny game. The other team made the 1st, missed the 2nd, kicked the rebound out for a wide open 3 that rimmed out at the buzzer. I always hated that play, but after watching that particular game, I remember thinking,"that is why you don't foul."
The bottom line is the risk of OT, far outweighs the risk of losing.
Washington had a shot at winning in OT, just as we had a shot at winning tonight. As fishy pointed out, happens.

 

[Gurleyman]

There were + 6 seconds left, defensive pressure on the ball should cut that in half. With the foul they still have to make the first shot, miss the first the worst you do is overtime. They make the first miss the second, offensive rebound and put back overtime. Offensive rebound and three point shot for loss highly unlikely. We were playing from behind all night, on the road I'd foul there every time.

That being said no one has ever paid me to coach basketball so what do I know.

What about giving up the offensive rebound and hacking the guy in the act? Makes it. You lose on a FT. I've seen that happen. I've seen a lot of putbacks miss, and twice I've seen winning threes miss.

The odds favor fouling, but you have to trust your team to handle its defensive glass. When MU missed a FT with 15 seconds left in overtime, we gave up the rebound. It's a risky propostion with this team as constructed. I would have played it straight up. With Okafor-Boone, I foul (which we didn't against Duke -- could have been a big boo-boo but Redick almost put up an air ball).

 

[housekeys]

I don't like the foul (in that situation) philosophy. We've seen it nearly backfire in the NCAA tourny. At UConn, we are used to tough man-to-man D. I always trust our D in these cases, and the worst case is OT. You foul, they make the 1st, miss the 2nd, and get the rebound, you could lose the game. And with the way this team boards, that is even more a possiblity.

I agree. You should not foul. Things happen. In this case Marquette player hit a prayer. You can't coach against luck.

Having said that, notice that when the 3 is launched UConn has like 3 guys within the 3 pt arc. You ask yourself, why? What good is it? The real failure, if any, is not having all your players line up around the 3pt arc. Tell the players to ignore an opponent going past you to position for a rebound. Stay right on the line and present the best possible defense for the shot. Again, if they are lucky, it won't matter. But my only issue is, you coach your players to stay just outside the arc.

 

[dtrumpet]

I would have liked a timeout at the end of regulation too. Put a big guy on the inbounder, make them catch the ball moving away from the hoop. It seems like haphazard possessions at the end of games seem to favor the offense. But the kid made a deep prayer 3 falling away from the basket. Then they banked in a 3 in OT. And we had Calhoun with the ball when we didn't want him to at crunch time. He had space, then he hesitated and got blocked. The game came down to a couple of plays, they made them and we didn't.
Coming back from being down 10 on the road though, and twice at that, is cause for optimism.

 

[Inyatkin]

There's also the possibility that you try to foul and the guy gets into his shooting motion and now he has three free throws. Not unheard of.
To say this is an easy call is ridiculous. Great coaches disagree on it.

 

[zls44]

Marquette was 0-14 from three - Cadougan was 0-2 from three and 4-24 from three on the season. You live with that shot all day long and you do not foul. There was a kid in his face and he was 3 feet beyond the arc. He makes that shot one out of 20 times at best under the circumstances.

The only thing I think you do is get the time out to set up a defense instead of allowing a helter skelter play.

Here is why it is not a debate.


OPTION 1: Foul. He has to hit the first FT. He has to miss the second on purpose. Marquette has to get the offensive rebound. Has to get off a shot. And make it.

That's five acts that all...ALL...have to occur.

OPTION 2: He makes a three to tie.

That's one act.

Five. Vs one.

 

[uconnfan68]

Foul end of regulation and it's a win

Great, in hindsight. Reality was they would have called a shooting foul if he missed, I'm shocked they didn't anyway for the 4-point play.

 

[msgordon]

it boggles my mind that every time this happens some people say i wouldnt have fouled either, that was just lucky. YOU TAKE LUCK OUT OF IT. can someone at least link a single time fouling didnt work?

 

[geohusky]

Everything being said it was a good game gutty comeback from 10 down twice. I believe we had three positions in OT where we were up 1 and came up empty each time. Tough year with all that is going on but the team is certainly playing for pride that is obvious.

 

[champs99and04]

There is no debate here - you foul. Every. Single. Time.

Marquette being 0 of 14 from three literally has nothing to do with anything. The fourteen misses prior has no baring on the fifteenth. Don't point to a lone example of a coach fouling and it not working out - that's terrible logic. I can do it too - ask John Calipari how not fouling in that situation worked out for him.

I was screaming at the TV for UConn to foul as soon as Boatright's jumper went through the basket. If UConn fouls with three seconds left, the chances of Marquette hitting the first free throw, missing the second on purpose (without a lane violation), grabbing the rebound, and then getting up a shot that is probably off-balance (UConn would have at least four guys in the paint) are slim at best. Yeah, the chances of Cadougan tossing up a shot from three feet behind the three point line that goes in are slim too, but the bottom line is UConn wins that game if they simply foul.

 

[Gurleyman]

Here is why it is not a debate.


OPTION 1: Foul. He has to hit the first FT. He has to miss the second on purpose. Marquette has to get the offensive rebound. Has to get off a shot. And make it.

That's five acts that all...ALL...have to occur.

OPTION 2: He makes a three to tie.

That's one act.

Five. Vs one.

If getting off a shot and making it is two different acts the first time, it should be the second.

If you don't make the first, you can still kick the rebound out to tie it with a three. Or you make the first, the rebound could go out of bounds your way, and then you could set up a baseline o/b play to tie or win.

Or you could hit both, steal the inbounds pass, and make a 3. That's happened to us too.

 

[James]

'There's no debate here' ... Really? Explain why every coach doesn't subscribe to this, they are all wrong and you are right ? Even though you've never coached d1?

 

[ConnHuskBask]

Some call it that. But our previous coach of 26 years never fouled in that situation.

Calhoun was wrong for 26 years.

I don't know what to tell you. You foul with 2 seconds left and the game is all but over. Letting them take a last second shot to tie is just poor basketball.

 

[msgordon]

'There's no debate here' ... Really? Explain why every coach doesn't subscribe to this, they are all wrong and you are right ? Even though you've never coached d1?

that doesnt mean much. there no debate that NFL coaches should never punt on 4th and 2 from their opponents 38 unless theres like a minute left, but half the coaches would

 

[James]

I guess it's flawless in the great book of 'fan strategy'

 

[msgordon]

if youre a uconn fan and we're down 3, even if we had our best rebounding team ever, can you honestly say youd rather have the opponent foul us as opposed to letting shabazz take a 3 to tie? i doubt a single fan would prefer that yet it seems many think the point is debatable

 

[James]

Since this is all hypothetical what if said shooter makes first free throw , ball gets tipped out for a good look at 3? they win. If you play good reasonable defense you go home with a w too

 

[mauconnfan]

if youre a uconn fan and we're down 3, even if we had our best rebounding team ever, can you honestly say youd rather have the opponent foul us as opposed to letting shabazz take a 3 to tie? i doubt a single fan would prefer that yet it seems many think the point is debatable

I don't think it's debatable either, they did the right thing. The guy made a throw from 25 and he's the guy we would prefer to shoot it outside of Gardner, it went in...what can you do??

 

[ConnHuskBask]

Since this is all hypothetical what if said shooter makes first free throw , ball gets tipped out for a good look at 3? they win. If you play good reasonable defense you go home with a w too

At worst the late game 3 is going in at about a 25% clip.

How many times in the history of college basketball has your hypothetical happened?

 

[zls44]

If getting off a shot and making it is two different acts the first time, it should be the second.

If you don't make the first, you can still kick the rebound out to tie it with a three. Or you make the first, the rebound could go out of bounds your way, and then you could set up a baseline o/b play to tie or win.

Or you could hit both, steal the inbounds pass, and make a 3. That's happened to us too.

Which one of the three scenarios seems most likely?

When is the last time you saw a team foul and have it blow up in their face?

Teams hit buzzer beaters several times a week.

 

[Point6]

Here is why it is not a debate.


OPTION 1: Foul. He has to hit the first FT. He has to miss the second on purpose. Marquette has to get the offensive rebound. Has to get off a shot. And make it.

That's five acts that all...ALL...have to occur.

OPTION 2: He makes a three to tie.

That's one act.

Five. Vs one.

unless the foul gets there late and while the offensive player is jacking the 3 - then you can lose on the +1 foul shot

 

[ctchamps]

Obviously it's debatable since some coaches don't foul and some do in these situations. I don't see the debate about debatability. What I do see is that if some of us pundits were coaching we would be as varied in how we handle this situation as what plays out at the Div I level of coaching.

The beauty about being a fan is there is no way to prove we are wrong, so we're always right! I'll take this option any day over a million$ plus contract and having to defend my position against wannabe coaches.

 

[housekeys]

if youre a uconn fan and we're down 3, even if we had our best rebounding team ever, can you honestly say youd rather have the opponent foul us as opposed to letting shabazz take a 3 to tie? i doubt a single fan would prefer that yet it seems many think the point is debatable

You make a good point. To me it is kind of moot and I take the sides of what our coaches did. It all depends on how the play is executed, anyway. In the flow of a hectic end it may not be easy to foul someone (being out of position to do so). And if that is the plan, to make sure you do not foul someone who is launching a 3, because then they have 3 foul shots. You just do not know. It is way too easy to make the call now. Given he hit the 3, we definitely should have fouled, and there is no debate in that case.

 

[Gurleyman]

if youre a uconn fan and we're down 3, even if we had our best rebounding team ever, can you honestly say youd rather have the opponent foul us as opposed to letting shabazz take a 3 to tie? i doubt a single fan would prefer that yet it seems many think the point is debatable

Depends on personnel. I'd rather have Boone and Okafor go for a putback than Taliek shoot a 3, yes (Pitt 3 in the BE title game notwithstanding). Put the ball in Ben's hands and give him a good look, and I'd want to go for the three.

I was actually hoping we wouldn't foul tonight in real time, because I feared having to depend on a rebound, but I wanted to see better D. When the shot went up, I didn't feel good at all about how we played it.

I personally think JC was wrong to not consider situations/personnel. We gave Redick a great look to tie when we had Oak and Boone to box out against Nick Horvath. That was one where I think we dodged a bullet by not fouling. But at the same time I can live with a coach who has their philosophy and sticks to it. If KO looks at this tape and decides he will never allow that to happen again and foul every time, that's ok with me too.

The one positive to telling a team to play straight up every time is you take the guesswork out of it. You can foul too soon (with 5-6 seconds left, the other team can make both and then foul you - if you don't make both, you can lose), which wouldn't have been a factor tonight, or make it too clear you're going to foul and allow the other player to read it and get in the act of shooting. If you decide you're going to foul in that situation, you need to practice it and be good at it -- to make sure you do it under four seconds and clearly on the dribble.

 

[ctchamps]

You make a good point. To me it is kind of moot and I take the sides of what our coaches did. It all depends on how the play is executed, anyway. In the flow of a hectic end it may not be easy to foul someone (being out of position to do so). And if that is the plan, to make sure you do not foul someone who is launching a 3, because then they have 3 foul shots. You just do not know. It is way too easy to make the call now. Given he hit the 3, we definitely should have fouled, and there is no debate in that case.

Exactly. Some of these guys are putting the cart in front of the horse. If a UConn player goes for the foul and a Marquette player recognizes the act, he takes a shot and gets three free throws. He makes the free throws and there will be a host of people who will complain about the choice to foul. Or if a foul is made before the ball is inbounded and the guy makes the first, misses the second but Marquette gets the rebound, kicks it out and Marquette makes a three for the win, (something like James for Miami) people will complain. The only way there are no complaints would be to have events played out where UConn wins. And even then there is always someone who thinks they could have done things better.

I complain about things as much as the next guy. But when it's said and done I'm typing away at a computer instead of proving myself at the college coaching level. I recognize my limitations.

 

[Gurleyman]

Which one of the three scenarios seems most likely?

When is the last time you saw a team foul and have it blow up in their face?

Teams hit buzzer beaters several times a week.

Teams hit buzzer beaters in tie games, up one and up two when you can't foul, so that's not really telling you anything.

With teams at schools I've worked for, I've had the game go overtime on a putback -- although we clearly got pushed under the basket with no call. I've seen us give up a wide, wide open 3 to win which was an airball (a "whew" moment). I've had the ball go out of bounds off our hands, and a baseline o/b play turn into an open 10 footer. And I saw us foul on purpose with seven seconds left and they made both, we hit one of two, and they missed a great look at a 3 to win.

There was a tourney game in our conference when the rebound went out of bounds to the offensive team. They ran a back screen and made a layup, got fouled and won in regulation.

In UConn's case, we've been burned by the tying 3 enough times that I'd be ok with fouling if KO goes with that philosophy. I know McNamara got us in the BET, but that might have been between 5-10 seconds when it was still too soon. Rashad just backed off him for some reason. There was a Florida State 3 to tie in the NIT semis back in Rip's freshman year.

But remember - in the biggest moment in this scenario that we ever had - Trajan Langdon fell down. If we had bailed him out with a foul, we would have given them a chance that they never got.

 

[ctchamps]

Depends on personnel. I'd rather have Boone and Okafor go for a putback than Taliek shoot a 3, yes (Pitt 3 in the BE title game notwithstanding). Put the ball in Ben's hands and give him a good look, and I'd want to go for the three.

I was actually hoping we wouldn't foul tonight in real time, because I feared having to depend on a rebound, but I wanted to see better D. When the shot went up, I didn't feel good at all about how we played it.

I personally think JC was wrong to not consider situations/personnel. We gave Redick a great look to tie when we had Oak and Boone to box out against Nick Horvath. That was one where I think we dodged a bullet by not fouling. But at the same time I can live with a coach who has their philosophy and sticks to it. If KO looks at this tape and decides he will never allow that to happen again and foul every time, that's ok with me too.

The one positive to telling a team to play straight up every time is you take the guesswork out of it. You can foul too soon (with 5-6 seconds left, the other team can make both and then foul you - if you don't make both, you can lose), which wouldn't have been a factor tonight, or make it too clear you're going to foul and allow the other player to read it and get in the act of shooting. If you decide you're going to foul in that situation, you need to practice it and be good at it -- to make sure you do it under four seconds and clearly on the dribble.

That was my only complaint - that RB didn't start guarding until just before the three point line. He had been playing full court defense the rest of the game so I believe they discussed this situation at some point with the players either during this game or during practice. Marquette was in the double bonus. So as much as I'm second guessing a tighter defense coming down the court, the situation could have ended worse with a four point play in the last five seconds by a missed second free throw and a three pointer. It's easy to second guess these situations.

 

[zls44]

But remember - in the biggest moment in this scenario that we ever had - Trajan Langdon fell down. If we had bailed him out with a foul, we would have given them a chance that they never got.

You don't foul until they cross half court.
Langdon did so while falling over.
Joyously.

 

[3uconn]

I really wanted Boatright to put on full court pressure on Cadougan. That would have cut another 2 or 3 seconds off the clock. Then it would have been truley a desperatation 3. I am perfectly fine with not fouling. Marquette hadn't made a 3 all game yet and the way it was going with Cadougan not making one and him having to make it from 2 or 3 feet out. You say that people make the game tying 3 at the end of regulation all the time but they don't. It may happen a few times a week but that shot is missed way more. Sportscenter only shows the games where it goes in, who wants to see the highlight of a game tying 3 being missed?They only show that when its a ranked team missing and losing.