I hate sports
- Thread starter SmellyCat
- Start date
I don’t get why Fitzmorris was so far from the inbounder. Would probably not have made a difference as the ball went away from the basket. But don’t get it anyway. Too far to bother the inbounds.
He could have double that and I’d still not get it. We were up. We did not need risks. He has no experience closing out games. He missed an easy and one (Bardo chuckled) and fouled twice to give and ones. Showed his naiveness down the stretch.
Fouls on him were BS. Matt could easily have missed the same shot. But I can see your point too.
Remember he played the last 7 or so games as the primary center, including 2 in the tournament. He was one of the few guys who played well against UConn.
I don't like the trend forming. Losing most of the close games against better opponents.
Being on the wrong side of one of these sucks ass. A tremendous performance and big win all wiped away to nothing by a total prayer heave.
Hardly a total prayer heave from a guy who shoots as well as Dix. That shot was a perfect swish.
Not only that, but it was the exact same score too. The difference was that we were up by 15 with 4 to play in 2019.
Winning close games is how you make the NCAA Tournament. Period.
Hope this one really stings and gets the guys to sharpen their killer instincts. Need to put teams away when you have the chance.
Totally agree. We have to come out with absolute gas against Illinois on Friday like our season is on the line. We can’t afford to start the B1G season 0-2. Would be brutal.
He seems unable to get up that high without a running start and the perfect take off.
Yeah, they pretty much got what they wanted, 28-ish feet straight on is a good look for a shooter. There wasn’t even a screen set, he just popped out to his spot and our guy (was it Ty?) got caught flat footed and was late getting there. Far from a sure thing to go in from that distance but that’s the best look at 3 they could ask for there.
Why not have shaded more towards the top of the key? That’s where the loser shot can come from. He did not impede that pass.
What do you suppose the betting line will be? I’m angry mad and want to see the players come out angry. I’m certain that barnhizer can come out angry and perform well. Hopefully some of the other guys too.
The hunger fouls are so soft. When he fouls someone he needs to foul them hard (not dirty). He bumps them lightly and they look like real fouls. Many and ones scored on luke hunger.
Agreed. Would have rather let them pass toward the basket for the tie than let that dude (or Sandfort) get a clean look from anywhere inside 30 feet. Either the players didn’t execute or the defensive alignment from the coaches was just bad. I think the Fitzmorris sub was too cute, just play your five best defenders.
The only thing I can think of is Collins is spooked by the "hack-a-Matt" strategy, especially after the flagrant foul (which looked to me like the Iowa players were coached to just foul him when he gets the ball). I'm not saying it's right, but if the only offense you can potentially get out of Nicholson is if he gets free throws, which is not going to be much, I can see why Hunger would get more PT. The problem is what you lose on the defensive end is much more (in my opinion) than what you gain on the offensive end.
However, when Iowa got behind and was in a position where they MUST foul, I could see getting free-throw shooters on the court. Still though: Bleah.
That all makes sense. But consider Hunger scored only one basket on a pump fake, something Nicholson is unable to do. The other points were bunnies that Matt could have done. And Luke missed two point blank opportunities.
Hunger does not get the respect from the refs Matt does by now. As seen in the two and ones he gets called for. I mean no one would be arguing if either of them was not called. He puffs his chest a little bit and the refs immediately blow the whistle. Matt came in, did the same, the IA guy makes an incredibly tough shot and the refs swallow the whistle. Which they probably would not were it Hunger in the same situation.
That's a discussion I am sure coaches have a lot of times. If he decided to press the ball, the Fitzmorris sub makes sense. Then he has to decide if he's going to cover the top or the basket area. Had he opened the basket area, a lob might have been thrown and we could be super mad we gave an easy pass closer to the basket.
The bigger discussion is to whether you press the inbounder or not. A lot of coaches will give that up with a second to go just to have the defender of the inbounder double team the guy coming to open a passing lane closest to the ball. Or doble team a specific player or players (in this case, Dix or Sandfort if they moved to open a passing lane).
I don't think there are right or wrong answers to these questions. The 100% wrong thing was for Berry to not be glued to Dix like Barnhizer was to Sandfort.
If you don't put someone on the ball, Iowa is probably going to try to get it into the paint - because they can see clearly, no?
Not sure the inbounder is a viable threat - tough to throw it in, get a pass and shoot in 1 second.
So its pretty easy to make the case that a guy who can't take a shot should not be guarded at all.
I don't see a lob over Nicholson by the basket.
Its all hindsight, but I think we'd do it differently.
If Iowa was heaving from under their basket with a few seconds left, I'd put a big guy on the inbounder so he couldn't see.
All I know is that an open look from 28 is a lot worse for NU than a contested look from 10.
If Ty Berry makes the 2nd free throw, our chance of winning goes to 95%.
In general that might be true. But for Iowa specifically, you can argue their strength is not inside. I don't see Freemantle being the guy getting freed to put up a shot with 0.8 to go.
I was seeing it unfold and thinking exactly I trusted Matt and our guys to protect the throw into the paint.
