|
Post by fwalum on Nov 17, 2010 13:25:16 GMT -5
It's the exact opposite of running up the score. I don't care who does it. There is no point to it and it's bad form. It has nothing to do with being a poor loser, just seems pointless and not the time to "teach kids not to give up." I don't think what Brad did was so bad. I am sure you have seen teams come back from 12-15 points down with 2 minutes to go, it happens. He probably could have called for no more fouls with 30 seconds to go, but then this is not something you can really work on at anytime other than a game situation.
|
|
|
Post by valporun on Nov 17, 2010 13:36:37 GMT -5
I have no problem with what Brad Stevens did last night in prolonging a true D-I game. Had this been Marian, IU-N, PNC...you have a good reason to piss and moan, but in a game against a true D-I team, this is a time to get these guys realizing that the game might not be in their hands, but the coach isn't giving up on teaching them how to keep fighting for another point/rebound/defensive turnover. Better to teach not to give up in a game that is about equal to what your players can handle, compared to doing it in a game against a very unequal opponent from a lower NCAA or NAIA level. If Homer had done this same thing, even down 35, I don't think Bill Self would have pissed and moaned, the Jayhawk faithful that remained to the end might have, but it would have been a good time to get some real fight out of the guys that need to be fighting for rebounds/forced turnovers/keeping ourselves in a game, even if we're not supposed to win it because the organizers in Las Vegas know we won't.
|
|
|
Post by milanmiracle on Nov 17, 2010 13:42:53 GMT -5
You play to win the game. Any questions?
|
|
|
Post by valporun on Nov 17, 2010 13:49:14 GMT -5
You play to win the game. Any questions? I want WINNERS!!
|
|
|
Post by vu72 on Nov 17, 2010 17:06:24 GMT -5
I watched most of the game and in particular the last several minutes. In my view what Stevens did had little to do with teaching anything other than how to foul as soon as the other team touches the ball. There was no "try to steal" or some such teaching tool.
If you are down by 10 with 1.5 minutes left then go for it and try to hope that they missed their two shot fouls and come back and quickly make a three. But think about it, if you are down by 15 and you have ten posessions in a 45 second period (huh??) and they make 1 of 2, and you make 6 of your 10 shots. What's the score? Well, 15 plus 10 (1 of 2 on 10 fouls)equals 25 and you make 6 3's, you gain 18 and still lose by 7.
Stevens just dragged out the enevitable as he had his scrubs in the game at the end. Look, there were 60 fouls combined, it was a mess of a game overall. Even Dickie V said he thought it was bad form and thought the rule should be changed so that after 12 fouls you get 2 shots AND the ball. Finally, after the game ended Stevens blew by Petino and barely gave him a look.
|
|
|
Post by wh on Nov 17, 2010 17:10:24 GMT -5
Bring it on and enjoy. First Butler loss by more than 10 points in 115 games. Lots of blame to go around, but the defensive lapses were the most difficult to understand. It's obvious that Stevens is still working on the rotation, but Howard on the bench with fouls and Mack with leg cramps (again) don't help matters. Opening of the arena and officials' calls didn't help, but those aren't valid excuses. It's obvious that there's still lots of work to be done, but I think the players will now be listening. There are reasons and then there are REASONS why teams lose. Last night's game was lost in the first half because Howard wasn't on the floor. Unlike a year ago, this team is not going to have the luxury of beating quality competition without him - plain and simple. If he finds a way to overcome this plaguing deficiency in his otherwise stellar game, Butler can play with anyone on their schedule. If not, there will be more Louisville's ahead. The REASON Valpo got blown out by Kansas was lack of effort on the defensive end of the court. Period. Whether we shoot 5% from 3 or 50% from 3, we're not going to beat quality opponents until we commit to playing hard-nosed in-your-face defense every second of every possession. At this point I don't have any more confidence in us playing hard-nosed defense than I believe Matt Howard will stop fouling all the time. There is too much history that says otherwise. I hope I'm wrong on both counts.
|
|
|
Post by bbtds on Nov 17, 2010 17:17:43 GMT -5
The REASON Valpo got blown out by Kansas was lack of effort on the defensive end of the court. Period. Whether we shoot 5% from 3 or 50% from 3, we're not going to beat quality opponents until we commit to playing hard-nosed in-your-face defense every second of every possession. Amen! Amen! Who said this Valpo team hadn't improved their defense and they wouldn't improve their record from last year until they did improve the defense? My sincere hope is that this year's Valpo team does improve their defense enough to go to the NCAA Tourney and win at least 2 games.
|
|
|
Post by stlvufan on Nov 20, 2010 18:36:45 GMT -5
"Really bad form by Butler and Stevens at the end of the game as they continued to foul until the very end." I really think this was a teaching tool, don't you? In essence, Brad seemed to be saying, "Don't quit on me and I'll never quit on you!" The rules allow it, so why not do it? I'm sure the UL partisans were still plenty comfortable in their $1,000 seats. Continuing to play to the final whistle is better than laying down and taking a beating. Amen. Count me in the "who cares" camp with these "bad form" arguments, like when Ozzie Guillen got pissed because the Marlins were stealing bases in the 4th inning, up 7-0. Even funnier are the times when the *winning* team in a blowout gets pissed at the *losing* team for stealing bases. Give me a break. I can see thinking "why?", but to call it "bad form" like they are violating some unwritten rule (an oxy-moronic concept if I ever heard one) is baloney.
|
|