Seemed like it was on purpose but not sure if it's been confirmed.

There was about 30 sec left. I don't remember Buzz ever employing that type of strategy before. I don't love the amount of time left, but I do like the idea of making teams make pressure FTs and not getting the chance to hit 3s. Guy missed both making it even sweeter.

I still think about that LSU loss during the BK era when we were up by 5 with 15 sec left and lost in regulation on a 3 at the buzzer.

I was trying to figure that out also, did they ask about it in the postgame?

It doesn't make a lot of sense to me unless there's some kind of other motive. Maybe we're trying to get a different lineup in the game for when we get the ball back?

He knew we were about to leave Goodine open, so he called for the foul.

I don't think it was on purpose.

The Collective said:

---

He knew we were about to leave Goodine open, so he called for the foul.

---

This is exactly what I thought at the time haha

No, it was not asked about in the post-game presser. I bet it gets asked about this week though.

When Jace committed the foul, he immediately looked to our bench and made some sort of acknowledgement hand motion, but it was hard to tell if that was "ah crap, that was a mistake" or "yep, we did that correctly."

Watching it live, my first thought was "oh, do we have a foul to give?" because it looked that deliberate and the way Jace reacted afterward. Obviously we didn't have a foul to give though.

It was 72-66 at the time and 26 seconds left when we fouled. Maybe it was a combination of fouling the right guy (Fears hadn't made a basket all night) and trying to bleed one more possession without a 3 being shot by OU? Even still ... feels like too much time left to do that.

TjgtAg08 said:

---

No, it was not asked about in the post-game presser. I bet it gets asked about this week though.

When Jace committed the foul, he immediately looked to our bench and made some sort of acknowledgement hand motion, but it was hard to tell if that was "ah crap, that was a mistake" or "yep, we did that correctly."

Watching it live, my first thought was "oh, do we have a foul to give?" because it looked that deliberate and the way Jace reacted afterward. Obviously we didn't have a foul to give though.

It was 72-66 at the time and 26 seconds left when we fouled. Maybe it was a combination of fouling the right guy (Fears hadn't made a basket all night) and trying to bleed one more possession without a 3 being shot by OU? Even still ... feels like too much time left to do that.

---

Totally agree with the Buzz reaction there. Buzz immediately turned to the bench with what seemed to me as a WTH gesture. Our seat are across from the bench so easy to see his responses during action.

Not that it matters, but the broadcast announcers definitely considered it to be intentional.

i was ready to give buzz credit… i think the last 30 seconds were great strategy… you're up 7-8 pts… both teams were in the double bonus and shooting 2… if you foul them each trip and they make both, you know they will be fouling you too.. all you have to do is make 1 of 2 (you're shooting 2)… if they make both every time and you only make 1, it would take them 7-8 possessions to tie you… they aren't getting 7-8 possessions in 30 seconds… game over… it's great strategy but only if you aren't in the 1 and 1… you too have to be shooting 2.

It's a terrible strategy.

Maybe if you're playing the USA basketball team with the best shooters on the planet, otherwise your biggest ally is the clock, and you need it running. You don't want to just give away free points.

Although teams do seem to shoot like 95% from 3 against us when we're ahead with under a minute to go so I could see why it feels like a good idea.

I think it's a good strategy when there is less than 15 seconds and you think there are only 2 possessions left in the game. And I'd rather we be up 5 than 6 if I'm going to give away free points.

seemed odd for sure... but I do think it was intentional.

If it wasn't intentional then I don't know what Jace was doing.

Now, did the bench want him to do it or was it just a miscommunication?

But yeah I would rather the clock run and watch them try to hit 95% from 3.

bulverdeaggie93 said:

---

i was ready to give buzz credit… i think the last 30 seconds were great strategy… you're up 7-8 pts… both teams were in the double bonus and shooting 2… if you foul them each trip and they make both, you know they will be fouling you too.. all you have to do is make 1 of 2 (you're shooting 2)… if they make both every time and you only make 1, it would take them 7-8 possessions to tie you… they aren't getting 7-8 possessions in 30 seconds… game over… it's great strategy but only if you aren't in the 1 and 1… you too have to be shooting 2.

---

this was my thought. it looked intentional. And we where making FTs. I think they actually missed 1 or 2

I think yes, but buzz looked puzzled by the first one.

Broadcasters claimed it was initial on the first Jace foul. Why? Make him shoot two instead of maybe making three? 84% shooter which means chance of missing one is about1/6 and missing both is 1/36 or about 3%. He missed both but not making a shot so no third attempt.

My take was it wasn't called by coach but who knows what Jace was thinking?

It was on purpose. I'm no professional, but read Jace's lips after the foul. He turns to meet his teammates on the floor and he says "He told me to." As if in answer to "why did you foul?"

Buzz did look confused, but maybe that call came from an assistant?

worked out. Kinda like fouling when up 3 with a few seconds left. Worst case scenario he makes both, you're still up 2 possessions, with the ball, and several seconds bled from the clock.

Bob… i agree stopping the clock isn't good…. but in our situation as it was, i think it was good overall (if it was intentional). Trying to remember now, i don't think there were any FG attempts either side the last 30 seconds? As long as we can make 1 of 2 in the double bonus.. they aren't going to catch us just them making 2 FT over the course of 30 seconds… they can't get 6-7 possessions, even with the clock stopping every 6-7 seconds

I still don't really buy the math and you're counting way too much on your own free throw shooting for my liking.

i hear ya… i just like them not going down and jacking up 3's (that go in). If we're up 6…. and every possession they make 2 FT and we only make 1 of 2… they only make up 1 point each total possession… takes them 6 possessions just to tie… they aren't getting 6 possessions in 30 seconds…. in the end, i'd be more interested in knowing if anything along these lines was Buzz's intent or thoughts.

PJYoung said:

---

If it wasn't intentional then I don't know what Jace was doing.

Now, did the bench want him to do it or was it just a miscommunication?

---

I mean the whole night we were all saying "What is Jace doing?"
Buzz looked very confused after the foul and was looking over to Lyle Wolf as if to say "Did we ask him to do that?" That made me think it was not on purpose. Also even if you were going to foul on purpose, I think they wouldnt have fouled that quick across half court.

Assuming you're waiting until they cross half court to foul and you're guarding in the backcourt to burn time without fouling then yeah, the odds are it's probably going to work out.

But I still think there's a lot more room for something to go wrong (you foul a shooter on a three and they make it, you turn it over on an inbounds pass, you miss both free throws.)

The more possessions you let the game have the more weird stuff could happen. I mean we turned it over three times last night inbounding the ball against a full court press and now you're inviting that situation happening like five more times.

It is on purpose, the Celtics coach started doing it last year I believe and JJ Reddick talked about it on his podcast as well before he became a coach.

The theory is when you are up 6, you foul them so that they can't make it a one possession game and then you get the ball back. Risk with are team is, if we don't make FTs then it could give other team ball back with less time wasted.

I'm guessing it's one of those things that doesn't make sense until you spend way too much time breaking down the math.

bobinator said:

---

It's a terrible strategy.

Maybe if you're playing the USA basketball team with the best shooters on the planet, otherwise your biggest ally is the clock, and you need it running. You don't want to just give away free points.

Although teams do seem to shoot like 95% from 3 against us when we're ahead with under a minute to go so I could see why it feels like a good idea.

---

As a long time college bball observer this is is common at all levels. There is simply no pressure down five or six plus and guys shoot prob > 50% on this shot. Partially due to teams not wanting to foul (unless they're totally dumb like we are at times) and partially the players aren't overthinking anything. It's all about getting the shot up.

I get that it theoretically makes sense, especially at the NBA level where the shooters are way better and the officiating is much tighter.

you don't do it if your own team is still just in the 1n1… you'd only do it if you are shooting 2 FT rest of game… it's all in the analytics and percentages

got lucky he missed but that's the 80%+ pg, I'd think we'd be trying to foul anyone not named Fears Goodine Moore

brilliant strategy.
three possession game vs two.

They were hitting the threes

It allows you to be very aggressive in traps and trying to press.

I approve this strategy

This made me look up the only game I know where this happened and a comeback was completed. In the UNI game we cut it to 6 with 21 seconds left in the game. They turned it over and we got a throw in under our own basket and House made a 3 pointer to cut it to a three point game.

In my mind, if it was intentional, the risk was not so much about us having to make our free-throws. It was more about getting the ball inbounded after the stoppage. We were really struggling to get the ball in cleanly at the end of the game.

Flatlander said:

---

In my mind, if it was intentional, the risk was not so much about us having to make our free-throws. It was more about getting the ball inbounded after the stoppage. We were really struggling to get the ball in cleanly at the end of the game.

---

Yeah, like I said, this is exactly the problem with this strategy in a college game. It makes way too many assumptions about your own ability to do some basic things.

bulverdeaggie93 said:

---

i was ready to give buzz credit… i think the last 30 seconds were great strategy… you're up 7-8 pts… both teams were in the double bonus and shooting 2… if you foul them each trip and they make both, you know they will be fouling you too.. all you have to do is make 1 of 2 (you're shooting 2)… if they make both every time and you only make 1, it would take them 7-8 possessions to tie you… they aren't getting 7-8 possessions in 30 seconds… game over… it's great strategy but only if you aren't in the 1 and 1… you too have to be shooting 2.

---

I didn't think nearly as detailed as you, but given how Goodine was dropping 3's, I thought it was a good strategy to foul and send them to the line. We know they'd have to foul us and we were somehow shooting lights out at the line.

I think it was on purpose. They mentioned it in an SEC game last night, saying that Buzz took the same approach as some NBA coaches were taking by ensuring that your lead does not dwindle from 6 to 3 after the possession.

Frank Grimes said:

---

I think it was on purpose. They mentioned it in an SEC game last night, saying that Buzz took the same approach as some NBA coaches were taking by ensuring that your lead does not dwindle from 6 to 3 after the possession.

---

This.
Plus the other players on the court kinda got onto Jace at the time, until he point blank said "he told me to!"

I kinda liked it.