Is this how 77 & 81 felt?

[TarHeelMark]

Now that I've had a few days to get over the initial pain... I will say that I still think it's worse to me than 77 or 81. In '77, I was a young'un that was just starting to become a UNC fan (Phil Ford won me over). It was the first NCAA championship game I remember watching, and while it did suck, I was still too new of a basketball fan to realize how difficult it is to get there and then lose. In '81, I actually had to work (part-time, teenager job), so I didn't see the game and in the pre-VCR days wasn't able to record it. I recall sneaking in a couple of radio updates during the game, but not having actually watched the game it didn't seem to hurt as bad.

From 1982 on, every time the Heels reached the Final Four, they either lost the semifinal game or won the whole enchilada. Losing in the semis sucks (especially 98), but that was easier to swallow than getting beat in the finals. And to lose the way we did... REALLY, REALLY hurts. We will have to watch that damn shot forever now when March Madness comes around, and I'll want to vomit every time I see it. If we had just played 5 seconds of freakin' D, I feel confident that we win in OT. I still don't get why Roy didn't put Hicks on the inbounder and make it extremely difficult for him to get an easy pass, but I'm not a HOF coach, so what the hell do I know?

 

[baboo]

You don't know that for sure,going into OT Carolina would've had the Big Mo knowing they still could win. That's just an arrogant statement plain and simple,Jenkins shot wasn't designed,he just threw it up and it went period.

I agree that we have no idea who would have won in OT. Maybe Big MO matters, maybe it doesn't. But the idea that Jenkin's shot, or at least the play itself, wasn't designed is factually wrong. All the players were clear that they practice the 5-seconds-to-go play EVERY DAY. There are four shooting options on the play with Arch first and Jenkins last. Arch has to go through the options just like a quarterback going through his progressions for receivers. Since Arch didn't have a clear shot, he passed it back to Jenkins, as the play is designed to do. Since Jenkins was squared up and unguarded (that's UNC's fault), the shot was a gimmie. No way he misses it under those circumstances. Bottom line, the play was successful because it was a designed and practiced play that UNC didn't guard well.

 

[mikeirbyusa]

That was 2 of the most clutch shots I ever saw less than 5 sec apart. No doubt in my mind it was a called play. Wish we had been on the winning end but we weren't. Nova was HOT in the final 4. Plain and simple.

 

[gary-7]

"Attitude" and "Next Play" -- are what produced the last shot that won the game. And they likely would have produced the same result in overtime.

GMAFB. The only things that could have helped you in overtime were wearing striped shirts. GTFO;

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

Nova played a better game, but thinking they would have won had the game gone to OT is fairly ridiculous. They had just crapped away a 10 point lead in 3 minutes. Of course, we'll never know.

 

[baboo]

Nova played a better game, but thinking they would have won had the game gone to OT is fairly ridiculous. They had just crapped away a 10 point lead in 3 minutes. Of course, we'll never know.

The outcome in OT would be uncertain, by your own admission, so it's not "ridiculous" to think that 'Nova would have won. Nate Silver's site fivethirtyeight keeps a running win probability during the games. At the beginning of OT, he probably would have 'Nova slightly favored because he had 'Nova slightly favored before the game started.

That UNC had just come back from 10 down was impressive, but it's unclear that so-called momentum carries over. Since the comeback was based on UNC working extra hard to get back into the game and in part on some spectacular shots by Paige, it is unlikely that the momentum would have been sustained throughout overtime.

Finally, it's totally false to say that 'Nova crapped away the lead. Other than Arch's throwaway ball near the end (which may have been tipped by UNC), 'Nova was still playing well. UNC was just tightening the screws and playing spectacular ball, so I prefer to give credit to UNC for the comeback. I think you do your own team a disservice by saying they only came back because 'Nova choked. 'Nova didn't choke; UNC just played really well at the end.

 

[HeelFan58]

gary-7,

Interesting perspective you have. So if I'm incorrect on all counts, that means UNC is not great team with quality people, didn't play very well, and doesn't have more talent? Way to diss your own team. Or do you just mean you disagree with SOME of my points?

Oddly enough, I do agree with you completely that 'Nova played over their heads. I thought of putting those exact words in my original post, but ended up not doing it. That's how they played at an unprecedented level.

As far as UNC being the better team, that is certainly debatable. Look at the standard analytics, which are not biased by fan interest.

_________________'Nova___________UNC
Pomeroy_________#1 (0.9633)____#2 (0.9522)
Sagarin__________#1 (94.26)______#3 (93.33)
BPI (before NCAAs)_#3 (88.8)______#1 (90.3)
RPI (before NCAAs)_#4 (0.6455)____#5 (0.6420)
Record___________35 - 5_________33 - 7

All but one of these metrics, which account for the whole season (not just one game), favor Villanova. I still wouldn't say that 'Nova is clearly the better team, but there's little to recommend the idea that UNC is better. Without question, though, 'Nova was the better team IN THE TOURNEY. Anyway, there's no shame in losing to the better team.

Finally, with regard to the referees, lots of calls get missed during the heat of the game. There's no reason to think those mistakes favored one side or the other, and any notion that the referees were out to get UNC is just, well..., that claim is not worthy of your team or your fan base.

so .......how do you account for 8 fouls in a row called on UNC , especially since UNCdoesn't play as aggressive a style of defense?

 

[baboo]

so .......how do you account for 8 fouls in a row called on UNC , especially since UNCdoesn't play as aggressive a style of defense?

Random bad luck? I don't know, is a string of fouls like that without the other team getting any so unusual? Are you suggesting that that string of fouls was due to bias by the refs against UNC? If so, why didn't it continue later in the game? Games ebb and flow. So do foul calls. It seems like an awfully big and unjustified mental jump to suspect wrongdoing by the refs.

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

I think you do your own team a disservice by saying they only came back because 'Nova choked. 'Nova didn't choke; UNC just played really well at the end.

That's weird, I don't remember saying Nova choked. They had a 10 point lead, which they at one point no longer had. It can be said it was crapped away (whether that was of their own doing, or UNCs). I tend to agree with you that UNC was more responsible for the comeback than Nova was. But by all means, keep putting words in my mouth if that helps your narrative.

 

[baboo]

That's weird, I don't remember saying Nova choked. They had a 10 point lead, which they at one point no longer had. It can be said it was crapped away (whether that was of their own doing, or UNCs). I tend to agree with you that UNC was more responsible for the comeback than Nova was. But by all means, keep putting words in my mouth if that helps your narrative.

I'm not trying to put words in your mouth. I've always understood "crapped away" as implying a kind of choking, especially due to panicking, as in "I crapped my pants." If that's not what you intended, my apologies.

 

[Archer2]

This will make everyone feel a little better. At least some of the kids in Durham are getting proper schooling. Scroll down for the video. Nice!

http://www.sportingnews.com/ncaa-ba...-heels-national-championship-kids-cards-video