Sunday NCAA tourney open thread

Submitted by jmblue on March 21st, 2010 at 4:21 PM

A few thoughts:

1. I remember thinking that our loss to Alabama was awful because Bama had lost to Cornell. It may have been a bad loss anyway, but Cornell is clearly legit. Congrats to them.

2. Why are Bo Ryan's teams so mediocre in the tournament? They seem to have all the key ingredients: good guard play, good shooting and a very low turnover total. Still, they never seem to amount to much in the tourney.

3. I will never cease to be amazed at how MSU's reputation as a "physical team" allows them to reach in and go over the back like crazy.


dr eng1ish

March 21st, 2010 at 4:28 PM ^

Come on people the health care thread has 20 replies and the tourney thread has 0? What kind of sports fans are we? Some interesting games going on right now. Cornell is playing the best of any team I've seen all year, absolutely crushing Wisconsin.


March 21st, 2010 at 4:33 PM ^

Man I'm so pissed about the OSU-GTech game. I fucking hate Ohio State. They ruin EVERYTHING.

I picked MSU to make it to the Elite Eight so their winning I don't mind.


March 21st, 2010 at 4:49 PM ^

congrats to sparty. great shot by Lucious, and Green did what he does. Such a smart player. Maryland played their hearts out -- gotta feel for Vasquez


March 21st, 2010 at 4:51 PM ^

but that was just an amazing sequence of basketball.

Also, decent for the big 10, I suppose while Wisconsin is getting whooped by Cornell.


March 21st, 2010 at 5:13 PM ^

I thought the Kansas-Memphis NCAA final two years back was a damn disgrace, because the actual basketball game stopped with a minute to go and it became a foul shot series - like a rope-and-dope.

I know you gotta make your free throws to win games, but it's just ridiculous when the entire endgame relies on a long series of shots at the line.

Sgt. Wolverine

March 21st, 2010 at 5:21 PM ^

ruin the end of what should be exciting basketball games. The penalty for fouling to stop the clock should be more harsh. Maybe three shots per foul or something. Just something -- anything -- to reduce or remove the incentive to absolutely destroy every last shred of excitement in the part of the game that should be most exciting.

Sgt. Wolverine

March 21st, 2010 at 6:52 PM ^

I think it's kind of odd to let intentional rule-breaking give a team a better shot at a comeback. I also don't like that the harm to that team's chances of making the comeback is largely dependent on the other team making its foul shots.

Actually...if it's apparent they're fouling to stop the clock, why not just call them as intentional fouls? Seems like that wouldn't be a big stretch.


March 21st, 2010 at 6:59 PM ^

This concept exists in other sports. In baseball there are intentional walks. In football, DBs will deliberately commit pass interference when they're beaten deep, and sometimes teams will even deliberately let a team score a TD at the end of a game to get the ball back. And so on.

As for intentional fouls, that rule needs to be scrapped and replaced with a flagrant foul rule. It's obvious that it's intentional harm that matters to officials, and not intentional fouling.

Sgt. Wolverine

March 21st, 2010 at 7:08 PM ^

An intentional walk isn't breaking the rules to gain an advantage; it's using the rules to avoid giving a great hitter a chance to make contact. Throwing a ball rather than a strike isn't illegal.

Likewise, letting the other team score isn't illegal. It's extraordinarily unlikely to work, but it's not illegal to play intentionally bad defense.

And intentionally committing pass interference is NOTHING like late-game fouling in basketball. When you intentionally commit pass interference, the other team gets a first down and another chance at scoring. The penalty for pass interference is among the most severe in the game. It may prevent the touchdown on that play, but it still puts the team in a significantly worse position than it was in prior to the penalty.


March 21st, 2010 at 7:14 PM ^

You're splitting hairs here. A walk is a penalty for throwing four unhittable pitches, just as free throws are a penalty for committing a foul when your team is in the bonus.

Philosophical issues aside, late-game fouls are realistically never going to go away. If you want the end of games to go more more smoothly, you have to focus your attention on limiting timeouts.

Sgt. Wolverine

March 21st, 2010 at 7:35 PM ^

Maybe, but it doesn't effectively guarantee something good for the team intentionally walking the batter as basketball fouls do in effectively guaranteeing another possession for the team that committed the foul. It's not a full guarantee, but it's close enough -- that's why teams foul.

I do agree that late-game fouls aren't likely to go away, but I do think they harm the game, so I'm still inclined to talk about the problem when it comes up.

I'm not entirely sure limiting timeouts would really solve the problem, though, because then there would likely just be MORE fouls at the end of the game to make up for the inability to stop the clock legally. It'd still be choppy and nearly unwatchable; it'd just be a different sort of choppy and unwatchable.