College Basketball Thread - Page 186

TitleTown088 · 03-19-2007, 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bsaza2358

I watched that entire game. Even though I was very intoxicated during the game, I was with Xavier alumni who are friends of mine. If you talk to X fans, they believe that Oden's 5th foul was the equivalent of a flagrant or intentional foul, which should have warranted 2 shots and the ball. I was wondering what you guys thought about it. Oden did foul hard, and he did shove Cage out of bounds. I don't think you can call a flagrant there because Cage could have flopped.

It was far from a flop. It only looked like a flop because it is a 7 foot dude pushing very hard. It should have been intentional, easily.

duckseason · 03-19-2007, 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bsaza2358

I watched that entire game. Even though I was very intoxicated during the game, I was with Xavier alumni who are friends of mine. If you talk to X fans, they believe that Oden's 5th foul was the equivalent of a flagrant or intentional foul, which should have warranted 2 shots and the ball. I was wondering what you guys thought about it. Oden did foul hard, and he did shove Cage out of bounds. I don't think you can call a flagrant there because Cage could have flopped.

I think it should have been called intentional because it was clear that Oden flat out shoved the dude while he was off-balance. He wasn't playing basketball, he was just angry that it appeared his team was about to lose. So he shoved the dude. It's hilarious to watch these talking heads on TV talking about how dude flopped. What they don't get is that it doesn't matter either way. Oden committed a flagrant foul regardless of how the dude reacted to it.

princefielder28 · 03-19-2007, 04:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by duckseason

I think it should have been called intentional because it was clear that Oden flat out shoved the dude while he was off-balance. He wasn't playing basketball, he was just angry that it appeared his team was about to lose. So he shoved the dude. It's hilarious to watch these talking heads on TV talking about how dude flopped. What they don't get is that it doesn't matter either way. Oden committed a flagrant foul regardless of how the dude reacted to it.

Oden said it himself that it was intentional

duckseason · 03-19-2007, 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by princefielder28

Oden said it himself that it was intentional

Haha, I didn't know that. That makes some of these dudes on TV look even dumber than I thought.

bsaza2358 · 03-19-2007, 04:33 PM

Well, everyone knows that it was an intentional foul. The question becomes whether it was "intentional enough" or "flagrant enough" to warrant 2 shots and the ball. I would say it was intentional and a hard foul, but it's not a no brainer call for 2 shots and the ball. That would have sealed the game against OSU. I don't think the refs would have made that call in favor of Ohio State. They didn't want to alter the course of the game. I think it was a borderline situation. In close, end of game situations, you can't have the refs deciding the game on that kind of call.

duckseason · 03-19-2007, 05:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bsaza2358

Well, everyone knows that it was an intentional foul. The question becomes whether it was "intentional enough" or "flagrant enough" to warrant 2 shots and the ball. I would say it was intentional and a hard foul, but it's not a no brainer call for 2 shots and the ball. That would have sealed the game against OSU. I don't think the refs would have made that call in favor of Ohio State. They didn't want to alter the course of the game. I think it was a borderline situation. In close, end of game situations, you can't have the refs deciding the game on that kind of call.

It wouldn't have been the refs deciding the game. Oden is responsible for his own actions. It was a foolish mistake. Teams die by them every day whether it be a foul like that, or a bad pass. Should the refs have ignored Chris Webber's timeout in '93?

RyanLeaf#1 · 03-19-2007, 05:40 PM

Something that confuses me and caused me to push a game with my bookie is..... Did anyone see when Cain on Virginia jumped up and grabbed the rim on defense against Tennessee yesterday? Isnt that a technical foul?... Cant be mad I went 6-0-1 yesterday but it would have been nice to go 7-0.

MP123 · 03-19-2007, 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by duckseason

It wouldn't have been the refs deciding the game. Oden is responsible for his own actions. It was a foolish mistake. Teams die by them every day whether it be a foul like that, or a bad pass. Should the refs have ignored Chris Webber's timeout in '93?

Rebels are going to beat Oregon.

Im_a_Romosexual · 03-19-2007, 05:43 PM

yes its a technical, but I cant remember why the refs didnt call it

duckseason · 03-19-2007, 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RyanLeaf#1

Something that confuses me and caused me to push a game with my bookie is..... Did anyone see when Cain on Virginia jumped up and grabbed the rim on defense against Tennessee yesterday? Isnt that a technical foul?... Cant be mad I went 6-0-1 yesterday but it would have been nice to go 7-0.

Yeah, I think the announcer even pointed it out. I'm pretty sure it's a tech, or at least goal tending. Shouldn't change the outcome of a bet though. The final score is the final score. Bad calls skew the outcome of pretty much every game.

duckseason · 03-19-2007, 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MP123

Rebels are going to beat Oregon.

Wow, you should be an analyst. I mean, it only took you 6 words to convince me.

slightlyaraiderfan · 03-19-2007, 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MP123

Rebels are going to beat Oregon.

No they won't, the Pac-10 is going to put 3 teams in the Final Four.

RyanLeaf#1 · 03-19-2007, 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by duckseason

Yeah, I think the announcer even pointed it out. I'm pretty sure it's a tech, or at least goal tending. Shouldn't change the outcome of a bet though. The final score is the final score. Bad calls skew the outcome of pretty much every game.

Believe me with the day I had yesterday im not complaining at all. I just didnt understand the no call thats all.

duckseason · 03-19-2007, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stillaraiderfan

No they won't, the Pac-10 is going to put 3 teams in the Final Four.

And then the heads at espn would spend the next week talking about how it was a "down year" in college basketball.

MP123 · 03-19-2007, 06:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stillaraiderfan

No they won't, the Pac-10 is going to put 3 teams in the Final Four.

1 team and that being UCLA.

etk · 03-19-2007, 06:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by duckseason

And then the heads at espn would spend the next week talking about how it was a "down year" in college basketball.

HAHA good stuff it's so true. What a down year in college basketball, no big upsets and 3 Pac-10 teams in the Final 4. A disgrace!

TitleTown088 · 03-19-2007, 06:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BuckNaked

I doubt we'll get Patterson since Tubby is a such a terrible recruiter.

You won't get Patterson b/c coach K is such a good recruiter! Actually, I'm really not too worried about it Duke will be set at the forward position next year and I don't think they will need him. ( especially if McRoberts returns). I wouldn't come to Duke if I was him, he won't get much PT.

princefielder28 · 03-19-2007, 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TitleTown088

You won't get Patterson b/c coach K is such a good recruiter! Actually, I'm really not too worried about it Duke will be set at the forward position next year and I don't think they will need him. ( especially if McRoberts returns). I wouldn't come to Duke if I was him, he won't get much PT.

I'm sure McRoberts will return; he hasn't proven to pro scouts that he's got the game yet.

PalmerToCJ · 03-19-2007, 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TitleTown088

You won't get Patterson b/c coach K is such a good recruiter! Actually, I'm really not too worried about it Duke will be set at the forward position next year and I don't think they will need him. ( especially if McRoberts returns). I wouldn't come to Duke if I was him, he won't get much PT.

IMO it's either UK or Florida, that's the word I'm hearing anyway. His parents are rooting for it to be UK but I think he's more set on Florida and I figure that's the route he'll go.

McDonalds AA game is next Wednesday...

Eaglez.Fan · 03-19-2007, 07:54 PM

I am very nervous for GTown against Vandy. I love Vandy's style of play and it kicks ass in this tourny. I wouldn't be suprised if more teams try out that style.

edit- post 6000th and I'm a cocksman :p

princefielder28 · 03-19-2007, 07:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eaglez.Fan

I am very nervous for GTown against Vandy. I love Vandy's style of play and it kicks ass in this tourny. I wouldn't be suprised if more teams try out that style.

edit- post 6000th and I'm a cocksman :p

Congrats on 6000!

I think Georgetown can take them down but if Vandy is shooting the lights out it could be a long night for G'Town

SuperMcGee · 03-19-2007, 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eaglez.Fan

I am very nervous for GTown against Vandy. I love Vandy's style of play and it kicks ass in this tourny. I wouldn't be suprised if more teams try out that style.

edit- post 6000th and I'm a cocksman :p

I had Vandy out early but I'm still rooting for them more than almost any other team. Georgetown out helps my chances quite a bit.

P-L · 03-19-2007, 08:14 PM

You college basketball gurus tell me who is the best fit for coach of Michigan. Some names that have been rumored so far are Jay Wright of Villanova and Lon Kruger of UNLV.

etk · 03-19-2007, 08:15 PM

I'm not exactly a guru, but my money is on Kruger. I don't know who it should be though.

yodapoop · 03-19-2007, 10:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RyanLeaf#1

Thats a mushes dream right there. Theres no way all the favorites win from here on out. It just isnt going to happen. You dont have one upset happening in the next round.

USC needs to beat UNC for me.