From: markham@brtph597.bnr.ca (Andrew Markham P205)
Subject: Re: Dean Smith (Re: UNC TARHEELS--1992/93 NCAA BSKTBLL. CHAMPS)
Organization: BNR Inc. RTP, NC
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 19:10:51 GMT

Steve Williams writes:
>Craig Simpson writes:
>>
>>Now lets comment on his previous statement "UNC and Dean need to do
>>something if they're goin to beat teams in the likes of Michigan."
>>Well Steve, since you did not see the game (since you have seen only
>>one game this year) let me tell you that UNC had the game won, it
>>took a *miraculous* play by Rose to win the game.  Dean could have
>>done nothing to have prevented this play from happening.
>
>Let me point out something.  Why did UNC happen to have a slim (one-point)
>lead near the end of the game?  This is another characteristic of the
>UNC teams, which explains why many teams pull an upset at the last second,
>just like what Michigan did.

UNC had a slim (one-point) lead near the end of the game because they
were playing a fairly talented team from Michigan on a neutral court.
If you think that because UNC is talented they should be ahead of EVERY
team (no matter how good they are) by 10+ pts at the end of the game,
you need to wake up and smell the coffee.

>>>And as for UNC's now-established reputation of slow starts.... UNC can
>>>get away with this in games against weaker opponents, but certainly
>>>not against teams like Michigan.  Why hasn't Dean Smith been able to
>>>solve this "slow start" problem?
>>
>>Just what do you consider a "slow start"?
>
>At opening tip-off, when UNC immediately falls behind by at least 8
>points and has to spend the rest of the half catching up, this is what
>I call a slow start.  By the way, this is another characteristic of
>the UNC teams.  Not only in first half, but also in second half.

I agree that UNC has a habit of getting off to a slow start in the first
half, but I have RARELY seen them do the same in the second half.  IMHO,
they are almost ALWAYS a second half team, that can take over close games
early in the second half.

>>With all of the great comebacks over the years, how can you say that
>>Dean's skills can be questioned?  If slow starts are a part on UNC's
>>history, so is UNC's comebacks.  You can not do this if the coach can
>>not make adjustments.
>
>True.  UNC has had several great comebacks.  However, UNC shouldn't
>have gotten so far behind in the first place.  Furthermore, I don't
>remember any UNC comebacks against strong teams in the NCAA playoffs.

Is UNC any different from other programs?  Just the other night Duke
was down by 9 (or was it 11) early in the first half to Oklahoma and
they came back and then Oklahoma came back.  I don't watch all their
games, but can assume that over the past few years they have been
down early and come back later to win some of their games.

Perhaps the same is true for Duke, Kansas, Kentucky, Indiana, etc...
Unless you watch EVERYONE of their games, you cannot simply assume
that because they win, they never come from behind.

>Perhaps you'll like to humor us by explaining why UNC lost to Kansas
>two years ago in the Final Four?  Or what about the loss to Ohio State
>in the NCAA playoffs last year?  In both games UNC was favored to win.

Perhaps you'll like to humor us by explaining how Villanove, NCSU, and
Kansas won their titles in the 80's?  The odds were certainly against
them.  And what about that Duke title over UNLV?

>>(3) Dean should have been able to stop Webber and Rose.
>>
>>    Come on Steve, give me a break.  These are two *great* players
>>    who will never be *stopped*.
>
>How come Duke was able to deal with Webber and Rose while beating Michigan
>last year in the NCAA Championship game and again, earlier this season?
>To say that Webber and Rose would never be stopped is ridiculous; these
>players are very good, but they're not supermen.  Also, Michigan isn't
>a two-man team; there are also three other Michigan players on the court
>along with Webber and Rose.  It takes real teamwork to win games.

Duke vs. Michigan last year is not applicable.  Duke vs. Michigan this
year was on Duke's home-court.  Michigan has also been getting a lot
of press lately on how much better they are playing now than at the
beginning of the season.

>>Lastly, this was not a upset.
>
>Not an upset????  UNC was favored to win the game, and UNC was ranked
>higher than Michigan.  Therefore, UNC was supposed to win.

Sh*t happens.  Fair-weather fan, eh?

>I am an UNC fan who happens to know that Dean Smith isn't a basketball
>god.  Perhaps just an angel or a saint or something.  Perhaps another
>NCAA title will make Dean a god? :-)

He's only had two double-digit loss years over the last quarter of a
century.  People can judge coaches on whatever they want.  Some (ME)
choose championships, some (YOU) choose winning.

Hell, if he won one this year and didn't for another 10 you would be
bitching about him only having won two.

-- 
Andrew W. Markham (markham@bnr.ca)
Bell Northern Research, Inc.