- Joined
- Aug 3, 2015
- Messages
- 1,493
- Reaction Score
- 4,908
Of course the strategy may have been with a three point lead, get to the bonus and then foul before a shot and if they make two free throws they have a one point lead, the ball, and a timeout
Your out to lunch on this one Slu. Just admit it.It should never have been done in the first place with that much time left.
AgainBy the third one FSU knew what UConn was doing which made the third foul dangerous as well.
I don't think it's quite that high of a percentage, but yes, they are wrong. It's a very good strategy that more coaches should use.If that's the right move then I guess 99.999999% of coaches make the wrong one since that strategy is rarely employed.
Well, yea, that WAS the strategy.Of course the strategy may have been with a three point lead, get to the bonus and then foul before a shot and if they make two free throws they have a one point lead, the ball, and a timeout
Of course the strategy may have been with a three point lead, get to the bonus and then foul before a shot and if they make two free throws they have a one point lead, the ball, and a timeout
I don't think that (get FSU to the line instead of giving up a 3) was the strategy. I think the strategy was use all the available fouls up to the limit to to burn as much time off the clock as possible. Either way the strategy was poorly executed.Well, yea, that WAS the strategy.
Again, they didn't execute it very well.
I'd disagree. But yes, either way it was poorly executed.I don't think that (get FSU to the line instead of giving up a 3) was the strategy. I think the strategy was use all the available fouls up to the limit to to burn as much time off the clock as possible. Either way the strategy was poorly executed.
I'd disagree. But yes, either way it was poorly executed.