What Muffet McGraw Did... or Didn't Do

[Orangutan]

Are you sure that horse is dead? I'd advise fouling it a few more times over the next few minutes, because you never know. Might still be some life in the old nag.

There's a 1-in-500 chance the horse is still alive.

 

[DobbsRover2]

There's a 1-in-500 chance the horse is still alive.

I think you gotta look in the horse's mouth to determine the exact odds. I could go to 1-in-450 if I squint at the teeth a certain way and tell myself that there's always some chance until you hear the Grim Reaper's final buzzer.

 

[Wally East]

Are you sure that horse is dead? I'd advise fouling it a few more times over the next few minutes, because you never know. Might still be some life in the old nag.

Maybe poke it with a stick to see if it will turnover?

 

[stamfordhusky]

Pride? She didn't want her team to look foolish or desperate at that point. She said several times that the pressure was on UCONN and that ND was not even expected to be here. So she chose to lose with dignity. I can see that.

I think giving up - which is what she did - is far from dignified.

 

[DobbsRover2]

You've just lost all credibility. Please direct me me to my post where I was "calling Muffett a quitter for not fouling with a more than a minute and a half to go." I'll save you the trouble, it doesn't exist. You used the Miami-VA game where Miami pressured VA into turnovers at the end of the game instead of standing around watching the opponent dribble the clock out unimpeded, as happened in the ND game. As if that was supposed to somehow bolster your position.
Then there was this statement "There have been many last minute turnarounds, even last half minute turnarounds that have been fueled by steals and turnovers that probably never would have occurred if the opponent was sent endlessly to the FT line." I agree with this, but that's not what happened in the ND game. Why would you bring it up in relation to the ND game when those steals and turnovers you mention were the byproduct of a pressure defense ? Something that ND chose not to do.
And this one "How are you sure that their is NO chance for ND when eschewing the fouling has been a staple of many late comebacks?"
I would also agree with "eschewing the fouling has been a staple of many late comebacks?", but again, what does it have to do with the ND game ? Did those teams, that made comebacks without fouling, employ the same defense that ND used in the last minute and a half ? Of course not. If they just watched the other team dribble the ball without applying any pressure, there would be no comeback.
Regardless of whether the odds were 500 to 1, 1,000 to 1, or 10,000 to 1, a tactic other than watching the other team dribble the clock down without resistance should have been employed. It was, after all, for a National Championship.
Your posts on this topic tells me one more thing. You're not as good a Monday AM QB as you think you are.

Again, you have slid in with the crowd that is calling Muffet a quitter because as you state, you think that ND just let UConn dribble the clock away to end the final minute and a half.

I'll also save you the trouble of having to explain what he odds are, because no one knows. But there many types of defensive pressure that can be used at the end of a game, and likely Muffet didn't think she had players at the end of the game who had the legs left to chase MoJett around the floor. The defense that was used may not have been a big pressure-D, but it got the ball back from MoJeff twice in plenty of time if they could hit some threes. They didn't, and the Irish lost. Sure, after the UConn givebacks and the ND misses and a minute ran off the clock and there's 37 seconds left with the margin still at 10, you can say the strategy didn't work and do anything like fouling everyone in sight if that makes you happy, but most sensible people can read the odds there.

I know there are some fans who worship the pressure D, but it is also a highly risky D that is easy for a great team like UConn to exploit when they expect it to come at them. They do a lot in practice to get prepared. The pressure-D also can make already tired defenders even more exhausted, leading to clankers on those threes. Again, I'd trust Muffet to have a greater insight into the game and as to what both her team and UConn were capable of in that final 1:33 than me, you or any BY poster, but if you feel otherwise I would be happy to asses your credibility level and give it the proper rating.

 

[DobbsRover2]

Maybe poke it with a stick to see if it will turnover?

Actually, I'd pressure the dumb brute to get up, because you can't expect to win in life if you just lie there waiting for the end. Never say quit on life's great game of H-O-R-S-E.

 

[DobbsRover2]

I think giving up - which is what she did - is far from dignified.

Yep, I've always thought the same about Geno after that February 2012 game. What an undignified loser!

 

[JS]

Maybe it's the heat (outdoors if not indoors), but this thread has been borderline for a while.

Too much sarcasm, too much disrespect for others' views. Too much verging on getting personal, one post now gone that went over that line.

Let's see if the heated rhetoric, which seems strangely out of sync with the subject matter, can cool down. If not, we'll have to flip a switch or two.

 

[DobbsRover2]

Maybe it's the heat (outdoors if not indoors), but this thread has been borderline for a while.

Too much sarcasm, too much disrespect for others' views. Too much verging on getting personal, one post now gone that went over that line.

Let's see if the heated rhetoric, which seems strangely out of sync with the subject matter, can cool down. If not, we'll have to flip a switch or two.

In the spirit of peace and harmony, I'd be happy to go part way with RVWsleep on the pressure-D argument that uses Muffet's overall strategy and doesn't paint her as a loser and quitter, names that do a disservice to a top coach and provide BB material for the Irish. In general the idea of trying to pressure the top passing and least TO prone team in college seems a little dubious, especially when it is at the end of the game and they are expecting it and daring you to try while wearing yourself out more, but let's use the 2011 men's Miami-UVA game as part of a strategy. Obviously no comeback works unless you hit your shots, so here's a scenario (500-to-1 long shot) that succeeds because the Irish do hit their shots.

---Basically same sequence as really happened, with ND at first playing a more conservative D. ND gets the ball back on MoJeff's miss, but Allen nails her 3 at 1:08. Same sequence proceeds, and after MoJeff turns the ball over with 31 seconds left, and Loyd hits her 3 with 22 seconds left. Okay, now ND is only down 4, and by all means unleash the dogs for 22 seconds to pressure UConn and try to come up with some takeaways and foul if nothing happens right away.

Once you get the margin down to 4, you have a shot, even with only 20 seconds left against the best team in WCBB. But as it happened, ND did not hit its shots, and Muffet was never in position to use the pressure-D in any way that had a reasonable chance of working. If you have ever played a full game of basketball against good opponents and tried to go full-out pressure-D for a minute and a half and lived to tell about it, kudos to you, for you are truly a marvel.

 

[CocoHusky]

Dobbs, the primary objective of my post was to point out a game that was similar in Magnitude ( National Championship) and score with time remaining on the clock where the coach chose to do something different than McGraw because the example you cited UCONN vs. Louisville (35 Point margin) was simply not. When you respond with words like "Monday Morning Quarterback" and " Paint her as a loser and quitter" - When I specifically stated that Muffett was NOT, I see that I have missed my primary objective and see no rational reason to continue.

 

[HuskyNan]

 

[Wally East]

Imagine that. A big comeback without intentionally fouling (the one foul that did happen was clearly not intentional). Coach K is such a quitter.

 

[DaddyChoc]

Can we start by talking about a comporable game and situation an 11 point lead is way different than 35 point. 2010 National Championship game UCONN vs. Stanford. UCONN up by 13 with 2:05 seconds left to go on the clock. Stanford starts fouling. 1 minute later Stanford is down by only 8. With :39 left the lead is down to 8. Stanford is still fouling. Wait :30 left Stanford is still fouling. What is going on? : 16 left Stanford still down by 6 and the are still fouling. :07 left Stanford down by 6 and still fouling. Stanford tried something, ND did not. I would not go so far as to say that ND "quit" but by not trying "something" ND is open to fair criticism IMO.

did Stanford win?

 

[Wally East]

Can we start by talking about a comporable game and situation an 11 point lead is way different than 35 point. 2010 National Championship game UCONN vs. Stanford. UCONN up by 13 with 2:05 seconds left to go on the clock. Stanford starts fouling. 1 minute later Stanford is down by only 8. With :39 left the lead is down to 8. Stanford is still fouling. Wait :30 left Stanford is still fouling. What is going on? : 16 left Stanford still down by 6 and the are still fouling. :07 left Stanford down by 6 and still fouling. Stanford tried something, ND did not. I would not go so far as to say that ND "quit" but by not trying "something" ND is open to fair criticism IMO.

The difference isn't that Stanford fouled and ND didn't. It's that Stanford made shots and ND didn't.

The problem here is stemming from the idea that some people believe that not fouling = not trying. That's simply not the case as the video Nan posted shows. There are different ways to come back.

 

[DobbsRover2]

For those who are interested in UConn's own end-of-game strategies when down in big games like an FF, looking at the 2012 OT loss to ND might be instructive about what Geno will try. Obviously in the earlier Feb 2012 big loss to ND, he did not think it worth it to throw everything at the Irish and go down fighting late in the game when behind by double digits. In the 2012 FF he did try something different at the end of the game that did involve fouls, but I don't think you can really call it a "quick foul every play" strategy, and the initial margin was much smaller.

Down 4 with a minute to play in OT, Faris turns the ball over and she subsequently fouls, but only after 16 seconds had ticked off the clock. With the lead at 5 with 42 seconds left, UConn missed a quick shot and four more seconds went off the clock after the rebound before Hartley fouled. With the lead now up to 7, after a KML miss, 7 more seconds ticked away after the rebound and another UConn foul with 22 seconds left. In the remaining time there was one more UConn foul and the lead swelled to 10 before Hayes cut it back down to 8 with a late layup.

I would interpret Geno's strategy as some version of pressure-D in the last minute with some fouls thrown in when they couldn't get the ball. But ND hit 7-8 FTs and what was a manageable 4 point deficit before the fouls became 10 with 9 seconds to go. During the last minute, UConn made 1 FT before Hayes' meaningless basket at the end (except that it kept UConn from losing by double digits). Should Geno have just ordered immediate fouls in the last minute against an ND team that hit 74.1% of the FTs during the game? Maybe, but likely not. Could UConn have made up the 4 point difference if it didn't foul? Maybe, who knows? Geno used the strategy he thought best, but as with ND in the 2015 NC game, the Huskies just couldn't put the ball in the basket at the end.

 

[lne001]

Uh oh, looks like it was my sarcastic post that was taken down. In today's vernacular, "My Bad."

In my defense, however, I would like to point out that I had come directly to this board after an hour on the 'Cess Pool'. That can cause anyone to go off the tracks.

 

[DobbsRover2]

Uh oh, looks like it was my sarcastic post that was taken down. In today's vernacular, "My Bad."

In my defense, however, I would like to point out that I had come directly to this board after an hour on the 'Cess Pool'. That can cause anyone to go off the tracks.

Been there, done that. Used the Trump card.

 

[Phillyconn]

Oh sure, just like Calipari was derided by the idiots on the men's board for not fouling all over the place in the last minute with UConn having gone perfect at the FT line during the game. Sure, makes perfect sense.

Maybe Muffett was hoping to be happy with a strategy that her team could get some givebacks from UConn (which she got), and that her team would make some shots (which they didn't). We don't have to go into all the dumb stuff that's said on the men's boards to ridicule a WCBB coach.

Look, I realize that the hatred of Husky fans for Muffett generally runs from somewhere between extreme to more extreme, but it's a little pathetic to keep smearing her just because she won a bunch of games against UConn and ND has been its chief rival recently.

The Crackbrain Guide to Basketball Logic

Situation 1: Coach tells team not to foul down by 10 with 1:30 left, and they and their opponent miss all their remaining shots and the team loses by 10. Verdict: coach is a quitter and loser.

Situation 2: Coach tells team not to foul down by 10 with 1:30 left, and they go 3-5 on threes and their opponent miss all their remaining shots and the team loses by 1. Verdict: coach is a quitter and loser even if her strategy almost worked.

Situation 3: Coach tells team not to foul down by 10 with 1:30 left, and her team makes 4 threes while the opponent turns it over or misses all their remaining shots and the team wins by 2. Verdict: coach is still a quitter and loser even if her team won because she refused to do the "only thing you can do in that situation."

Situation 4: Coach tells team to foul every chance down by 10 with 1:30 left, and her team makes 4 threes while the opponent shoots their expected 75% by nailing 6 of 8 and the team loses by 4. Verdict: coach is really a winner because she did the "only thing you can do in that situation."

Situation 5 (the poor outcome for the foul method): Coach tells team to foul every chance down by 10 with 1:30 left, and her team only can hit 1-8 against the perimeter pressure defense on threes while the opponent shoots their expected 75% by nailing 12 of 16 and the team loses by 19. Verdict: again, coach is really a winner because she did the "only thing you can do in that situation."

Situation 6 (the generally normal one for the foul method): Coach tells team to foul every chance down by 10 with 1:30 left, and her team makes their standard 33% while shooting 2-6 on threes while the opponent shoots their expected 75% by nailing 9 of 12 and the team loses by 13. Verdict: once again, coach is really a winner because she did the "only thing you can do in that situation."

Situation 7 (that fantasy choker situation): Coach tells team to foul every chance down by 10 with 1:30 left, and her team goes 4-8 on threes while the opponent misses every FT and the team wins by 2. Verdict: That's the way it always happens in my PlayStation NBA basketball games, even against the best teams, so of course the coach did the right thing.

Again, November can't come soon enough.

Nothing wrong with bashing Calipari or McGraw. I hate both. I love to see the look on their faces when the clock hit zero, and another loss to UConn is in the books.

 

[DobbsRover2]

Nothing wrong with bashing Calipari or McGraw. I hate both. I love to see the look on their faces when the clock hit zero, and another loss to UConn is in the books.

Well you've certainly come to the right place then, as Muffet squashing is a much loved pastime on the BY, and I certainly have done my share. But again, still think it's best to do it for good and accurate reasons. Doing the stupid stuff just makes BYers seem like a lot of posters on other sites who have been cited here for being just plain ignorant and bilious.

 

[Phillyconn]

Well you've certainly come to the right place then, as Muffet squashing is a much loved pastime on the BY, and I certainly have done my share. But again, still think it's best to do it for good and accurate reasons. Doing the stupid stuff just makes BYers seem like a lot of posters on other sites who have been cited here for being just plain ignorant and bilious.

I didn't read every post in this thread. From what I did read, I didn't find anything ignorant or bilious. Say what you will about X's and O's and the different strategies used at the end of games. Muffet, had a look of utter defeat, on her face, at the end of the game. She knew that the dream was over. I love it! Because, I remember the look on her face when ND beat us in the BE finals. I remember Skylar's antics, at the end of the game, basically saying, screw UConn. So, to the victors, goes the spoils, and the Muffett bashing.

 

[Goodgood]

Geno's face was the same when ND beat UConn multiple times. It is not fun to lose. Specially when that was the end of Maya Moore's collegiate career.

 

[DobbsRover2]

I didn't read every post in this thread. From what I did read, I didn't find anything ignorant or bilious. Say what you will about X's and O's and the different strategies used at the end of games. Muffet, had a look of utter defeat, on her face, at the end of the game. She knew that the dream was over. I love it! Because, I remember the look on her face when ND beat us in the BE finals. I remember Skylar's antics, at the end of the game, basically saying, screw UConn. So, to the victors, goes the spoils, and the Muffett bashing.

Sure mindless vengeance bashing can be sweet I guess. I've just seen too much clueless stuff about Geno on other boards including ND's to go all happy jack by calling an opponent's coach a quitter, but sure, however you want to get your jollies. At least ND still wants to play UConn, and if it really bothers you that opponents celebrate on the rare occasions when UConn gets beat, at least you picked the right team to root for that will keep you from getting stressed out too much. Ignorance is in the mind of the beholder, and I trust that both the UConn and ND fans are happy that their team's coaches are not members of the fantasy strategy forum leagues.

 

[CocoHusky]

While I will agree that some bashing can be perceived as bilious especially when it is mindless, I fail to see how questioning the use of a coach’s specific tactic (fouling) can be perceived as labeling that coach a quitter.

 

[meyers7]

While I will agree that some bashing can be perceived as bilious especially when it is mindless, I fail to see how questioning the use of a coach’s specific tactic (fouling) can be perceived as labeling that coach a quitter.

Well there were a few posters who did say she quit, gave up, threw in the towel.

 

[DobbsRover2]

While I will agree that some bashing can be perceived as bilious especially when it is mindless, I fail to see how questioning the use of a coach’s specific tactic (fouling) can be perceived as labeling that coach a quitter.

Um yes, the thread started as a reasonable discussion of a rival coach's tactics, but by the first page the description for some had become "throw in the towel" and then to "didn't try at all" and "gave up" and "quitter." Look, I know the coaches of UConn's top rivals are fair game for the worst type of diatribes, be they Walz, Staley, Stringer, Mulkey, McGraw, and many others from the past. Personally, I have a deep antipathy for only one (ex-)coach, and even for her I have a deep respect and just like to let her actions speak for themselves. You can of course selectively read the posts in a thread (or even leave yourself a big out by saying "I didn't read all of them"), but having read such baseless and stupid stuff about Geno on other boards, it feels a little repulsive to me when the BY stuff starts going that same way on other coaches. That's just me though, and any UConn fan who hates McGraw for past actions is likely going to dig into the chamber pot for some projectiles.

And again, Geno's tactics at the end of some big losses have been even less aggressive than what Muffet did in the 2015 NC, so throwing brown stinky stuff into the wind that comes back to cover your face doesn't seem the right way to go.