I know this is hard for you to grasp and I understand that, but Coach R did everything in the book to get this team to respond after losing their leader and nobody and I mean nobody stepped up to the plate to take the reins.

 

I understand the situation. And I would completely see it, IF this were a small school with lesser resources. The program at Highlands should not be in a position where losing one player destroys the sesaon. JMHO

And if the other team "walks" within a 6 feet of the player "standing still with the ball doing nothing", it's a 5 second call and a turnover.

 

Tell me again who wasn't competing?

 

I wasn't at the game, but based on what I'm reading, this wasn't the 4 corner offense that Dean Smith ran where all 5 players were handling the ball and moving. Notre Dame applied ZERO pressure. (again..only an opinion based on other posters comments)

 

Nor did HHS at the start of the 2nd half.... that is applied zero pressure!

Looks like a Bellevue fan is not a happy kitten today. LOL

 

 

Hahaha! You think! But really looks like one of your "peeps" from the Hill. Man, stop hatin!

 

I love it that Coach Richey has everybody's panties in a ruffle. All these excuses are comical. Oh and hey wheats, don't forget your roots there my friend. A big ole WOW to you!!!

Nor did HHS at the start of the 2nd half.... that is applied zero pressure!

 

What I understand from the game is that HHS scored their first 2 points of the game within a minute of the start of the second half and played a 2-3 zone back on D and ND had no answer for the zone and after a minute and a half of running their offense ND called timeout and came out and held the ball to force HHS out of the zone. Down 4 to a team you lost by 28 points why would you want to come out of a defense that had ND uncomfortable? If I had said HHS had a shot to take the lead with 3 minutes remaining or a semi contested 4 footer to tie the game with two minutesn remaining I would have been told to take the blue tinted glasses off. Every prediction had ND winning BIG. The coach who I talked to who was watching the game told me that he felt if ND would have just continued to play pressure D on HHS in the first quarter ND would have forced HHS to change their gameplan.

What I understand from the game is that HHS scored their first 2 points of the game within a minute of the start of the second half .

 

I don't think that is true. I believe they had 0 after 3 quarters.

I don't think that is true. I believe they had 0 after 3 quarters.

 

You are correct. Game must have been going to quick for my buddy.:sssh:

I have mixed feelings in the strategy. First, is the object to give your team the best chance to win or to have your players "experience" playing in a regional game on a college floor?

 

I couldn't name one player on either team and have only seen less than 10 girls games in my life but I guess if I was a parent of one of the girls I would like to see my daughter play a "normal" style game just for the sake of watching her play instead of stand around even though she probably would have little chance of winning. So I would say the parents on here hate the style played when the coach was trying to win any way possible and the fans, probably of underdog HHS, liked the strategy because they just want to win and it almost worked.

 

I didn't see the game but with the disparity in high school girls scores throughout the season, if NDA is a lot better than HHS then the NDA coach could have pressed and trapped and caused turnovers and take HHS out of this strategy. Just my opinion.

 

Would you feel the same way if, let's say, your son was the star QB of his team's football team? Throws the ball with a ton of success all year long. Come the first playoff game, his team is matched up against a team with a very high powered offense as well as a very good pass defense. Your son's coach analyzes the opponent and then decides that he is going to play a keep away offense and pound the ball all night long to keep the ball out of the other team's hands. Your son doesn't get one chance to throw the ball but because the decision of his coach, his team actually has a chance of winning the game late but loses 7-0.

 

If my son is the QB, I'm very content with the coach's decision. It's a team sport and the number one objective of any game and of every game is to win. That means taking advantage of every method within the rules to win. To many running the football every play and losing 7-0 maybe very, very boring. To me, it's great coaching if the coach didn't think he had a chance of winning running his normal offense. Jaime is a pretty smart basketball coach. She's kind of been up and down the bball court a time or two. I trust her judgment completely.

The bottom line on stall ball is this. Sports is about competition and trying your best at all times to prove you and your team are better and more skilled than your opponent. In stall ball, one team is choosing not to compete. Call it strategy if you want but if you have your team standing still with the ball doing nothing, there is no competitive action taking place. That is why it bothers people. Stall ball is not competing.

 

Do you feel the same about running the football on every down to eat up the clock and limit the other team's offensive possessions? If not, why is it any different? Help me out here. I see an amazingly strong similarity between what Jaime did and what many football coaches try to do when they are matched up against a very powerful offense.

Here is what is so shocking to me. Folks are saying the only way for Highlands to win was to pull off this game plan. Is there really that much of a difference between the # 3 team in the region and a # 6 team?? Highlands had a winning record going into this game and had thrown up 81 points on the 20th of this month and 98 on the 22nd. I did see that Notre Dame crushed Highlands during the regular season, but still don't understand the thought process. It's just bad for the game! Bad for the girls, bad for the fans. Highlands only played in 3 games this year where the score was decided by 4 points or less. Not fun to watch! This will not help attendance to girls games just like when they tried switching the games to Friday every other month.

 

No offense TAC but I'll take Jaime's knowledge of the game and her ability to assess her team's chances against NDA over yours. Again, no offense meant.

Another football analogy: you're a coach. Tie game. There's a minute left in the game. The other team is driving and is at about your 30. The other team has a very, very good fieldgoal kicker. Hasn't missed all year. You on the other hand have an explosive offense and have scored quickly all game. You decide to let the other team score. I mean you actually tell your defense to let the other team run unimpeded into the endzone because you are convinced based on your assessment of your team and the other team that they are likely to eat up the rest of the clock and kick a last second field goal to win the game. You decide you'd rather go down 7 but at least have a minute or so to score and go for two and the win. Is it wrong to tell those kids playing defense to let the other team score? I sure don't think so. What if it's possibly the last game of the year and your stud LBer is one tackle away of breaking the tackle record? I still don't think so. Face it, if a football coach successfully used that strategy to win a game, 99% of the people on this site would be calling him a genius. A big risk taker, but a genius.

What I understand from the game is that HHS scored their first 2 points of the game within a minute of the start of the second half and played a 2-3 zone back on D and ND had no answer for the zone and after a minute and a half of running their offense ND called timeout and came out and held the ball to force HHS out of the zone. Down 4 to a team you lost by 28 points why would you want to come out of a defense that had ND uncomfortable? If I had said HHS had a shot to take the lead with 3 minutes remaining or a semi contested 4 footer to tie the game with two minutesn remaining I would have been told to take the blue tinted glasses off. Every prediction had ND winning BIG. The coach who I talked to who was watching the game told me that he felt if ND would have just continued to play pressure D on HHS in the first quarter ND would have forced HHS to change their gameplan.

 

So now you agree you were wrong in your account, so why didn't HHS come out and pressure NDA? I mean a loss by 1 or a loss by 70 is still a loss no matter what!

Eleven pages later! :isurrender: By the way, I just deducted $4.00 from my tuition payment!:laugh:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]35905[/ATTACH]

 

THis shot would have put Highlands ahead with about 1.5 minutes to go. It fell short. I get how this was a strategy to win the game but no one, absolutely no one would attend games if this strategy were employed regularly. Can you say shot clock?

 

You work all game for a shot and the best one you can get is a 22 footer?

So now you agree you were wrong in your account, so why didn't HHS come out and pressure NDA? I mean a loss by 1 or a loss by 70 is still a loss no matter what!

 

I was wrong, they were down by six going into the fourth quarter and had a chance to tie with 2 minutes remaining. No one is debating that the better team won and a HHS lost. The debate here is what was the best strategy for HHS to use to have a chance to win the game. If they try and run with ND it's a blowout so why is it so hard to understand that what HHS did and the strategy they used gave them the best opportunity to win the game. I still contend that ND's coach played right into it.

You work all game for a shot and the best one you can get is a 22 footer?

 

Actually the best shot was the 4 footer that HHS missed with 2 minutes remaining to tie the game.