Give the coach this loss | Page 3 | The Boneyard

Give the coach this loss

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm sure just as many blowhards would declare the crappyness of the "old refs" in the Big East (Higgins et al) as "undebateable."

...and I give you Karl Hess. STFU.
 
Why was Wolf under the basket and not at the three point line? Bazz too BTW.
 
geohusky said:
Foul end of regulation and it's a win
Expand ...
Forget it, geohusky. Nobody will ever admit Ollie made a mistake. It ruins the image they've painted as themselves of Kevin Ollie as Jim Calhoun II. But the right play was to foul him. Even Napier said as much in the post game. Oh well. Its one game. These things even out over the course of the season.
 
Point6 said:
unless the foul gets there late and while the offensive player is jacking the 3 - then you can lose on the +1 foul shot
Expand ...

When is the last time you saw that. Ever. Any level.
 
DogMania said:
I think the odds of MU getting the first FT and the put back were a whole lot higher than any player from MU hitting their first 3 of the game, not to mention a real deep one.
Expand ...

3's happen all the time. FT and putback with about 3 seconds left happens how often? I will NEVER understand how so many coaches allow another team to go the length of the floor with under 10 sec to go and get off a 3 point shot down by 3. It keeps happening and they keep getting burned. Especially with these putrid refs you should have been able to get a foul by breathing on the guy. Geeeze!
 
.-.
zls44 said:
When is the last time you saw that. Ever. Any level.
Expand ...

I agree, low chance of that call. On the other hand, Cadougan is going to chuck it up the instant he senses contact, so the possibility of a 3 shot foul is not insignificant. I have also seen refs call a foul on an inbound intentional.

I tend to agree with those who say foul in that situation, but I don't think it is as clear cut as most believe. Marquette was not just missing from 3, they were missing badly, all game. Cadougan took a contested 3 from 25 feet out. 9 times out of 10, that will go our way.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
I tend to agree with those who say foul in that situation, but I don't think it is as clear cut as most believe. Marquette was not just missing from 3, they were missing badly, all game. Cadougan took a contested 3 from 25 feet out. 9 times out of 10, that will go our way.
Expand ...

Even for an Okafor team, if the shoe was on the other foot, is there ever a time when you would have rather had UConn at the line? Ever?
 
three days later we have our first insane comment on Ollie's coaching.
The team did everything to stay in this game. I like the way Ollie coaches, makes adjustments, and shows patience during stretches. There is a learning curve for Ollie as well, but right now, even with the loss, I don't see how you can blame Ollie. It was very clear the rebounding, or lack of cost the game.

I think everyone really played a solid game. Marquette is just deeper.

I was really impressed with Wolf. The team was definitely better with him on the court than Olander.
Not sure if that's always the case, but it seemed that Marquette went around Olander for a layup at will. With Wolf, it seemed we would get on a roll at both ends.

Overall, we knew there would be some tough games especially with our lack of depth in the front-court.

This is a top 10 team next year if everyone stays.
 
Shaka Smart would have had this team crapping its pants after going down 10 twice.
 
.-.
Vuce said:
If he misses it I hope we don't foul. If he makes it I wish we did. Guaranteed win every time
Expand ...

I think the correct play is to foul and I'm willing to assign a certain percentage of the blame to Ollie even though there was no timeout. He could have called timeout himself and/or the team could have been more aware of what to do in that situation.

Having said that, if that shot clangs off the backboard (which it would 90+ percent of the time) then nobody would be questioning Kevin Ollie and the Marquette board would be having a meltdown over the fact that they had to settle for a 30 footer by a bad 3 point shooter because their coach failed to call timeout.
 
The best case scenario is for the other team to not get a shot off at all. Or a complete prayer (which this was not). So there is something to be said for trying to play D for a few seconds, even if you believe in fouling. If, say, Giffey had come with a hard trap near midcourt, we might have been able to force Cadougan into picking up his dribble or a bailout pass resulting in a 40-footer. If they are clearly in trouble (ala Langdon in 1999), don't bail them out and give them a chance.

I also think anything over 5 seconds is too soon to foul (which wasn't a factor in this case). The other team can then just make both, foul you immediately, and if you don't make both, you're in the exact same situation a few seconds later. Only instead your lead is two, you can't foul, and you can lose at the buzzer.
 
61cygni said:
Well one thing is clear: there is no debating that this is a debatable topic.
Expand ...
LOL! Wrote the same thing earlier in this thread! Great mines think alike!
 
but everyone is fine when calhoun never fouled right?
 
.-.
UConnSwag11 said:
but everyone is fine when calhoun never fouled right?
Expand ...
You win 3 national championships, 866 games you earn some respect when you go against the conventional wisdom. Like Belichek going on 4th down from a place nobody does...Ollie hasn't done anything to earn the benefit of the doubt when he violates the norms. If he gets to 100 wins even, maybe he earns that right. So far he's 0-1...
 
how is not fouling violating the norm when more coaches don't foul then do? You realize Calhoun didn't foul against Syracuse in the 2006 BE tourney and it cost them right? Also, last I checked we've played 13 games, not 1.
 
freescooter said:
You win 3 national championships, 866 games you earn some respect when you go against the conventional wisdom. Like Belichek going on 4th down from a place nobody does...Ollie hasn't done anything to earn the benefit of the doubt when he violates the norms. If he gets to 100 wins even, maybe he earns that right. So far he's 0-1...
Expand ...

This doesn't make sense. Ollie didn't go against conventional wisdom or violate any norms. He followed the CW. So that makes him 0-0.
 
freescooter said:
You win 3 national championships, 866 games you earn some respect when you go against the conventional wisdom. Like Belichek going on 4th down from a place nobody does...Ollie hasn't done anything to earn the benefit of the doubt when he violates the norms. If he gets to 100 wins even, maybe he earns that right. So far he's 0-1...
Expand ...

Of course, when reading the above post, one must understand that phrases like "conventional wisdom" and "violates the norm" are according to the poster and in no way are they accepted in the real world as the eternally jaded and delusional poster would like you to believe.
 
aceboon said:
how is not fouling violating the norm when more coaches don't foul then do? You realize Calhoun didn't foul against Syracuse in the 2006 BE tourney and it cost them right? Also, last I checked we've played 13 games, not 1.
Expand ...

That one was too early to foul. McNamara released that shot with eight seconds left, so the foul would have had to have come with about 9-10 seconds left. Way too much time.
 
aceboon said:
how is not fouling violating the norm when more coaches don't foul then do? You realize Calhoun didn't foul against Syracuse in the 2006 BE tourney and it cost them right? Also, last I checked we've played 13 games, not 1.
Expand ...
This was a situation where you foul. the Syracuse game was different I think, more like 8-10 seconds left I think. And I think most coaches would foul in last night's situation. the intentional miss is a very difficult play to pull off. My point was in response to the comment that Calhoun wouldn't foul. He's a proven winner. On occasion he doesn't follow the playbook, he isn't going to get questioned while a guy who has coached 13 games will. Ollie didn't go with the standard practice to foul in that situation and he lost.
 
.-.
this has nothing to do with calhoun v ollie for me...i always hated when calhoun didnt do it and i would have hated not fouling regardless of whether or not the shot went in last night. ive always believed fouling is the right play based on everything ive seen whether it be math, common sense or the eyetest
 
msgordon said:
this has nothing to do with calhoun v ollie for me...i always hated when calhoun didnt do it and i would have hated not fouling regardless of whether or not the shot went in last night. ive always believed fouling is the right play based on everything ive seen whether it be math, common sense or the eyetest
Expand ...
You've made your point perfectly clear. If you were coaching you would have called for the foul. I thought I read somewhere that KO called for the foul but the team didn't execute. So two questions: why the persistence of the argument? And since the game played for more than 5.6 seconds can you comment on the positive and negatives within the game?
 
mostly all positives just play da wolf as much as he can handle going forward. i think youre a good poster but u have 4000 posts and have been known to type essays so excuse me for being persistent once in a while
 
freescooter said:
This was a situation where you foul. the Syracuse game was different I think, more like 8-10 seconds left I think. And I think most coaches would foul in last night's situation. the intentional miss is a very difficult play to pull off. My point was in response to the comment that Calhoun wouldn't foul. He's a proven winner. On occasion he doesn't follow the playbook, he isn't going to get questioned while a guy who has coached 13 games will. Ollie didn't go with the standard practice to foul in that situation and he lost.
Expand ...
It's not the norm to foul, we see these situations occur all the time with shot attempts going up to tie...and I say this as someone who is usually in the camp to foul.
 
msgordon said:
mostly all positives just play da wolf as much as he can handle going forward. i think youre a good poster but u have 4000 posts and have been known to type essays so excuse me for being persistent once in a while
Expand ...
Even though I know it was rhetorical, no one needs my permission for anything.

I just feel people do themselves a better service if they don't just play one note, particularly a note that starts to annoy the listeners.

There are a lot of good posters who run circles around me. I know my limitations. But I'll continue to contribute anyways. I just think this forum isn't any different from other things in life. For instance, If DD only took threes he would be in trouble. His play has gotten more dynamic and as a result he's doing better. And it increases the potential for the team.

Too many posters, IMO, come here only expressing negative things. I'm not making a statement that people shouldn't complain. I'm suggesting this forum will significantly improve if more people take the time to express a more balanced commentary about players and games than what currently is taking place.

Yours was the first post I read when I decided I would try to suggest this. It has nothing to do with you personally, so I hope you don't take offense. I might try it out on a few other people until I get clocked enough times to know the inertia is just too strong.
 
I decided to let the game sink in before posting anything. Sure, if we fouled, possibly we could have won. But then Marquette makes 2 free throws, we inbounds, get fouled, maybe make both, then the same situation is set up again.

I think a bigger problem was our offensive sets the last 2 minutes. Way too much 1 on 1 stuff by Boat. Sure he made some big shots as well, but dribbling the ball around for 25 seconds trying to find an opening before turning the ball over is not offense. It's one guy trying to win the game for us. And he failed.

No biggie as hopefully they will learn from this, but our offense the last few minutes was just as much to blame for the loss as the last second prayer that they jacked up that went in...
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,369
Messages
4,568,635
Members
10,472
Latest member
MyStore24


Top Bottom