Yep, just competition.
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
2019 NCAA Tournament Thread
- Thread starter cmgoods
- Start date
Depends on where the ball is. In the backcourt, yes. If you do foul, make sure they don't get a look.
Last edited:
Virginia literally won a game last week where Purdue fouled up 3. So, me. I'll argue. Play your defense, especially when you're one of the best defensive teams in the country.
The odds of a team making a 3 have to be better than the odds of them making one free throw, then missing the next, then getting the rebound, then making a shot in a crazy scramble. Dunno if there’s a way to find out, but can you logically argue there’s a better chance of tying or winning in the 2nd scenario? It requires two made shots instead of one and getting an offensive rebound. All in a row. It’s like arguing a parlay bet is a good idea.
Odds are better if you foul.
Some coaches don’t foul because the odds are relatively close either way and playing defense has a worst case scenario of OT while fouling brings in a small possibility of losing in regulation (i.e. UVA-Purdue).
I would foul and have practiced it so I was confident my team knew how to do it without fouling a 3pt shooter or getting beat on a missed FT tipout.
Some coaches don’t foul because the odds are relatively close either way and playing defense has a worst case scenario of OT while fouling brings in a small possibility of losing in regulation (i.e. UVA-Purdue).
I would foul and have practiced it so I was confident my team knew how to do it without fouling a 3pt shooter or getting beat on a missed FT tipout.
I don’t think there is a definitive way to measure it out statistically, as their are so many variables that are impossible to control. I do think it is impossible to say one way or the other is definitively correct. Fouling also makes it possible to lose in regulation. Are the odds of that happening high? Definitely not. But you cannot lose in regulation if you don’t commit a foul.
I will always stand by playing defense.
I hope the Buffs can somehow make a Final Four in my lifetime. That was such a fun experience and so much better than hosting the Super Bowl. For all its faults, the NCAA puts on a great weekend.
Why are you using Purdue/VA as an example of losing from fouling while up 3? It went to overtime, just like if VA had just hit a three if Purdue didn’t foul.
@Buffnik @torerobuff
Edit for tagging. Tying the game was crazy enough, odds of them finishing that play with a 3 to win had to be a small fraction of 1%.
Can y’all come up with any example where a team lost in final seconds because they fouled up 3? Overtime doesn’t count.
@Buffnik @torerobuff
Edit for tagging. Tying the game was crazy enough, odds of them finishing that play with a 3 to win had to be a small fraction of 1%.
Can y’all come up with any example where a team lost in final seconds because they fouled up 3? Overtime doesn’t count.
Last edited:
CUoldtimer
Well-Known Member
Oh my. Everything I said is 100% fact. There was a clear double dribble not called that allowed them a final shot vs Auburn. There was a tripping call called on TT when it was clear it was a teammate that tripped the UVA player. It was also clear Guy fouled the TT guard with 1:15 left that wasn’t called. None of those three plays are debatable.
CUoldtimer
Well-Known Member
No. Not two blatant bad calls or no calls in the final 2:45 of OT or regulation. They decided the game vs AU and might have decided it vs TT.
Sounds like a sore loser to me.
Dude. Give it a rest. Calls get missed. You seem to think that teams don’t have to get lucky to win single elimination events wherein skill/talents are roughly equal.
Is it your position that the referees fixed the tournament for UVA? Is it your position that they didn’t actually win the tournament?
I don’t get your point. We get it: they got some lucky calls their way. In the regular season, UVA were the best team from the best league. UVA put a run together fueled by luck and skill in the postseason.
That’s pretty cool if you ask me, especially after an historic loss in the first round of the same tournament last year. Maybe get dryer for that wet blanket of yours.
CUoldtimer
Well-Known Member
CUoldtimer
Well-Known Member
It’s my position that if not for bad calls late in the game, they don’t beat AU or TT. That is the position of most non-UVA fans. I have no dislike for UVA. Haven’t even seen them play until the sweet 16. HC seems like a great guy and I like the team now. I find it humorous that some can’t admit that refs cost AU the game missing an obvious double dribble with 4 sec left and easily could’ve cost TT the game with two horrible calls or non calls in the final 2:45 of OT. If any of these weren’t blatant then yes, it’s just human error but all of them was just very poor officiating. Sometimes refs cost teams championships or victories. See missed PI call against the saints in the playoffs. Poor Refs cost games and championships sometimes.
And if you want to spend the time looking for the calls you can say this of almost every champion in every sport most years. In the end it comes across as somebody looking for a reason to justify not accepting the actual outcome of the game or the tourney.
Had UVA lost their fans could have easily gone through the game film and found any number of calls that "could" have gone the other way that would have made them winners. They didn't have to because in the end they won.
Again, I'm not a UVA fan in any way. I am a basketball fan and UVA played well enough to deserve their title. I don't even care about the angle @manhattanbuf brings up with them losing to a 16 seed last year. They played an excellent tournament and deserve their title.
Deal with it, UVA won the title and no it wasn't because of the refs.
So what if poor refereeing was a part of the tournament? Who cares since everyone equally had bad refereeing?
Thanks for avoiding my questions, BTW. You haven’t helped advance this discussion by repeating yourself.
Why do you have sour grapes about UVA winning? Did you lose money on a bet? Did your march madness bracket not go your way? Do you have a gripe with the Commonwealth of Virginia?
Robots and AI, perfectly officiated games per the written rules. Game will be slow and unwatchable in order to avoid all those fouls and violations that human refs "errored" on. Goodbye step back 3, no more euro step, say goodbye to the crossover. Lot more double fouls. Penetration to the lane will die off, we will be back to the way James Naismith envisioned. Good times.
This has always been my issue with replay. It should be in place to reverse the egregiously bad calls, not to go into microscopic detail and look at 4 different angles in super slo-mo taking 3 or 4 minutes. Put a time limit on the length of the review, say 30 seconds, maybe 60, and if they can't clearly overturn the original call in that timeframe then stick with the original call and move on.
A call has already been made and unless there's indisputable evidence to overturn it then the original call should stand. This has always been the original definition of replay and for whatever reason this basic principle has been lost. It shouldn't be this hard but they've clearly taken it way too far.
I like this. Up to three angles. No slow motion, no zooming, just a quick glance to confirm or deny the original call.
I used that theoretically. The shot after the tip out could have been a 3 pointer for the win. Also, someone could try to foul and have someone jack up a prayer to get a 4pt play out of it. So there are 2 rare scenarios where you could lose by fouling instead of simply guarding the 3pt distance without fouling anyone. I suppose there's also the risk of giving up free throws and then having your inbounds stolen with a quick shot for a loss. That's the stuff that scares coaches off. They're risk averse. Same mentality we see in football with punting on 4th down from the other team's side of the field.
I think with Tad it's more of a matter that it's another scenario he'd have to spend practice time on when he doesn't need to. The numbers are close enough either way so that he'd rather just play it straight while re-enforcing the mindset that CU stops people without fouling.
Ken Pomeroy looked into this and it seems he'd rather play defense based on what the numbers say. When you have to shoot a 3 and the defense knows it, you only make about 16% of them. And offensive rebounds off free throws occur at about a 40% rate when the offense is in desperation mode to get that board. But all the numbers shake out very close either way.
https://kenpom.com/blog/yet-another-study-about-fouling-when-up-3/
https://www.usatoday.com/story/spor...final-seconds-do-you-foul-or-defend/24981367/
I wouldn't even have an issue with a single look at a slow mo. This idea though of trying to dissect things down and split hairs is killing the momentum of games.
The biggest controversy I'm having with basketball instant replay right now is the reviews on possession in the final couple minutes.
At first I thought it was a no brainer. Can't see everything, especially in traffic. So get it right.
Then I realized how often refs use possession as a way to avoid calling a foul in those situations. Tight game, things are chippy, someone is slapping and pushing -- they simply give the 50/50 call to a team instead of hitting a guy on the other team with a foul (which could foul someone out or put a team on the FT line). But you can't add a foul by review and we end up with reversals of possession on plays where a guy got mugged but maybe grazed the ball last. I kind of like that they tend to swallow the whistle at the end, but with replay they probably need to stop doing that.
What’s the offenseive rebound % off a free throw when the other team knows you’re going to purposely miss?
