Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="newmexicuse, post: 2542508, member: 57"]
In general, I like the fouling strategy, but truthfully I thought it was wrong in yesterday's game even though it worked out in hindsight.

Our D was so good, and they were so flummoxed, that I thought what we should have done is to have four defenders at the three point line, and instruct the interior defender to only stand there with arms up to try and impede, but not foul. My thinking was that by doing that we would get another sec or two off the clock while trading those secs for an easy two rather than put them at the line. A two would not particularly hurt us. What would have killed us would be a trey or a FT plus an o board for them off of an intentional miss of the second FT.  I did not think they would force a contested trey with a wide open deuce available to them and some time left on the clock. What really bailed us out was Izzo did not call for the intentional miss where they probably had better than a 50% to grab a board. If we were holding our own on the glass, then i would have agreed with the fouling strategy. We were just lucky Izzo missed the obvious.

I was OK with the foul at 9 secs, but did not like the second foul at 3.7 secs because that should have been the intentional miss situation.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?