Archive for March, 2006

Considering Herb Sendek II

Published
by
Tar Heel Fan
on March 21, 2006
in ACC Basketball and Analysis
. 1 Comment

Now that NC State has been eliminated from the NCAA Tournament by Texas, the discussion begins in earnest about his future. In my previous post I, the non-State fan observer, moved myself off the fence concerning Sendek’s future(as if anyone really cares what I think, especially as a UNC fan) squarely into the “it’s time for a change” camp. I think Sendek is a good coach and I think that he runs a good program. I also think that he has more plateaus than upward climbs and perhaps now is the time to build upon the foundation he has built with a new coach.

I still stand by that thought process though when NCSU beat California Friday night and I realized Sendek was 4-1 in the NCAA First Round, it did give me pause to think. After all consistently winning that first game says a lot and perhaps with the right personnel they could move even further in the tournament. The problem with thinking Sendek has hit a wall is there is no way to prove that other than let him keep coaching. There is however another aspect of this issue which may have Wolfpack nation looking for a new coach for all the wrong reasons. It is the “Jim Valvano Factor”

Jim Valvano was the NC State head coach from 1980-1989. During his tenure NC State won the 1983 ACC and National Championships, as well as the ACC title in 1987. His record was 209-114 during that time. Here is how NC State finished during the season during the Valvano era.

1980: Lost in NCAA Second Round as a #4 seed to #5 Iowa
1981: No NCAA Tournament
1982: Lost in NCAA First Round as a #7 seed to #10 UT Chattanooga
1983: Won National Championship as a #6 seed
1984: No NCAA Tournament
1985: Lost in Elite 8 as a #3 seed to #1 St. John’s
1986: Lost in Elite 8 as a #6 seed to #1 Kansas
1987: Lost in First Round as a #11 seed to #6 Florida
1988: Lost in First Round as a #3 seed to #14 Murray State
1989: Lost in the Sweet 16 as a #5 seed to #1 Georgetown

It should be noted that the 1990 team was on probation and could not go to the NCAA Tournament because of Valvano’s mishandling of the program. Now, make no mistake Valvano had success at NC State. NC State won a miracle title in 1983. NC State also got into a couple of Elite Eight’s in the mid-eighties. The ACC title in 1987 came after a 6-8 ACC season and was the only way they got into the NCAA Tournament. 1988 brought an upset loss to Murray St and in 1989 the Sweet Sixteen run came after they dropped the first round of the ACC tournament to Maryland who was the #8 seed. In essence, Valvano brought a roller coaster of wins and losses to Wolfpack nation. The 1983 title team had 10 losses, by no means a powerhouse. NC State had an average NCAA seeding of 5.6 under Valvano being a #3 seed twice and being as low as a #11 seed. Valvano’s win-loss record over the span of his tenure was only slightly better than Sendek’s now. Aside from the up and down nature of the program, NC State had players which barely qualified to be in school, developed a reputation of being a school which did not graduate players, and was eventually banned from the NCAA Tournament in 1990 following numerous NCAA violations under Valvano which forced his resignation.

So the question I have is where were the lynch mobs asking for Valvano to be fired over the state of the program circa 1988? I understand that winning a title and then making two Elite Eights can have a pacifying effect on the fan base, but honestly speaking which program was better off by the end of its ninth year: Valvano’s heading into NCAA probation with a tattered reputation or Sendek’s with five straight tournament appearances and a clean program that graduates players to boot. There is only one thing that explains Valvano’s immunity from fans versus Sendek’s vulnerabilty and that has to do with personality. Valvano put on a show whenever he was in front of the cameras. He was loved by the fans and his passion for the game was infectious. So regardless of how badly NC State performed or regardless of their failure to win games, Valvanno’s personality and showmanship deflected any fan rumblings. NC State’s record against Duke and UNC was not much better than it is now but fans never asked for a coaching change because Valvano was so lovable and had won a national title.

Unfortunately for Sendek he has not developed a cult of personality. 850 the Buzz’s Adam Gold called him the “anti-Valvano” and so regardless of the fact that his on court performance is nearly the same and his off court handling of the programs is vastly improved Sendek gets ripped by the fans for not being Jim Valvano. This is the core of what is happening in Raleigh and everyone knows that if Sendek could woo the masses the way Valvano did, no one would be talking about firing him. It is my opinion that Sendek may be at a wall and a new coach may be needed to move the program along. If that is the case, so be it, but NC State fans also need to realize that Dean Smith and Mike Krzyzewsk have never had winning personalities, just incredible winning ways. Of course some say current UNC coach Roy Williams meshes those two aspects perfectly.

If NC State fans want to get rid of Herb Sendek because they feel he has a hit a limit on how high he can take the program then that is fine. But please do not express a desire to get rid of him because he is not living up the the legend of Jim Valvano. Valvano showed a lot of courage in his fight with cancer and his legacy in that arena is great. His legacy as a head basketball coach at NC State is one of NCAA violations and wild inconsistency. NC State fans really do not want to go back there again do they?

Share This Post:
[Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Facebook] [MySpace] [Technorati] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!] [Email]

Neutral Court

Published
by
Tar Heel Fan
on March 21, 2006
in Analysis and NCAA Tournament
. 0 Comments

Among the many controversies that surrounded the brackets for men’s and women’s tournament none was as perplexing at the treatment overall top seed North Carolina got in their regional setup. UNC got handed what amounted to the “bracket of death” by placing should have been #1 seed Tennessee as #2 followed by Big East regular season champ #3 Rutgers and #4 Purdue. This is not how it is supposed to work for the overall #1 seed. By definition you face the lowest possible seed on that line at each step of the tournament. In other words if Tennessee is #2 in UNC’s region that means they are #8 overall which is ludicrous.

Aside from the stiff competition there was also the matter of the sub-regional location. There were two possible sites for UNC go to to, Nashville and Norfolk. Being the overall #1 seed one would think that UNC would go to the closest location which would have been Norfolk. The committee operates in a different reality and sent them to Nashville instead and permitted #1 seed Duke, who UNC beat twice, to go to Norfolk. So, no big deal, Nashville is not too far except the committee in all their inifinite wisdom seeded home team Vanderbilt as the #8 seed. Assuming seeding hold the overall #1 seed in the whole tournament would be forced to play a second round opponent on their home court. And silly as I was I thought all tournament games were suppose to be neutral court affairs. Now UNC won the game last night by 19 but the game was tight at points and I am sure playing Vandy at Vandy made their job a little more difficult. And perhaps I should not complain too much since it is essentially no harm, no foul. However it a slow day so I will.

1. Why does the women’s selection committee permit lower seeded teams or any team for that matter to play tournament games on their home floor?

I tried to come up with a reason as to why the home team would need to be present at a sub-regional to make that particular sub-regional work. The only one I could come up with was crowd support. The women’s tournament does not enjoy the same following as the men’s tournament. In fact I would surmise that more UNC fans probably traveled to Dayton to see them men play than the top four seeds in Nashville combined to see the women play. So in one respect I can see why having the home team present would raise the crowd levels some. That being said I would conclude that the team that really got screwed in this arrangement was #9 Louisville. As much griping as UNC fans did about playing Vandy on their home court in the second round, it really was not that big of a deal because UNC was so much better than Vandy. Did it disadvantage UNC to have to deal with a hostile crowd and possibly created a more competitive game than they would have faced on a neutral court? Probably, but the effects should not linger. Louisville, on the other hand, is already disadvantaged as a lower seed and that is compounded by the fact they are playing an opponent they could beat on their home court. Are having people in the seats or some other logistical issue more important than perserving some semblance of a neutral court? Apparently so. On the men’s side, the pod system puts teams close to home, but never on their home court. Also, in the case of the men’s tourney the higher seeds not the lower ones are rewarded with proxmity to home in the sub-regional and also in the regional if it works out that way. #1 Duke played in Greensboro, #1 Villanova played in Philly, and #2 Texas played in Dallas. The locations are all fairly close to home for these teams and though in Duke’s case it can actually backfire since UNC and NC State fans can crash the party and create a hostile environment.

In the women’s tournament I think the real reason behind permitting lower seeds to play at home is an effort to facilitate upsets of higher seeds. Sounds crazy? Take a moment to think about what makes the men’s tournament the single greatest sporting event in this country. It captures the very essence of the American spirit by having the little guy rise up and beat the giant. It has the drama of young kids from small schools fighting and scrapping their way to a win over some well known big school. We identify with that because one of the greatest upsets in history was 13 colonies pushing out the British empire. The women’s game is largely devoid of this aspect, so by having the #8 seed play on its home floor, it creates a some parity where none previously existed. I also think the support factor is a part of this since no one wants a women’s game seen on television with very few people there and the crowd not at least cheering for someone.

2. Shouldn’t the courts all be the same?

The other issue I have with Vanderbilt as a tournament site is that it has a design that is vastly different than other courts. At Vandy there is more space around the out of bounds and the benches are in the end zones and not on the sideline. This is not really that big of an issue but one that was commented on by UNC players was the location of the shot clock. At Vandy the shot clock is underneath the basket. In other words the shot clock is not located in the same spot as it is in other gyms around the country. One key aspect of tournament play is that all 65 teams play games on courts that a relatively the same. Bench locations might be different, the courts will obviously look different, but one would expect that the shot clock, the game clock, and scoreboard would all be in roughly the same location. In the interest of having a fair tournament, the court environment should be the same. Now granted everyone playing at that site deal with the same issues, but this kind of issue also gives Vandy an advantage playing on their own floor versus other teams. The courts all need to be the same and if Vandy wants to be a NCAA host then they need to make sure their shot clock and game clock are located in the same place as other game and shot clocks at other tournament sites.

UNC moves on the Cleveland to face the Purdue-UCLA winner. Tennesee has George Washington.

Share This Post:
[Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Facebook] [MySpace] [Technorati] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!] [Email]

ESPN: Promote Women’s Basketball At All Costs

Published
by
Tar Heel Fan
on March 20, 2006
in Analysis, ESPN and NCAA Basketball
. 3 Comments

In my previous post, I dissected the “dunk” by UT’s Candace Parker and briefly mentioned how it is being promoted by ESPN in much the same fervor as they did Pat Summitt passing Dean Smith on the all time wins list even though the two sports are completely different. Where the alleged dunk is concerned, ESPN once again is adbidcating any semblance of fact and reality by promoting Parker’s “dunks” as the real deal. ESPN’s Graham Hays said in his article:

But Parker’s dunks were different. The first one came in the flow of the action, with a defender in close proximity, and with the outcome of an NCAA Tournament game still very much in doubt. In fact, after Parker’s first dunk, the Lady Vols responded with a 24-2 run.

Parker’s dunks are important not because she got her hand above the rim and scored two points by pushing the ball through the hoop, but because it highlights the player at the forefront of an athletic revolution in women’s basketball.

First of all, does anyone really believe the result of this game was ever in doubt? Army beating Tennessee would be the same as the army of Iceland taking the White House, it will never happen. When Parker “dunked” the ball it but the Vols up 15-14 with 13 minutes to go in the first half. A one point lead not even midway through the first half does not constitute the game being in doubt. If they were up one in the latter part of the second half then that might be true but as he points out UT went on a 26-2 run after that so let’s not make it sound like the “dunk” occurred during a portion of the game where UT was in danger of losing.

Secondly, his description of the dunk is completely false based on the replays I have seen and the picture I have posted above. Hays claims that Parker got her hand above the rim and pushed the ball through the hoop. The replay and the photo in my previous post clearly show that Parker pushes the ball over the rim and then grabs it but did not, in my estimation, push the ball through the hoop which would be consistent with the definition of a slam dunk. If she had pushed the ball through the hoop with her hand the ball would not be slightly above the rim as her hand is grabbing the hoop. Pushing it through means the ball is forced downward and past the rim before the rim is grabbed the player. In Parker’s case it was clear that she was able to put the ball above the rim but because she did not have the necessary lift was forced to let it go and grabbed the rim with her fingers. The ball then moved over the rim and fell through. In most dunks seen in the men’s game whether with one hand or two, the player is able to put his whole hand above the rim and with the flick of a wrist push the ball downward through the hoop followed by a grab of the rim. It is an important distinction and one ESPN does not seem to be bothered by because it would negatively influence their relentless promotion of their women’s broadcasts

Now, let me be clear, I think women dunking the basketball is great and I am not disparaging this out of some sexist agenda. My beef with ESPN is their insistence upon calling this something that it clearly is not in an effort to promote women’s basketball which they are the sole presenter of in the NCAA Tournament. ESPN has a business relationship with the NCAA to promote the game and grab ratings so I find an inherent conflict of interest in making so much noise about calling what Candace Parker did a “dunk” when it is clearly was not according to the best available definition. There are multiple elements of the women’s game which make it less enjoyable to watch than the men’s game and one of them is the lack of above the rim action. That being said, having women go down the court and perform borderline slam dunks or worse yet layups while touching the rim which are then called dunks may be more harmful to the game than not having that aspect at all.

It was not a dunk, at least not in my opinion, and even if it was a borderline dunk, it had less wow factor than a reverse layup and does not garner the hype ESPN is giving it in an effort put bodies in front of the TV during women’s basketball broadcasts.

Share This Post:
[Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Facebook] [MySpace] [Technorati] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!] [Email]

What is a Slam Dunk?

Published
by
Tar Heel Fan
on March 20, 2006
in Analysis and NCAA Basketball
. 0 Comments

Because I thought this was readily defined but following the Tennessee-Army game in the Women’s NCAA Tournament the standard has been adjusted somewhat. Volunteer Candace Parker is being hailed as the first woman to “dunk” twice in a tournament game. This is obviously big news for women’s basketball fans who want to see the game moved above the rim a little more to ratchet up better support. ESPN, by and far the largest advocate of women’s basketball, has been effusive about this feat. Now, let me be clear, I am not a sexist. I like women’s basketball, I do not find it to be nearly as compelling as the men’s game. I like watching the current UNC women’s team because they play a very fast style much like that found in the men’s game. Having placed that disclaimer squarely out there I can honestly tell you that what Candace Parker did yesterday, from what I saw, was not a slam dunk, it was a layup on which she grabbed the rim. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines a “dunk shot” as:

a shot in basketball made by jumping high into the air and throwing the ball down through the basket

Now look at this photo of one of Parker’s “dunks”

As seen in the photo the ball is above the rim. In fact one photo at ESPN.com shows the ball to be even higher than it shows here. According to the dictionary definition of a dunk, the ball is literally thrown down through the hoop. If you watch a men’s game and a player dunks the ball he goes up and throws the ball down through the basket and then grabs the rim. Parker did not do that here. It is clear she put the ball above the rim and then grabbed it. The ball subsequently fell through the hoop. She did not, as indicated in the definition, throw the ball “down through the basket” but rather pushed it over the top of the rim and it simply fell through.

Now, I have seen footage of Parker dunking in the McDonald’s High School All American slam dunk contest, so I am not saying she cannot dunk. However, this is not a slam dunk, not by the definition in the dictionary and not in comparison to what consitutes a slam dunk in the men’s game. And to anyone who thinks it is not an important distinction or thinks that it does not have to be the same as in the men’s game should probably ask yourself why everyone is pushing this dunk as a boon for women’s basketball. It is because women’s basketball needs to become more like the men’s game in order to get people into the stands. I am just not sure labeling something that is clearly not a slam dunk as a dunk in an effort to raise interest in the game is the way to go. Of course ESPN, in particular, has never been interested in the difference between apples and oranges, just ask Dean Smith about his all time wins record.

Share This Post:
[Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Facebook] [MySpace] [Technorati] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!] [Email]

Sweet Sixteen

Published
by
Tar Heel Fan
on March 20, 2006
in Analysis and NCAA Tournament
. 0 Comments

Four #1 seeds are still alive. As well as a #13, #11, #7, and #6. And with four #1 seeds still alive the possibility of all four making the Final Four is very much in play. Using average seeding of the three remaining teams in each of the top seed’s region here is an idea of who has the toughest bracket left.

Washington, DC: #1 UConn, #5 Washington, #7 Wichita St. #11 George Mason.
Average Seed of Other Three Teams: 7.6

Atlanta: #1 Duke, #2 Texas, #4 LSU, #6 West Virginia
Average Seed of Other Three Teams: 4

Oakland: #1 Memphis, #2 UCLA, #3 Gonzaga, #13 Bradley
Average Seed of Other Three Teams: 6

Minneapolis: #1 Villanova, #3 Florida, #4 Boston College, #7 Georgetown
Average Seed of Other Three Teams: 4.6

So based on average seeding Duke technically has the tougher potential road followed by Villanova, Memphis, and UConn. The problem with seeding is it does not tell the whole story. Boston College should have been a #2 seed so Villanova is getting a tougher game with its four seed than say Duke with the four seed LSU. The highest seed UConn will face in the regional is against #5 Washington. Since Wichita St and George Mason are #7 and #11 which means UConn could go to Indianoplis having failed to see a top four seed(Much like UNC last season which played #16, #9, #10, and #6 on the way to St. Louis) Duke and Memphis clearly have the toughest road because they potentially could see a #2 seed in the Elite Eight.

Now does any of this really matter now? I would contend it does because with each move to a new site and new “four team tournament” as Dean Smith used to call them, the pressure is greater and the momentum changes. These teams were seeded where they were for a reason and with the exception of BC, I think it is indicative of how good they are. The first four days of tournament play is always replete with teams playing above their seeding and this year was no exception. The second four days of the tournament usually results in many teams “returning to their seeding” In other words George Mason will play like the 11 seed they really are or Bradley will be overmatched by Memphis in Oakland. There are exceptions to this like in 2000 when the Final Four had a #1, #4, and two #8 seeds. The point it that the second weekend of the NCAA Tournament has a way of exposing the lower seeds. Partly because they are unable to sneak up on someone and partly because four #1 seeded coaches have four/five days to study film and break down their opponent. Whereas seedings seem to go out the window in the first and second round, the Sweet Sixteen and Elite Eight usually brings them back to reality.

That being said, I have never seen an NCAA Tournament with this kind of parity from top to bottom. I think Bradley and George Mason enjoy better odds this year than any low seed before them.

Share This Post:
[Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Facebook] [MySpace] [Technorati] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!] [Email]

Heels Season Collapses on Floor in Second Half, Dies Later

Published
by
Tar Heel Fan
on March 19, 2006
in Analysis, NCAA Tournament and UNC Basketball
. 1 Comment

But is was all gravy right? At least that is the consolation Tar Heel fans are employing this evening after watching UNC come out like world beaters against George Mason then settle into a rut which lasted the rest of the game. UNC played a horrible game, committed six straight turnovers to start the second half and had a lot of trouble getting the ball to Tyler Hansbrough. David Noel playing for his career hit the big shots to keep UNC in it but ultimately the weak guard play from UNC finally caught up. The Patriots played some good defense, was able to consecutive threes with the shot clock at five seconds and seemed to have little trouble scoring on the interior. GM also did an excellent job of dictating the pace and holding UNC 20 points under their average. I thought the foul calls were a little lopsided considering UNC usually attempts 24 free throws a game but only attempted four this time around. However, there was no ref conspiracy, UNC should have played better pure and simple. Hansbrough only having 10 points was a big stat. No other Tar Heel hit double figures.

I mentioned back in my pre-ACC Tournament post that one issue teams faces is which team would come to play, if there was a definitive point in the season where a team started playing better. UNC started the season 12-5 through January then went 9-1 ending with a win at Duke. Once the postseason started it seemed like the turnover prone UNC of November through January reemerged rather than the hot Heels of February and early March. I suppose that is the pitfall of an inexperienced team. The Heels ended the season 23-8 which is a far cry from what many expected. Which leads me to the “gravy” talk. It almost seems like a cop out because it seemed like by beating Duke they had fully trascended the rebuilding status and were proned to greater things. The Duke game was the peak point and in many ways like winning a championship considering the power of the rivalry and the attention it garnered. UNC’s failure to play well over the next four games was probably a combination of the ebb and flow of a team’s performance and the inexperience of the freshman. Lots of pundits like to say that there are no freshman in the postseason, but if it is their first postseason then, yes, they are freshman still. When the season began and the prognosticators said UNC would be fortunate to make the NCAA Tournament much less be competitive in the ACC I took no umbrage because UNC had just won the title and that was enough to placate me if we had to endure a rebuilding year, no matter how traumatic. Roy Williams did a great job taking some talented personnel and making this year a successful year. I always like at least getting to the Sweet Sixteen because I think that denotes separation and gives you a few more days of basketball to talk about. It was not meant to be and despite the collapse seen today in Dayton, it was a great season considering how bad it could have been. So pass the gravy.

As for next season, UNC loses David Noel and Byron Sanders, and assuming Hansbrough stays put(which he should because today is a good indication he is not ready for the NBA) then the returning rotation minus Noel and the addition of five of the top 32 players in high school(including three in the top 10) should put UNC in the top ten, if not #1 in the country. In other words expectations will be back to normal levels in Chapel Hill and gravy will not be on the menu.

I will have a NCAA wrapup tommorrow.

Share This Post:
[Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Facebook] [MySpace] [Technorati] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!] [Email]

Is Half of a Sweet Sixteen a Semi-Sweet Eight?

Published
by
Tar Heel Fan
on March 18, 2006
in NCAA Tournament and UNC Basketball
. 0 Comments

When the NCAA Tournament started, ESPN chose Tennessee as an “All Access” team meaning they would be filming every mundane part of UT’s existence outside of the game itself. ESPN probably thought that UT would be around at least until next Saturday. Since the “never should have been seeded second” Volunteers have been summarily dismissed by #7 Wichita St(I love it when I pick an upset correctly) will the ESPN All Access continue? Will we be treated to Bruce Pearl on the golf course next week or perhaps some footage of UT players attending class? Probably not, but it is a little egg on ESPN’s face setting that deal up only to have UT lose in the first weekend.

Despite the major turmoil found in one of my Final Four picks(Kansas) losing last night, I still I am holding 14 of the Sweet Sixteen out there and today garnered me a 7-1 mark(thanks a lot Illinois.) I figure as long as I bring enough teams through to the Elite 8 and get my UC0nn-Texas title game with UConn winning, I will do pretty good overall.

Maybe its just me, but the number of games that are hotly contested by the last minute seems more prevalant this year than in the past. It has made for some enjoyable hoops actions. Among the winners today: Duke and Florida won easily, Boston College got away from Montana in the second half, UCLA squeaked it out over Alabama, LSU slipped by Texas A&M, Wichita St gave the MVC some credibility, Washington led big but won close over Illinois, and Gonzaga finally acted like the high seed they are and won despite Adam Morrison playing more like former Tar Heel and current Minnesota guard Brian Morrison.

The ACC is still perfect at 6-0. UNC plays at 2:20 versus George Mason and NC State has a tough but not impossible test against Texas. Although I picked Texas to go to the title game I also happen to think they are vulnerable. In fact everyone in the field is vunerable which is perhaps why the games are so close and so great to watch.

There will be no live blog of the UNC-GM game tommorrow.

Share This Post:
[Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Facebook] [MySpace] [Technorati] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!] [Email]

NCAA Tournament Wrapup

Published
by
Tar Heel Fan
on March 18, 2006
in NCAA Tournament
. 2 Comments

Bracket. Busted.

In all of the years I have been picking brackets I have never lost a Final Four team during the first round. Congratualtions Kansas, you have now lost two straight first round games as a top four seed under Bill Self and if am not mistaken that is a first. Here are today’s observations.

High Seeds Upset or Struggle Mightily

UConn was down by 12 to Albany midway through the second half. That’s right, the odds on favorite to win the whole darn tournament was down 12 to a #16 seed. They rallied as you might expect and won but that was indicative of how the day went. Iowa lost to a #14, Kansas lost to a #13 seed. NC State won as #10 seed and #11 George Mason, without a suspended player, sent Michigan St home. #1’s Memphis and Villanova did not really cruise versus their #16 seeded opponents. Texas only beat Penn by eight. In other words, it appears parity has arrived in full force in the NCAA Tournament. A #1 seed losing to a #16 may happen sooner rather than later.

Defending Champs Win

UNC, who by all accounts, was not supposed to even make the tourament survived a spirited effort from Murray St to advance 69-65. UNC really did not play well and whether that is some of their inexperience or Murray St matching up well, it was a little testy most of the night. UNC now gets George Mason, who beat the much vaunted Michigan St. As much as I used to think of schools like George Mason were easy marks. In today’s NCAA Tournament there are no easy marks.

Conference Tournament Champs and Performance

Big East: Syracuse lost to Texas A&M
Big 10: Iowa lost to Northwestern St.
Big 12: Kansas lost to Bradley

The SEC, ACC, C-USA, and PAC-10 champions are all still in.

Records
ACC 4-0
SEC 5-1
Big East 5-3
Pac 10 3-1
Big 10 3-3
Big 12 2-2

So everyone was down on the ACC but thus far they are undefeated at 4-0. This means very little because the Big East could still put two teams in the Final Four.

I was 13-3 yesterday, today not so good at 10-6 for a 23-9 first round. I lost a Final Four team in Kansas but still retain 15 of 16 Sweet Sixteen teams and my championship game matchup is still alive.

Duke leads of things tommorrow with a tough game against George Washington.

Share This Post:
[Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Facebook] [MySpace] [Technorati] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!] [Email]

NCAA TOURNAMENT-UNC vs MURRAY STATE: LIVE BLOG

Published
by
Tar Heel Fan
on March 17, 2006
in NCAA Tournament
. 0 Comments

From Dayton, OH where everyone’s chic pic to beat UNC in the second round, Michigan St., lost to a team playing without a key player. Given the struggles we have seen tonight from UConn as well as the Iowa loss to Northwestern St., this is a dangerous fame for UNC. Time to take care of business.

9:46 PM
CBS has switched over to Dayton here in Raleigh.

9:48 PM
Murray St. controls the tip and scores off Hansbrough inside 2-0 Racers.

Reyshawn Terry for three….YES! That is a good start for him.

9:50 PM
Three quick fouls on Murray St. Free throws good for Tyler Hansbrough, UNC up 7-2

UNC rebounding well early on. If Murray State does not shoot well, it should be a lot of one and out possessions for them.

9:52 PM
Good defense forces the shot clock violation.

Murray State is cold early. One shot and out for the Racers.

9:54 PM
1st TV timeout following another Racer foul. UNC looks much more relaxed and generally sharper than they did last week against Virginia in the ACC Quarterfinals. It appears they are trying to get Hansbrough touches early and run the offense through him.

9:55 PM
I am not a Chevy guy and now that Coach K is shilling for them I will never be a Chevy guy.

9:57 PM
Murray St. has committed its fifth foul five minutes in. Now we have the customary “Roy Williams did a great job losing seven players and still making the Tournament” discussion.

9:59 PM
Poor execution by the Heels followed by a turnover. Murray St. is detecting a little window to rally back into this game.

Murray St gets the timeout falling out of bounds. UNC up 8-4.

10:00 PM
I have seen the Devil and he drives a Cheverolet.

10:02 PM
Murray St. ball out of the timeout trailing 8-4

18 foot jumper from Murray St.

UNC answers on the other end.

Steal by Marcus Ginyard goes in and is fouled.

Ginyard makes both free throws to put UNC up 13-6

Murray St has six fouls.

10:04 PM
Back to back threes from the Racers to pull within one.

Byron Sanders hits the layup to move the lead out to 15-12.

10:06 PM
UNC outhustled quite a bit on some rebounds. The Racers miss several shots and Byron Sanders finally grabs it and forces the jump ball. Should be UNC ball.

2nd TV Timeout

10:08 PM
This is the first Coach K-free commercial break I have seen this game.

UNC leading 15-12. UNC inbounds and not taking a lot of shots. Another Tar Heel turnover.

10:09 PM
OH MY GOODNESS!!! Terry on the steal gets it back on the break and leans in for the one handed slam from the middle of the lane over some poor Murray St. player. UNC leads 17-12.

10:10 PM
Terry turnover, UNC’s fifth of the half.

10:11 PM
Replay of the Terry dunk. He planted a few feet inside the free throw line.

UNC is fortunate Murray St is so cold.

10:12 PM
Hansbrough breaks the drought to put UNC up 19-12.

Murray St. three cuts it back to four.

10:13 PM
Danny Green answers for three. Murray St. timeout with 8:25 remaining and UNC up 22-15.

10:14 PM
Another Hansbrough travel. 3rd TV tiemout.

10:15 PM
AAGGGHHH! This is the third time I have seen the Coach K commercial. I think they should be forbidden from showing it during a UNC game.

10:18 PM
Token press from the Heels, Racers break it.

David Noel commits a three point shooter. Not a smart move there.

10:19 PM
Redding makes all three free throws then gets a steal and layup. UNC lead down to two.

10:20 PM
Wes Miller misses the front end of the 1-1.

Murray State takes the lead on a three.

10:21 PM
The refs have called a lot of fouls on Murray St and it still feels like they are not calling stuff.

Two Hansbrough free throws puts UNC back up 25-23.

10:23 PM
UNC is very sloppy with the ball. Murray St. is shooting 31% but 9 UNC turnovers are keeping this game close.

Murray St has committed 10 team fouls to UNC’s two fouls. The Racer coaching staff is livid.

Hansbrough hits 1 of 2 to put UNC up 26-23

10:25 PM
Murray St jumper cuts it to one.

Quintein Thomas airball, Green lays it in for a three point lead.

10:26 PM
4th TV timeout. UNC has been very sloppy and is not getting great looks. Murray State has taken a lot of three and missed many of them badly. UNC needs to take better care of the ball and get some better offensive effeciency.

10:28 PM
Another bad pass knocked out of bounds for their 10th turnover.

10:30 PM
Racer’s Pearson cuts the lead to one.

Ginyard missed the three that bounces out of bounds.

10:31 PM
Hansbrough misses badly, not getting solid offense from him right now.

10:32 PM
DUNK from Hansbrough. Murray St is shooting horribly. A lot of shots not hitting much rim.

UNC leads 30-27

Murray St. cuts it to 30-29.

10:33 PM
UNC in danger of being behind at halftime and they are now behind at halftime.

This is exceptionally frustrating when you consider the following facts:

Murray St was whistled for 11 fouls versus 2 UNC fouls.
Murray St is only shooting 32% from the floor.
UNC has committed 10 turnovers and is not shooting that well.

UNC needs to take better care of the basketball and get some kind of offensive flow going.

If this is any consolation Texas is struggling with Penn and Kansas is trailing Bradley at halftime.

10:54 PM
I can only imagine the butt chewing Roy gave those guys at halftime. Is it just me or are the halftimes in the tournament longer than normal

Murray St. leading scorer Shawn Witherspoon is out for the game with a broken foot.

10:55 PM
Hansbrough puts UNC back in the lead. That is good offensive execution.

10:57 PM
Nice shot by Bobby Frasor opens the lead to three.

Orr for Murray St answers to cut the lead to one.

10:58 PM
Terry at the line and hits two to put UNC up 36-33.

10:59 PM
Outrebounded on the Orr miss.

David Noel extends the lead back to three.

Follow dunk from Griffith and ignites a little momentum.

11:00 PM
Nice backdoor pass to Terry for the easy layup.

Racers answer with the floater, UNC up 40-39.

Terry committs the charge.

11:01 PM
It would be nice for UNC to get on a run and try to open this up a little.

Murray St shooting free throws after the 1st TV timeout of the second half.

11:05 PM
Long commerical.

Racers up one on two free throws.

Another offensive foul for UNC.

No offensive move to the inside.

11:06 PM
Murray State takes a four point lead. UNC needs to score here and they do from Green.

11:07 PM
UNC is allowing way too many offensive rebounds for Murray St.

Hansbrough follows the Ginyard miss to tie the game. Hansbrough is having trouble scoring otherwise.

Thomas to Hansbrough on the break for the slam, UNC leads 46-44.

11:10 PM
Hansbrough tries to lead the break while handling the ball and is called for a travel.

You cannot go zone, they will kill you with threes. Murray State retakes the lead on the three, 47-46.

2nd TV timeout.

11:13 PM
Miss from Ginyard, Murray St. ball.

Hansbrough with another steal and this time he is fouled on the way to the basket.

11:14 PM
Hansbrough hits to free throws for a 48-47 UNC lead.

Another three from Murray St. How many times has UNC gotten beaten by three point shooting in the tournament!

11:16 PM
Terry misses the three and Noel flubs the putback. Danger time for UNC.

Racers’ Kennedy throws an elbow. Racers lead 52-48

11:17 PM
Missed three from Green. No offensive rebound.

UNC needs to think about putting together some kind of run here and get control of the game.

Frasor hits two free throws to cut the lead to 52-50.

11:19 PM
Nice steal from Noel, Frasor layup ties the game. Murray St. a little puzzled with the UNC defense.

Danny Green for three….YES…UNC leads 55-52.

11:21 PM
UNC did a great job defending and then lets Murray St drive the lane for a layup.

3rd TV timeout. UNC leads 55-54.

11:22 PM
Kansas is losing by 11 to Bradley. I have them in the Final Four. I quite possible may be in deep bracket trouble.

Texas is only leading Penn by four. I also have them in the Final Four. That would spell complete braket disaster.

11:24 PM
Green hits two free throws to give UNC a 57-54 lead.

Murray St is getting way too many offensive boards.

Racers’ Hopkin pulls them within one.

11:26 PM
Hansbrough with the 12 footer to push the lead back to three.

Racers’ Jenifer going to the line to shoot two and hits 1 of 2. UNC 59-57

11:27 PM
Hansbrough hits one of two, and UNC gets an offensive rebound.

Green extends the UNC lead to five.

11:29 PM
Green misses a three to put UNC up eight.

Racers’ Hopkins on the line for two free throws.

Five minutes to go in the game and UNC leads 62-58.

11:30 PM
How can Hansbrough go up and be surrounded by two defenders and not get FOULED!?!?

Racers’ Griffith misses the free throw and Hansbrough loses the ball out of bounds. This stuff is killing UNC.

11:31 PM
Every bounce is going Murray State’s way. Hansbrough gets whistled for a phantom foul.

Racers get one of two. UNC now leads 62-61.

Horrible shot from Terry, Ginyard rebounds, over to Terry who drives the lane…

Where is the FOUL CALL!!!

Frasor for three….BIG SHOT! UNC leads 65-61

11:35 PM
Murray St cuts it back to two.

Frasor misses the three. 1:40 to go with UNC leading by two. Murray St. timeout.

The refs have missed some big fouls calls on Murray St. Terry was literally held as he went into the lane for that last shot and there was no call.

11:38 PM
Game tied at 65. 1:00 to go. Roy wants to talk about it.

11:40 PM
Big shot from Hansbrough to put the Heels up by 2!

38 seconds left and Murray St has called timeout.

11:41 PM
Murray St. misses a shot to tie. Noel rebounds out to Ginyard who passes down to Hansbrough.

Racers foul Ginyard with 16 seconds left.

4th TV timeout. Go figure.

11:44 PM
Big free throw here for Ginyard.

First one is good. UNC by 3.

Two possession game with UNC up 69-65. UNC timeout.

11:47 PM
Blocked shot by the Heels. Outlet to Terry who dribbles it out of bounds with four seconds left.

Murray St. ball with four seconds left and UNC leading 69-65.

11:48 PM
Murray St tosses it in and misses the three badly. UNC survives 69-65.

Considering all of the trouble high seeds all over this tournament have had this result is not that bad. Make no mistake UNC has to play better than they did tonight. Hopefully with one tournament game under their belt they will be sharper against George Mason on Sunday.

Share This Post:
[Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Facebook] [MySpace] [Technorati] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!] [Email]

Coach K Fans the Flames

Published
by
Tar Heel Fan
on March 17, 2006
in ACC Basketball and NCAA Tournament
. 0 Comments

The latest, greatest controversey surrounding Duke coach Mike Krzyzewski is a theory that UNC’s placement in Dayton rather than Greensboro had something do with Duke’s complaint about sharing a pod site with UNC. It has been postulated that the large influx of UNC fans actually creates a home court disadvantage for Duke. UNC fans will go to a Duke game simply to cheer for almost any other team but Duke so it is possible that UNC fans attending games in Greensboro may create a hostile environment. I am unable to find a definitive link to quotes by K or any other Duke adherent other than J.J. Redick’s observation of Duke was booed during practice in Charlotte last year. So without a concrete quote I think this is simply another theory batted around by opposing fan bases. I actually think Duke will get booed no matter what because everyone pulls for the underdog but I digress.

Nevertheless, during the postgame press conference following last night’s win over Southern Coach K answered a few routine questions about the game and tournament. Then, out of nowhere, Coach K made a point to go back and address a question someone had asked him on Wednesday about the “UNC in Dayton” theory. From the News and Observer:

After the game, Krzyzewski was philosophical about his team’s uneven performance but seemed displeased enough to rehash an issue that was still bothering him from Wednesday’s news conference.

“Just the fact that [the question] was asked that I had something to do with North Carolina going to Dayton. I’ve never heard of anything more ludicrous,” Krzyzewski said.

Krzyzewski was directing his comments to the reporter who asked him Wednesday whether he had influenced the NCAA selection committee’s decision to keep UNC out of Greensboro.
The Coliseum could have been a tough venue for Duke with the Heels sharing it. UNC might have outdrawn Duke like it did playing in their shared home state during the opening weekend of the NCAA Tournament in Charlotte in 2005.

“When was I supposed to do that?” Krzyzewski said. “Like during a timeout with one minute to go in the ACC championship game, sidekick [send a text message] to Craig Littlepage [the selection committee chairman] and say, ‘Look, send the Tar Heels someplace else.’

“I don’t know where that came from. I was offended by that. No one has any influence. And the other thing is that, even if I did [have influence on that], I would never do that. I’ve been a head coach for 31 years. I would never do anything like that. I’m offended by the thought of that.”

So if the theory is so ludicrous and baseless, why bring it back up at the tail end of your postgame press conference completely apart from the context of questions being asked? Why not simply let the story die rather than drag it kicking and screaming back into the spotlight to be considered again?

Now this consitutes the third time Coach K has set off a PR bomb with the media in the last month. Last month he denied that coaches worked the refs during games and could not be influenced, then just before the UNC game he claims to know for a fact there is a media bias against Duke. Now he stops a postgame press conference and issues a passionate denial over his alleged involvement with UNC’s placement in Dayton which reporters asked him about a full day earlier. If there is one thing we know about Coach K from the public courtship by the Lakers a few years ago is that he is a master at using the media for his own agenda. In this case it is only prudent to ask what is Coach K trying to accomplish by stirring the media pot so often and how is he going to benefit?

Copyright 2006, BCB

Share This Post:
[Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Facebook] [MySpace] [Technorati] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!] [Email]