It probably is not the best scenario for Dayton. They can get a small college in for not a large payout and still sell many tickets. Why add the opportunity to lose a game and not make any more money?

(03-18-2015 11:49 PM)Overrated Wrote:  Andy Glockner is kinda harping on this on twitter, but that was pretty clearly a foul that wasn't called at the end of the game as defined by the rule:

"It should be illegal to extend one's arms fully or partially, other than vertically, so that the freedom of movement of an opponent is hindered when contact with the extended arms occur."

The Dayton player jumped forward, landed leaning forward and had his arms at a 45 degree angle when contact was initiated. It's a foul, even with the Boise State player jumping into him (there is nothing that prohibits that). Dayton got a favorable call at home. That is what tends to happen. It's a big part of the reason why home teams win more than road teams.

I bolded the key part of the rule which is why I believe it wasn't a foul. The defender jumped forward but still landed a foot and a half away from the boise defender (before any contact was made). The boise player had freedom of movement. If he takes a normal jump shot there is no contact at all. He had to make a really weird, awkward forward lunge to initiate contact and even when doing that the defender's feet were already on the ground when contact occurred. It was a bad play by the offensive player.

I generally like Glockner but the guy was about as annoying as could be last night. He spent the entire night whining about Boise having to go to Dayton. The committee had Dayton as one of the last 4 in. Their options were to switch Dayton with a higher rated team and penalize the higher rated team by shipping them to Dayton, or switch Dayton with the last at-large bid so that Dayton didn't make the tournament. I'm sorry, but both those options would have been way worst.

Maybe the NCAA should have two different sites for two different days of First Four games. I'd be fine with that, but they haven't done that and it hasn't been a complaint so far.

I didn't stay up to watch it, but I just watched the replay. Doesn't look like enough contact to call a foul. The shooter should have jumped into the guys chest to get the call. It looked like the defender tried to avoid him, landed to the shooters left and the shooter kind of acted to get the call, but didn't look like there was really much contact. If you get the defender off your feet, you should go right into them immediately to get the call. BSU's guy did not. Waited for the guy to land and shot it awkwardly, but didn't look like much contact. The shooter was a step slow on getting the call. I wouldn't have called it a foul (Though maybe another angle would show more contact).

BTW...I don't buy the NCAA put them there to sell tickets. The play in games are already very well attended to begin with. One of the reasons it remains is Dayton because it doesn't matter who is playing Dayton, Columbus and Cincy people seem to head to those games pretty well.

(03-19-2015 07:29 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(03-18-2015 11:49 PM)Overrated Wrote:  Andy Glockner is kinda harping on this on twitter, but that was pretty clearly a foul that wasn't called at the end of the game as defined by the rule:

"It should be illegal to extend one's arms fully or partially, other than vertically, so that the freedom of movement of an opponent is hindered when contact with the extended arms occur."

The Dayton player jumped forward, landed leaning forward and had his arms at a 45 degree angle when contact was initiated. It's a foul, even with the Boise State player jumping into him (there is nothing that prohibits that). Dayton got a favorable call at home. That is what tends to happen. It's a big part of the reason why home teams win more than road teams.

I bolded the key part of the rule which is why I believe it wasn't a foul. The defender jumped forward but still landed a foot and a half away from the boise defender (before any contact was made). The boise player had freedom of movement. If he takes a normal jump shot there is no contact at all. He had to make a really weird, awkward forward lunge to initiate contact and even when doing that the defender's feet were already on the ground when contact occurred. It was a bad play by the offensive player.

I generally like Glockner but the guy was about as annoying as could be last night. He spent the entire night whining about Boise having to go to Dayton. The committee had Dayton as one of the last 4 in. Their options were to switch Dayton with a higher rated team and penalize the higher rated team by shipping them to Dayton, or switch Dayton with the last at-large bid so that Dayton didn't make the tournament. I'm sorry, but both those options would have been way worst.

Maybe the NCAA should have two different sites for two different days of First Four games. I'd be fine with that, but they haven't done that and it hasn't been a complaint so far.

None of what you wrote matters. It says nothing in the rule book about "taking a normal jumpshot." There is no such thing as a normal jump shot. If that play happens near the basket and a player jumps toward the basket to shoot and makes contact with a guy leaning forward, it is a foul. That is simply the rule. It is on the defender to go straight up when defending. It should be applied here as well. The refs didn't call it, but it is still a foul.

(03-19-2015 07:57 AM)BigDawg Wrote:  I didn't stay up to watch it, but I just watched the replay. Doesn't look like enough contact to call a foul. The shooter should have jumped into the guys chest to get the call. It looked like the defender tried to avoid him, landed to the shooters left and the shooter kind of acted to get the call, but didn't look like there was really much contact. If you get the defender off your feet, you should go right into them immediately to get the call. BSU's guy did not. Waited for the guy to land and shot it awkwardly, but didn't look like much contact. The shooter was a step slow on getting the call. I wouldn't have called it a foul (Though maybe another angle would show more contact).

BTW...I don't buy the NCAA put them there to sell tickets. The play in games are already very well attended to begin with. One of the reasons it remains is Dayton because it doesn't matter who is playing Dayton, Columbus and Cincy people seem to head to those games pretty well.

In real time I saw no foul. Watching in slow mo there was not enough to call a foul. The BSU player did a poor job in trying to create a foul. I hate these "created foul" attempts being called.

(03-18-2015 11:02 PM)EffinBJ Wrote:  

(03-18-2015 10:46 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(03-18-2015 10:42 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  Dayton may have gotten a homer call there. I get that they swallow the whistle, but that was pretty blatant on the initiating contact move.

I think he gets the call if he takes a normal shot and gets hit like that. Refs really don't like to call it when the jump shooter jumps forward into the defender to force a foul instead of taking a normal shot.

Kemba did the exact same thing in the round of 32 game against UC. After trailing at the half the Bearcats fought back and took the lead. Kemba pulled out the jump into -the-defender foul and on the next possession took about eight steps off a screen for a layup, to wrest back control of the game.

I'm with the announcer - I hate that play, I don't care that it always gets called, it's the offensive equivalent of sliding under an airborne layup attempt inside the restricted zone. Get it out of the game.

That said it's ridiculous that Dayton gets to play there. If I'm Miller I'd recruit kids on that.

"Son, every year we'll get the play in nod because the NCAA and the networks want to show a sold out game and a crowd going nuts. It'll be the only game on TV at that time so the whole country will be watching you play. In front of your home fans."

Why would you recruit on the opportunity to play in the First Four? Hey kids, don't worry if we just barely sneak in to the tournament because we'll get to play at home. Isn't the goal to be better and avoid the First Four?

I agree with what most experts have said, yes it is an advantage to play in your own arena but you either have to punish someone else by putting Dayton ahead of the First Four or you punish Dayton and have them not in the field at all. Not an easy decision for something that likely won't happen most years. Maybe the answer is to find a new home for the First Four in the coming years. I don't have the answer but it was one heck of an atmosphere.

(03-19-2015 07:29 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  I generally like Glockner but the guy was about as annoying as could be last night. He spent the entire night whining about Boise having to go to Dayton. The committee had Dayton as one of the last 4 in. Their options were to switch Dayton with a higher rated team and penalize the higher rated team by shipping them to Dayton, or switch Dayton with the last at-large bid so that Dayton didn't make the tournament. I'm sorry, but both those options would have been way worst.

Maybe the NCAA should have two different sites for two different days of First Four games. I'd be fine with that, but they haven't done that and it hasn't been a complaint so far.

I sort of agree that they didn't have great options, but would it have been that bad to have a different 11 seed play in the First 4 thing? UC is the top 8 seed but is in the top 1 seed's region, it's not like they follow the S-Curve religiously.

(03-19-2015 07:20 AM)Former Lurker Wrote:  So why do we not play Dayton home and away? People say we need the crap OOC games for the money, but wouldn't we do just as well, if not better, by selling out the Shoe every other year for Dayton vs. drawing 4500 every year for Slippery Rock? Plus, games vs Dayton would have at least moderate TV appeal.

UC played Dayton for years and no one cared. The last game about 5 years ago was at US Bank, which gave both teams' fans a chance to go, and there were like 7,000 in attendance.

UC wasn't very good 5 years ago and had a lesser attendance due to other factors. Both teams are tournament caliber now. Attendance would probably be better.

(03-19-2015 10:25 AM)bearcatfan Wrote:  UC wasn't very good 5 years ago and had a lesser attendance due to other factors. Both teams are tournament caliber now. Attendance would probably be better.

UC was a 6 seed that year. That is one of the top 24 teams in the country.

Those who say that wasnt a foul ....would that have been called a foul at the 8 minute mark of the first half?

The Dayton defender was not vertical. He came late at shooter and was off balance. He stopped but his arms were about 120 degrees to the floor and clearly in the way of the shooter. You simply can't reward bad defense just because it's the end of the game and ref doesn't want to influence game...which the ref ultimately did anyway.

A foul should be a foul regardless of when it occurs on the clock.

(03-19-2015 10:37 AM)50Cent Wrote:  Those who say that wasnt a foul ....would that have been called a foul at the 8 minute mark of the first half?

The Dayton defender was not vertical. He came late at shooter and was off balance. He stopped but his arms were about 120 degrees to the floor and clearly in the way of the shooter. You simply can't reward bad defense just because it's the end of the game and ref doesn't want to influence game...which the ref ultimately did anyway.

A foul should be a foul regardless of when it occurs on the clock.

I think it's a play that maybe 10-20% of the time gets called a foul. I don't care when it is in the game, Refs rarely call a foul when a player jumps forward into a defender who has his feet on the ground (and the Dayton defender was planted when the contact occurred). He wasn't 100% vertical so maybe a ref could justify calling it a foul, but I think it rarely gets called as such in that situation. When you force contact by not taking a legitimate shot it's harder to get the call.

(03-19-2015 10:37 AM)50Cent Wrote:  Those who say that wasnt a foul ....would that have been called a foul at the 8 minute mark of the first half?

The Dayton defender was not vertical. He came late at shooter and was off balance. He stopped but his arms were about 120 degrees to the floor and clearly in the way of the shooter. You simply can't reward bad defense just because it's the end of the game and ref doesn't want to influence game...which the ref ultimately did anyway.

A foul should be a foul regardless of when it occurs on the clock.

I would not have ever called that one a foul. The defender was back on his feet and the shooter didn't appear to jump into him. I was taught the if the defender left his feet, you jump into them while they are in the air. Always will get the foul because they left their feet and contact was while both were in the air.

The BSU guy appeared to wait until the Dayton guy was back on the ground and even then, it seemed like minimal contact initiated by the offense and it wasn't even much contact. I would never call that one. Had the Dayton guy still been in the air when the contact happened, I'd call it all day, every day. But that didn't look like the case to me.