2023 NCAAM East Regional Thread (ǝnpɹnԀ, ǝʇʇǝnbɹɐW, ʇS sɐsuɐʞ, ǝǝssǝuuǝ┴)

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

I don’t know about Houston and Auburn, but to my untrained eye, there is a huge difference between UVA’s style of play and what we experienced on Saturday.

I know it’s tough to play UVa, but it’s not impossible to game plan against them. I would guess we have been successful against them at least 50% of the time over the last 10 years. But they are not a dirty team, and I don’t remember many flagrants playing against them.

This is in comparison to what we experienced Saturday. Tennessee’s big guy threw Kyle down twice in the first 90 seconds. As Jay Bills said, when the refs went to the monitor and didn’t assess a flagrant on either play, they were essentially saying “go ahead”. Then a few minutes later, Kyle and Tyrese were both hit in the head on the same play! They reviewed the play against Tyrese, but I don’t think they even called a foul on the play against Kyle, despite the fact that he was bleeding all over the court and his face was split open. That was 3 flagrant reviews in the first 5 minutes! I have never seen anything like that before! The fact that the refs didn’t assess a flagrant on any of those plays is mind boggling to me. And imo, that is very different than the way UVa plays.

As Seth Greenberg said, forget about freedom of movement, you can’t run any offense at all if the refs are going to allow that level of physicality.

As mentioned elsewhere, I don't see how you go from "the refs are going to allow that level of physicality" to "dirty team."

Is it the fault of the refs? Or the team? Or the coach?

I don't fault the team or the coach, personally. It's a strategy that only works if the refs swallow their whistle or if your opponent drastically changes how the play in response.

Well, Tennessee went two for two.

[SavDukeGrad]

As mentioned elsewhere, I don't see how you go from "the refs are going to allow that level of physicality" to "dirty team."

Is it the fault of the refs? Or the team? Or the coach?

I don't fault the team or the coach, personally. It's a strategy that only works if the refs swallow their whistle or if your opponent drastically changes how the play in response.

Well, Tennessee went two for two.

I didn’t say Tennessee was a dirty team. I Said UVa was NOT a dirty team.

But, personally, I thought Tennessee’s strategy in this particular game was borderline. I have no idea how they have played in other games.

I don’t know who is primarily to blame for that. But imo, it should be unacceptable.

For the record, I was merely pointing out that there is a big difference in the way Tennessee played on Saturday, and the way UVa plays, imo.

[kako]

I didn’t say Tennessee was a dirty team. I Said UVa was NOT a dirty team.

But, personally, I thought Tennessee’s strategy in this particular game was borderline. I have no idea how they have played in other games.

I don’t know who is primarily to blame for that. But imo, it should be unacceptable.

For the record, I was merely pointing out that there is a big difference in the way Tennessee played on Saturday, and the way UVa plays, imo.

Teams always push the limits to try to gain advantages. There are many limits they try. Duke is (in)famous for taking charges, many think the officials should call Duke for flops. Other fans are often up in arms about that.

I saw a couple of UT game this year. Yes, they are physical. Rick Barnes' teams always are. Duke saw a lot of that when he coached Clemson. (As an aside, a lot of older Duke fans like Barnes, particularly because he got into a heated argument with Dean Smith).

UT plays hard and physical. I don't think there is anything wrong with that. If it goes past the limit, officials should call fouls. The problem is the limit is up to the refs' opinions. But in the end, I'll say it again - great teams can play different styles of play and still win. This Duke team was not ready for this type of game, and it showed. This was a good Duke team, but not good enough to adapt to this particular physical game, especially when the refs did not help them out. And one cannot count on the refs doing that.

9F

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Teams always push the limits to try to gain advantages. There are many limits they try. Duke is (in)famous for taking charges, many think the officials should call Duke for flops. Other fans are often up in arms about that.

I saw a couple of UT game this year. Yes, they are physical. Rick Barnes' teams always are. Duke saw a lot of that when he coached Clemson. (As an aside, a lot of older Duke fans like Barnes, particularly because he got into a heated argument with Dean Smith).

UT plays hard and physical. I don't think there is anything wrong with that. If it goes past the limit, officials should call fouls. The problem is the limit is up to the refs' opinions. But in the end, I'll say it again - great teams can play different styles of play and still win. This Duke team was not ready for this type of game, and it showed. This was a good Duke team, but not good enough to adapt to this particular physical game, especially when the refs did not help them out. And one cannot count on the refs doing that.

9F

I think the charge/flop is a fair analogy. It is infuriating to opposing fans and forces refs to make a call. It also led to rule changes that try and minimize the gamesmanship.

[SouthernDukie]

As mentioned elsewhere, I don't see how you go from "the refs are going to allow that level of physicality" to "dirty team."

Is it the fault of the refs? Or the team? Or the coach?

It's the fault of all three in descending order:

1) The refs for allowing it. They have the most culpability here.

2) Coach Barnes. He's played this way for the longest time, and I have zero doubt he told his guys to rough up Flip in particular.

3) The players. I've played and I know the difference between physical and dirty. The line isn't a blurry as some would have us believe.

[kako]

I understand what you and MtnDevil are saying. The dirty play is on the refs and the corrupt NCAA for turning college basketball into rugby matches. The NBA did something about that type of play because it's not a game most people want to watch. But to think that the NCAA will do something about it, we're kidding ourselves. They lost all credibility when they didn't punish the Cheating school down the road for years of academic fraud. They will sit on their hands and do absolutely nothing.

GoDuke!

While I agree with you about the NCAA and UNCHeat, let's separate that and game play. Until a team starts to win a natty with the physical style of play that UT used (e.g. Detroit Pistons in the early 90s), I agree. The NCAA won't change the game because of one or two early games in any given tournament. If UT wins it all in this ugly way, maybe they will. And they will make certain things points of emphasis - like two hands on the ball handler and not allowing a 3-point shooter to land are fouls now. But until then, Duke needs to have an edge to them, which was very tough to have this year with so many underclassmen.

For example, the '92 team had that edge, even though they could be accused of being generally a finesse team. Mainly because Laettner was a badass, and Hurley was junkyard dog (and both were at least Duke HOF-level skilled). Duke didn't have anyone on that level, not even close. Flip was probably the closest, but when UT literally hit him in the face, it knocked him back.

Thinking about it, this Duke team could have used the attitudes of guys like these:

Dan Meagher
Danny Ferry
Laettner
Hurley
Dante Jones
Shane Battier
Andre Buckner
Gerald Henderson

I know I'm forgetting someone. But all of these guys, regardless of in-game skill level, had an edge that might have helped when they faced UT. Even practice guys like Buckner can have an impact to prepare the rotation players for what's to come.

9F

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

While I agree with you about the NCAA and UNCHeat, let's separate that and game play. Until a team starts to win a natty with the physical style of play that UT used (e.g. Detroit Pistons in the early 90s), I agree. The NCAA won't change the game because of one or two early games in any given tournament. If UT wins it all in this ugly way, maybe they will. And they will make certain things points of emphasis - like two hands on the ball handler and not allowing a 3-point shooter to land are fouls now. But until then, Duke needs to have an edge to them, which was very tough to have this year with so many underclassmen.

For example, the '92 team had that edge, even though they could be accused of being generally a finesse team. Mainly because Laettner was a badass, and Hurley was junkyard dog (and both were at least Duke HOF-level skilled). Duke didn't have anyone on that level, not even close. Flip was probably the closest, but when UT literally hit him in the face, it knocked him back.

I mean, they made our freshmen look like freshmen. Give our guys two more off seasons of bulk and it looks a lot different.

[SavDukeGrad]

It's the fault of all three in descending order:

1) The refs for allowing it. They have the most culpability here.

2) Coach Barnes. He's played this way for the longest time, and I have zero doubt he told his guys to rough up Flip in particular.

3) The players. I've played and I know the difference between physical and dirty. The line isn't a blurry as some would have us believe.

Thanks for this, Southern Dukie. I agree with you completely.

[kako]

I mean, they made our freshmen look like freshmen. Give our guys two more off seasons of bulk and it looks a lot different.

The problem is the freshmen may not be here in two more years!

Perhaps recruiting a burly 3 or 4* player that would be here for the long haul and effectively making him a hockey-like enforcer would help. Or recruiting football players to be walk-ons. Not sure, just a suggestion.

9F

[kako]

It's the fault of all three in descending order:

1) The refs for allowing it. They have the most culpability here.

2) Coach Barnes. He's played this way for the longest time, and I have zero doubt he told his guys to rough up Flip in particular.

3) The players. I've played and I know the difference between physical and dirty. The line isn't a blurry as some would have us believe.

#1 leads the pareto diagram here, by far. If the refs had called a tighter game, things might have been different. But there's a range that every officiating crew has, and where it fell for this game did not benefit Duke.

But as I've stated in other threads, a key factor in the Duke loss was Nkamhoua's step up (many steps up) in play. His offensive output was so far above his norm, and Duke's defense could not stop him like UT's defense did to our guys.

9F

[Rich]

Until a team starts to win a natty with the physical style of play that UT used (e.g. Detroit Pistons in the early 90s), I agree. The NCAA won't change the game because of one or two early games in any given tournament. If UT wins it all in this ugly way, maybe they will. And they will make certain things points of emphasis - like two hands on the ball handler and not allowing a 3-point shooter to land are fouls now.

I agree with this, but an added problem is that there are so many more refs across the NCAA compared to the NBA, and they are part time employees, so it's much harder to get consistency across conferences. So when tourney time comes, there are officials from different conferences using different standards. The SEC plays a much more physical style in general and SEC refs presumably allow it.

I don't know the officials who called the Duke-TN game, but I'm sure they were overwhelmed with the style of play and didn't know how to address the situation. The NCAA can try to emphasize certain rules, which seem effective at the beginning of the season, but always get lost by tournament time.

[kako]

I agree with this, but an added problem is that there are so many more refs across the NCAA compared to the NBA, and they are part time employees, so it's much harder to get consistency across conferences. So when tourney time comes, there are officials from different conferences using different standards. The SEC plays a much more physical style in general and SEC refs presumably allow it.

I don't know the officials who called the Duke-TN game, but I'm sure they were overwhelmed with the style of play and didn't know how to address the situation. The NCAA can try to emphasize certain rules, which seem effective at the beginning of the season, but always get lost by tournament time.

Definitely. With all the money that the NCAA makes, if I were the czar, they would do at least a couple of things:

1. Have a set of full-time refs that will be planned for the NCAA tournament. These can come from the conferences or not, I don't care. But emphasize consistency. I know that means some refs in the conferences may still be part-time, but so be it. Don't dumb down the officiating because of that. At least the tournament may go more smoothly consistency-wise.

2. Separate topic, but still with refs. Have a central command center, like the pro leagues do, to govern/overrule to some extent at least some of the officiating decisions made on site. At the very least, this might help speed up the game when refs are trying to figure out things like clock timing.

9F

[Rich]

Definitely. With all the money that the NCAA makes, if I were the czar, they would do at least a couple of things:

1. Have a set of full-time refs that will be planned for the NCAA tournament. These can come from the conferences or not, I don't care. But emphasize consistency. I know that means some refs in the conferences may still be part-time, but so be it. Don't dumb down the officiating because of that. At least the tournament may go more smoothly consistency-wise.

2. Separate topic, but still with refs. Have a central command center, like the pro leagues do, to govern/overrule to some extent at least some of the officiating decisions made on site. At the very least, this might help speed up the game when refs are trying to figure out things like clock timing.

9F

The problem with part-time officials exists with college football too. I'm surprised it hasn't gotten any traction given the much bigger money involved. I don't see changes with college basketball until football is addressed. The NCAA is so inept it would take some real politicking for any of this to happen.

[robed deity]

While I agree with you about the NCAA and UNCHeat, let's separate that and game play. Until a team starts to win a natty with the physical style of play that UT used (e.g. Detroit Pistons in the early 90s), I agree. The NCAA won't change the game because of one or two early games in any given tournament. If UT wins it all in this ugly way, maybe they will. And they will make certain things points of emphasis - like two hands on the ball handler and not allowing a 3-point shooter to land are fouls now. But until then, Duke needs to have an edge to them, which was very tough to have this year with so many underclassmen.

For example, the '92 team had that edge, even though they could be accused of being generally a finesse team. Mainly because Laettner was a badass, and Hurley was junkyard dog (and both were at least Duke HOF-level skilled). Duke didn't have anyone on that level, not even close. Flip was probably the closest, but when UT literally hit him in the face, it knocked him back.

Thinking about it, this Duke team could have used the attitudes of guys like these:

Dan Meagher
Danny Ferry
Laettner
Hurley
Dante Jones
Shane Battier
Andre Buckner
Gerald Henderson

I know I'm forgetting someone. But all of these guys, regardless of in-game skill level, had an edge that might have helped when they faced UT. Even practice guys like Buckner can have an impact to prepare the rotation players for what's to come.

9F

I mean sure, if we had one of those guys on this year's team, maybe it would have been different.

SOME are complaining here that Tennessee and Barnes are at fault. But I think most are just frustrated that it wasn't basketball and SHOULDN'T ever be basketball. Like that was outside the lines of "we needed a hard-nosed guy to respond to their style." Yeah, to win that game and advance, sure. But it shouldn't HAVE to be that way because that stops resembling basketball and is a different sport altogether. That's the annoying part.

It's like when there's a game (like Duke Virginia this year) where clearly there was a call at the end that played a huge role in deciding the game. And the counter is always "well that's why you shouldn't turn the ball over so much", (or miss shots, or foul, or whatever negative stat you choose from earlier in the game etc) and leave it in the refs' hands at the end. Well sure but...come on. It doesn't change the fact that the officiating was poor and played a huge role, and as fans, we can complain while still acknowledging that the team wasn't a juggernaut and had strengths and weaknesses, as every team does.

[rsvman]

While I agree with you about the NCAA and UNCHeat, let's separate that and game play. Until a team starts to win a natty with the physical style of play that UT used (e.g. Detroit Pistons in the early 90s), I agree. The NCAA won't change the game because of one or two early games in any given tournament. If UT wins it all in this ugly way, maybe they will. And they will make certain things points of emphasis - like two hands on the ball handler and not allowing a 3-point shooter to land are fouls now. But until then, Duke needs to have an edge to them, which was very tough to have this year with so many underclassmen.

For example, the '92 team had that edge, even though they could be accused of being generally a finesse team. Mainly because Laettner was a badass, and Hurley was junkyard dog (and both were at least Duke HOF-level skilled). Duke didn't have anyone on that level, not even close. Flip was probably the closest, but when UT literally hit him in the face, it knocked him back.

Thinking about it, this Duke team could have used the attitudes of guys like these:

Dan Meagher
Danny Ferry
Laettner
Hurley
Dante Jones
Shane Battier
Andre Buckner
Gerald Henderson

I know I'm forgetting someone. But all of these guys, regardless of in-game skill level, had an edge that might have helped when they faced UT. Even practice guys like Buckner can have an impact to prepare the rotation players for what's to come.

9F

Maybe add Singler?

[DU94]

Maybe add Singler?

Definitely Singler plus Brian Davis.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Definitely Singler plus Brian Davis.

Davis and Singler sporks!

[Maged]

Nate James.

Kenny Dennard

[-jk]

I agree with this, but an added problem is that there are so many more refs across the NCAA compared to the NBA, and they are part time employees, so it's much harder to get consistency across conferences. So when tourney time comes, there are officials from different conferences using different standards. The SEC plays a much more physical style in general and SEC refs presumably allow it.

I don't know the officials who called the Duke-TN game, but I'm sure they were overwhelmed with the style of play and didn't know how to address the situation. The NCAA can try to emphasize certain rules, which seem effective at the beginning of the season, but always get lost by tournament time.

It’s even worse with refs: they’re independent contractors, getting gigs from different conferences. They only work for the ncaa in March.

-jk

[kako]

SOME are complaining here that Tennessee and Barnes are at fault. But I think most are just frustrated that it wasn't basketball and SHOULDN'T ever be basketball. Like that was outside the lines of "we needed a hard-nosed guy to respond to their style." Yeah, to win that game and advance, sure. But it shouldn't HAVE to be that way because that stops resembling basketball and is a different sport altogether. That's the annoying part.

It's like when there's a game (like Duke Virginia this year) where clearly there was a call at the end that played a huge role in deciding the game. And the counter is always "well that's why you shouldn't turn the ball over so much", (or miss shots, or foul, or whatever negative stat you choose from earlier in the game etc) and leave it in the refs' hands at the end. Well sure but...come on. It doesn't change the fact that the officiating was poor and played a huge role, and as fans, we can complain while still acknowledging that the team wasn't a juggernaut and had strengths and weaknesses, as every team does.

I don't like that style of play, but I wouldn't go so far as to say it's not basketball. It is basketball, but it's the refs that control whether fouls are called or not. I wished they had called more fouls in the UT game. They didn't. It sucks, but there you have it. As I've said, one can either hope and pray that the refs call fouls, or one can set up a team that can handle the physical play. Which is why I was dreaming of players that would have been good to have on this team.

But I don't think it's like the UVA game. Duke was clearly screwed by the refs (Lee Cassell, Tim Clougherty and Jeffrey Anderson - may their names live in infamy) out of the opportunity to win in OT, and the conference said so. This was clearly a refs' mistake, while the UT game was a refs' judgment call ("incidental contact" is a judgment call, as the word "incidental" is not clearly defined) . Perhaps it was poor judgment in our eyes, but it was judgment. The UVA game was clearly not following the written rules concerning the timing of the foul with respect to the horn, not whether it was a foul. It was just flat out wrong.

9F