Home› Sports Talk
Options

Wichita State is 31-0. If UNC were 31-0, would you "tank" the ACC Tournament?

halfcentmanhalfcentman Posts: 1,498 ✭✭✭
in Sports Talk
Let's say that a team like UNC or Duke was 31-0 instead of Wichita State.

As the coach, would you "tank" the tournament by not playing any of your starters and risk them getting injured?

Logically, if UNC were 31-0, the ACC tournament would have zero equity for them as far as getting the overall number one seed, as any actual result be mutually exclusive from getting the overall, #1 seed in the "Big Dance."

As far as the undefeated season is concerned, that means almost nothing. The goal is not to go after past history. If that happened, that's a bonus. The goal is to take home the entire enchilada as they say.

Besides that, there would be a lot of equity for UNC with regards to giving non-starters some valuable, non-garbage time playing time.

What are your thoughts?

Comments

  • Options
    MGLICKERMGLICKER Posts: 7,995 ✭✭✭
    If I am being paid $5,000,000 or even $5 a year to coach a team, my goal is to win every game. Anything less is a fraud.

    Seeds are overblown. If #16 beats number one in the first round, they are now #1 for the remainder of the tournament, no?
  • Options
    DboneesqDboneesq Posts: 18,220 ✭✭
    .
    STAY HEALTHY!

    Doug

    Liquidating my collection for the 3rd and final time. Time for others to enjoy what I have enjoyed over the last several decades. Money could be put to better use.
  • Options
    halfcentmanhalfcentman Posts: 1,498 ✭✭✭


    << <i>If I am being paid $5,000,000 or even $5 a year to coach a team, my goal is to win every game. Anything less is a fraud.

    Seeds are overblown. If #16 beats number one in the first round, they are now #1 for the remainder of the tournament, no? >>



    It has nothing to do with seeding. If UNC were 31-0, their seeding would be the same regardless of what occurred in the results of the tournament given the way the other teams are currently.

    UConn women were in this position years ago. I do not know what they did, but I will look it up.
  • Options
    MGLICKERMGLICKER Posts: 7,995 ✭✭✭


    << <i>It has nothing to do with seeding >>



    Correct. I should have separated my two points better.
  • Options
    markj111markj111 Posts: 2,921 ✭✭✭


    << <i>If I am being paid $5,000,000 or even $5 a year to coach a team, my goal is to win every game. Anything less is a fraud.

    Seeds are overblown. If #16 beats number one in the first round, they are now #1 for the remainder of the tournament, no? >>





    NO. Your goal is to win the NCAA championship. Do you bring in your best reliever in the top of the ninth if you are down by 5? Of course not (unless it's an elimination game), yet that represents your best chance of winning the game.
  • Options
    MGLICKERMGLICKER Posts: 7,995 ✭✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>If I am being paid $5,000,000 or even $5 a year to coach a team, my goal is to win every game. Anything less is a fraud.

    Seeds are overblown. If #16 beats number one in the first round, they are now #1 for the remainder of the tournament, no? >>





    NO. Your goal is to win the NCAA championship. Do you bring in your best reliever in the top of the ninth if you are down by 5? Of course not (unless it's an elimination game), yet that represents your best chance of winning the game. >>



    You are submitting a different scenario.

    If I am down 20 in a game with 5 minutes left, starters get benched. That is not the same as entering the game with a losing game plan. I recall The undefeated Indy Colts throwing the seasons final game to rest the A players. How did that work out?
  • Options
    PowderedH2OPowderedH2O Posts: 2,443 ✭✭
    In the words of Herman Edwards, "You play to win the game." Tank nothing. Just win, baby.
    Successful dealings with shootybabitt, LarryP, Doctor K, thedutymon, billsgridirongreats, fattymacs, shagrotn77, pclpads, JMDVM, gumbyfan, itzagoner, rexvos, al032184, gregm13, californiacards3, mccardguy1, BigDaddyBowman, bigreddog, bobbyw8469, burke23, detroitfan2, drewsef, jeff8877, markmac, Goldlabels, swartz1, blee1, EarlsWorld, gseaman25, kcballboy, jimrad, leadoff4, weinhold, Mphilking, milbroco, msassin, meteoriteguy, rbeaton and gameusedhoop.
  • Options
    EstilEstil Posts: 6,923 ✭✭✭✭
    Well we basically "tanked" the 1996 SEC title game...and that worked out in the end. Though if you are actually undefeated this far in, why not go for running the table? Not to mention to see a out-of-nowhere team like Wichita State doing so.
    WISHLIST
    Dimes: 54S, 53P, 50P, 49S, 45D+S, 44S, 43D, 41S, 40D+S, 39D+S, 38D+S, 37D+S, 36S, 35D+S, all 16-34's
    Quarters: 52S, 47S, 46S, 40S, 39S, 38S, 37D+S, 36D+S, 35D, 34D, 32D+S
    74 Topps: 37,38,46,47,48,138,151,193,210,214,223,241,256,264,268,277,289,316,435,552,570,577,592,602,610,654,655
    1997 Finest silver: 115, 135, 139, 145, 310
    1995 Ultra Gold Medallion Sets: Golden Prospects, HR Kings, On-Base Leaders, Power Plus, RBI Kings, Rising Stars
  • Options
    halfcentmanhalfcentman Posts: 1,498 ✭✭✭


    << <i>Well we basically "tanked" the 1996 SEC title game...and that worked out in the end. Though if you are actually undefeated this far in, why not go for running the table? Not to mention to see a out-of-nowhere team like Wichita State doing so. >>



    Wichita State and a high-profile team like UNC are totally different.

    Running the table is immaterial if the tournament has no value if you are going to be the overall, #1 seed regardless of how the ACC tournament would play out. There is nothing to gain and everything to lose.

    Also, the undefeated record is NOT a valid argument here: It is the gap between you and your competition that is important. Even if there the SLIGHTEST doubt that it would not be certain that you would have an overall #1 seed, the option not to play the starters would be completely off of the table.

    ...and as I mentioned prior, even though the tournament would have zero equity as far as seeding is concerned, it has a tremendous amount of equity as far as giving bench players quality playing time. Not only does this aid a strong team in case something does happen to a starter during the actual tournament, but they have a lot to play for if they are returning to school the following season.

  • Options
    SanctionIISanctionII Posts: 11,732 ✭✭✭✭✭
    It would be absolutely "Shocking" for the 34-0 "Shockers" to run the table March Madness and win the title as the 8th team to run the table for an entire season (joining the 1976 Indiana Hoosiers; the 1964, 1967, 1972 and 1973 UCLA Bruins; the 1957 North Carloina Tar Heels; and the 1956 University Of San Francisco Dons).
  • Options
    EstilEstil Posts: 6,923 ✭✭✭✭
    To hear Bob "sour grapes" Knight put it, his 1975 team should've also run the table, but a certain someone crashed that party! image
    WISHLIST
    Dimes: 54S, 53P, 50P, 49S, 45D+S, 44S, 43D, 41S, 40D+S, 39D+S, 38D+S, 37D+S, 36S, 35D+S, all 16-34's
    Quarters: 52S, 47S, 46S, 40S, 39S, 38S, 37D+S, 36D+S, 35D, 34D, 32D+S
    74 Topps: 37,38,46,47,48,138,151,193,210,214,223,241,256,264,268,277,289,316,435,552,570,577,592,602,610,654,655
    1997 Finest silver: 115, 135, 139, 145, 310
    1995 Ultra Gold Medallion Sets: Golden Prospects, HR Kings, On-Base Leaders, Power Plus, RBI Kings, Rising Stars
  • Options
    markj111markj111 Posts: 2,921 ✭✭✭


    << <i>To hear Bob "sour grapes" Knight put it, his 1975 team should've also run the table, but a certain someone crashed that party! image >>



    It did not help that Scott May was playing with a broken arm. OTOH, only a horrible charging/block call let Indiana beat Alabama in the tournament in 76.
  • Options
    EstilEstil Posts: 6,923 ✭✭✭✭
    Just to be fair and balanced, an injured Derek Anderson no doubt cost us gold in 1997...though he did get to make a "cameo" so to speak during a game to shoot free throws off a technical. But Pitino didn't want to be selfish and risk further injuring him and his possible NBA career just to win another title.
    WISHLIST
    Dimes: 54S, 53P, 50P, 49S, 45D+S, 44S, 43D, 41S, 40D+S, 39D+S, 38D+S, 37D+S, 36S, 35D+S, all 16-34's
    Quarters: 52S, 47S, 46S, 40S, 39S, 38S, 37D+S, 36D+S, 35D, 34D, 32D+S
    74 Topps: 37,38,46,47,48,138,151,193,210,214,223,241,256,264,268,277,289,316,435,552,570,577,592,602,610,654,655
    1997 Finest silver: 115, 135, 139, 145, 310
    1995 Ultra Gold Medallion Sets: Golden Prospects, HR Kings, On-Base Leaders, Power Plus, RBI Kings, Rising Stars
  • Options
    EstilEstil Posts: 6,923 ✭✭✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>To hear Bob "sour grapes" Knight put it, his 1975 team should've also run the table, but a certain someone crashed that party! image >>



    It did not help that Scott May was playing with a broken arm. OTOH, only a horrible charging/block call let Indiana beat Alabama in the tournament in 76. >>



    Yeah why doesn't 70s NCAA tournament games get more attention? Perhaps the fact that there were no seeds prior to 1978 and/or far less good footage?
    WISHLIST
    Dimes: 54S, 53P, 50P, 49S, 45D+S, 44S, 43D, 41S, 40D+S, 39D+S, 38D+S, 37D+S, 36S, 35D+S, all 16-34's
    Quarters: 52S, 47S, 46S, 40S, 39S, 38S, 37D+S, 36D+S, 35D, 34D, 32D+S
    74 Topps: 37,38,46,47,48,138,151,193,210,214,223,241,256,264,268,277,289,316,435,552,570,577,592,602,610,654,655
    1997 Finest silver: 115, 135, 139, 145, 310
    1995 Ultra Gold Medallion Sets: Golden Prospects, HR Kings, On-Base Leaders, Power Plus, RBI Kings, Rising Stars
Sign In or Register to comment.