This is all what if?? What if we threw away the inbounds?? We know the actuality, and that was not what we wanted.All this speculating on the "what if" of letting it play out is pointless. What if Steele, in trying to make that pass to Green or Lacey, throws it away, or drives toward the basket and gets called for a charge? Do you really want Steele shooting the 3 there? Those are what if scenarios that haven't been mentioned. In all the scenarios mentioned a couple of replies earlier, it seems to assume good outcomes if the play were allowed to continue.
For me, Coach didn't like what he saw, called a timeout, and tried to get us into something with a better chance of succeeding. I'm good with that.
I don't know if you realize it or not, but you are basically rephrasing the doctrine of "proximate causation." That is the doctrine courts use in determining liability in negligence cases. Paraphrased, it means the most direct, closest cause of an event. Trying to analyze all of the remote factors leading up to an event is sometimes called "but for" causation. That's what all the posts indulging in if, if, if are doing. There's no end to it. It can be chased back to a butterfly flapping its wings in Indonesia. The fact of the matter is that the teams were one point apart with less than five seconds left and the refs made an absolutely horrible no-call. That's your "proximate" (real) causation. OTOH, I'm not sure we would have fared much better than Creighton did with a hot UNC team. I'm not sure which is better - exit when we did or receive a beat-down from UNC. I'm not sure we would have matched up much better than UNC - when they're hot...There are infinite "what ifs" that both teams could point to that could have changed the game starting with the opening tip off. What if Steel shoots and hits a 3 and there is still time left on the clock? Creighton could have thrown up a miracle and still have won the game with a last second shot. But it was Bama that took the last shot of the game. And the only what if at that point of the game that could have actually changed the outcome was, what if the ref blows his whistle and calls the foul on Creighton on Relefords last shot of the game?
Creighton could have still won the game but so could have Bama. Releford could have missed all three free throws or just hit one and sent it into overtime. But the odds would have been on him hitting 2 of those free throws thus giving Bama the win. That is the only real what if that plainly could have changed the outcome of the game. The other what ifs just create more what ifs.
It is always better to win the game and get the chance to play another game. If you are scared of a beat-down then you have a loser's mentality. Trust me, the players and Coach Grant would have loved to been playing against UNC in the next round. Remember that we we won an 8-9 matchup back in 2004 against Southern Illinois when they missed a last second shot. We then got the chance to play a No. 1 seed Stanford. Not many gave us a chance but Bama found a way to win and then beat Syracuse to go to the elite 8. That team and this team was not scared or worried about getting beat-down. They only wanted to win and advance.OTOH, I'm not sure we would have fared much better than Creighton did with a hot UNC team. I'm not sure which is better - exit when we did or receive a beat-down from UNC. I'm not sure we would have matched up much better than UNC - when they're hot...
I was really just saying. Of course I wanted to play UNC...It is always better to win the game and get the chance to play another game. If you are scared of a beat-down then you have a loser's mentality. Trust me, the players and Coach Grant would have loved to been playing against UNC in the next round. Remember that we we won an 8-9 matchup back in 2004 against Southern Illinois when they missed a last second shot. We then got the chance to play a No. 1 seed Stanford. Not many gave us a chance but Bama found a way to win and then beat Syracuse to go to the elite 8. That team and this team was not scared or worried about getting beat-down. They only wanted to win and advance.
I felt much the same way when everyone criticized CNS and Coach Mac after the LSU game back in November. When fans criticized them for being too conservative, my immediate thought was that if we went up, Miles would go from conservative Les to Crazy Les and then all hell would break loose...I don't know if you realize it or not, but you are basically rephrasing the doctrine of "proximate causation." That is the doctrine courts use in determining liability in negligence cases. Paraphrased, it means the most direct, closest cause of an event. Trying to analyze all of the remote factors leading up to an event is sometimes called "but for" causation. That's what all the posts indulging in if, if, if are doing. There's no end to it. It can be chased back to a butterfly flapping its wings in Indonesia. The fact of the matter is that the teams were one point apart with less than five seconds left and the refs made an absolutely horrible no-call. That's your "proximate" (real) causation. OTOH, I'm not sure we would have fared much better than Creighton did with a hot UNC team. I'm not sure which is better - exit when we did or receive a beat-down from UNC. I'm not sure we would have matched up much better than UNC - when they're hot...
No I didn't realize that but I did stay in a Holiday Inn Express one time!I don't know if you realize it or not, but you are basically rephrasing the doctrine of "proximate causation." That is the doctrine courts use in determining liability in negligence cases. Paraphrased, it means the most direct, closest cause of an event. Trying to analyze all of the remote factors leading up to an event is sometimes called "but for" causation. That's what all the posts indulging in if, if, if are doing. There's no end to it. It can be chased back to a butterfly flapping its wings in Indonesia. The fact of the matter is that the teams were one point apart with less than five seconds left and the refs made an absolutely horrible no-call. That's your "proximate" (real) causation. OTOH, I'm not sure we would have fared much better than Creighton did with a hot UNC team. I'm not sure which is better - exit when we did or receive a beat-down from UNC. I'm not sure we would have matched up much better than UNC - when they're hot...
Don't know how accurate you are on the 9 out 10 times its not called but about the second line I bold lettered, that sir is poor officiating! If it was a foul it is supposed to be called regardless of the outcome! That is the ref deciding the outcome by not calling the foul! He was standing in perfect position and had to have seen the shot take place! I understand making a mistake by missing a call but to conscientiously decide to not call a foul on a last shot of a game is pathetic officiating. If the shot had been down under the basket where the big guys battle I can understand the refs letting them play it out more.Trevor Releford got fouled on that last play, but in that situation late in the game...9 out of 10 times its not called. It was a last second desperation heave and it was not an aggregious foul. If it had been a designed play and shot from closer in to the 3 point line, theres much more chance of it being called.
Right or wrong on the non call, thats how it appeared to me. The refs didnt want the outcome being from that desperation heave.
it was a hreatbreaker, but i think getting back to the tourney was a big step forward for the team. I think that the teams on the right path, and hopefully theres going to be a better result next season.
Can't agree, since I've seen quite a few called in that circumstance. However, I'll listen to any matter you have to support that assertion. If there's nothing, then it becomes just another folk tale. As I've said in another thread, the NBA is actually better at calling it, but it's certainly called in college ball...Trevor Releford got fouled on that last play, but in that situation late in the game...9 out of 10 times its not called. It was a last second desperation heave and it was not an aggregious foul. If it had been a designed play and shot from closer in to the 3 point line, theres much more chance of it being called.
Right or wrong on the non call, thats how it appeared to me. The refs didnt want the outcome being from that desperation heave.
it was a hreatbreaker, but i think getting back to the tourney was a big step forward for the team. I think that the teams on the right path, and hopefully theres going to be a better result next season.
Suppose you could wave a magic wand and we beat Creighton, but it means we lose to the Heels by 30. Do you take the deal?I was really just saying. Of course I wanted to play UNC...
Probably. You can't know that anyway, so that's a false choice...Suppose you could wave a magic wand and we beat Creighton, but it means we lose to the Heels by 30. Do you take the deal?
Or hey, Creighton's defensive switch could have caused us to turn the ball over, and then we sit back and wonder why CAG didn't call a TO with the obvious switch.You know if we don't take a timeout and we get the ball to the corner to Steele and he shoots (all the time he would have had), we are second guessing the 1st called in-bounds play and not the timeout!