Penn State 83, Illinois 76 POSTGAME

#101      
The reason, I think, others do not follow the Chambers game plan is that our team does sleep walk, like they did in this game.

We did beat Maryland and MSU with the exact defense. And played very well at WI, IIRC.

Let us see what happens when we visit PSU in two weeks. I expect a far superior product.

Having said that, there is really no reason to play the way we did. This and the remaining games are crucial. How that escaped both coaches and the players is beyond me. But then I have my share of goof ups too.

The part I find concerning is the “one size fits all” approach we seem to take for game planning and prep. The B1G is way too good of conference with too good of coaches for that.

PSU is the worst three point shooting team in the league, and their strength is dribble penetration. The over-pressure was exactly what they needed from us to take advantage of us. Coachingillini is correct, Chambers game plan was good (did what Rutgers did) and played to their strengths.

It’s also the reason Iowa and Wisconsin beat us so easily. They both pass a very high level and force rotations out of that over pressure that get our defense discombobulated.

The bottom line is as much as I’ve enjoyed our recent wins, I see some trends that concern me long term with the lack of flexibility in the systems on both sides of the ball.
 
#102      
Robert from Illini board, com was way to negative. We got manhandled, we do not have the strength this season. Kofi coming in next year will help with getting bullied by a team like PSU. We also got jobbed on the physicality of the game. If this game is called differently we win. We also had all the young kids have an off night together. This is the kind of game where a decent Kipper would have been a difference maker. He just doesn't have it in him this season.

No Big Deal, whose next?
 
#103      
He just doesn't have it in him
I like the post and its sentiment. Above is the only necessary adjustment.

Games like this still make me miss Tilmon. Can you imagine a 1+2 punch post combo of Giorgi and a properly-developed Tilmon? Good grief.
 
#104      

APS iMBA

Urbana, IL
Unfortunately the last two games have gone the way I pretty much expected. I expect Penn State to beat us there too, although it would be nice to split that series. This is a mostly young team and it shows. They're still a ton of fun to watch though, so don't regret having watched it with the expectations I went in with.
 
#105      

Deleted member 500209

D
Guest
I like the post and its sentiment. Above is the only necessary adjustment.

Games like this still make me miss Tilmon. Can you imagine a 1+2 punch post combo of Giorgi and a properly-developed Tilmon? Good grief.
Missouri would trade him right now for a four of clubs. See Tigerboard
 
#106      

Deleted member 500209

D
Guest
I am sure Griffin is playing better in practice to warrant playing time.

Dre was in the arc when the "foul" happened. I think Jordan fouled the guy as well. Likely before he was in the shooting motion. It was at a pivotal point in the game, however the net result would only differ by them getting a 1 and 1 and us getting 2 shots. Bardo kept saying that PSU was going to get the ball, not sure what confused him, but the whole sequence was confusing.

The above was not the problem. We got our butts kicked and weren't hitting from the outside to compensate. Dre was great, the rest of the team mediocre at best. Was thinking of possibly driving ~6 hours to PSU to see that game, but the spurt of enthusiasm is waning again.

Go ILLINI.
Not a rules expert but I don’t t think the arc rule applies on elbow throws, only charges taken when the offensive guy is jumping/landing. Given that basketball is highly leveraged to momentum swings, it was a critical and game changing call.

Agree with rest of your post. Also not sure my interpretation of arc rule is correct and too lazy to research.
 
#107      
IdahoIllini —

From someone who has watched college basketball since the 50's (my first real college basketball memory is of watching Elgin Baylor in a Seattle uniform — everyone thought they’d suited up the heavyweight champion), I couldn’t agree with you more. There are reasons why there is such a thing as a zone defense — one of those being to hinder penetration. Limit your capabilities and you hamstring your team. Teach zone defense hand-in-hand with man-to-man — you’ll improve your team, confound your detractors and frustrate your foes.

What, exactly, is the downside to being equally disposed to (should the circumstances warrant) and adept at both types of defenses ?
 
#108      
Not a rules expert but I don’t t think the arc rule applies on elbow throws, only charges taken when the offensive guy is jumping/landing. Given that basketball is highly leveraged to momentum swings, it was a critical and game changing call.

Agree with rest of your post. Also not sure my interpretation of arc rule is correct and too lazy to research.

Here are the rules for the restricted arc copied straight out the NCAA Men's Basketball Rule Book that I happen to have handy:

Art. 14. A secondary defender as defined in Rule 4-36 cannot establish initial legal
guarding position in the restricted area for the purpose of drawing an offensive foul
when defending a player who is in control of the ball (i.e., dribbling or shooting)
or who has released the ball for a pass or try. When illegal contact occurs within
this restricted area, such contact shall be called a blocking foul, unless the contact
is a flagrant foul.
a. When illegal contact occurs by the offensive player leading with a foot or
unnatural, extended knee, or warding off with the arm, such contact shall be
called a player-control foul.
b. When a player in control of the ball stops continuous movement toward
the basket and then initiates illegal contact with a secondary defender in the
restricted area, this is a player control foul.
c. This restriction shall not apply to a secondary defender who establishes legal
guardian position in the Restricted Area Arc and jumps straight up with
arms in legal verticality position and attempts to block a shot.
Art. 15. Illegal contact caused by the swinging of the elbow(s) that:
a. Results from total body movement is a common or flagrant 1 personal foul;
b. Is excessive per Rule 4-18.7 is a flagrant 2 foul, or
c. Occurs above or below the shoulders of an opponent is a common, flagrant
1 or flagrant 2 personal foul.
Art. 16. Illegal (not incidental) contact with an elbow that does not involve the
swinging of the elbow shall be considered a foul.

Rule 4-18.7 flagrant 2 foul
Flagrant 2 personal foul. A flagrant 2 personal foul is a personal foul
that involves contact with an opponent that is not only excessive, but also
severe or extreme while the ball is live. In determining whether a foul has
risen to the level of a flagrant 2, officials should consider the following:
1. The severity of the contact;
2. Whether a player is making a legitimate effort to block a shot. Note
that a player may still be assessed a flagrant 2 foul on an attempted
blocked shot when there are other factors such as hard contact to the
head or the defender winding up or emphatically following through
with the contact);
3. The potential for injury resulting from the contact (e.g., a blow to
the head or a foul committed while the player was in a vulnerable
position), and
4 Any contact by the offending player to the groin area of an opponent
which is not clearly accidental.
5. Any foul similar to the foul described in Rule 4-15.2.c.7 in which
the contact, or the result of the contact, is not only excessive but also
severe or extreme.
 
#110      
I wish Dummies would put out an edition on NCAA basketball rules.
It's pretty simple in this case. All three players (Feliz, Jordan and the Penn State player) went for the rebound. The ball came off the rim and the Penn State player grabbed it, before the two Illini players, and immediately cleared out Feliz with his elbow. The arc rule wasn't in play, since all three players were jumping to get the ball, so it wasn't a blocking or charge in the arc situation. Instead, it was a clear out, with the elbow, by the offensive player. A text book offensive foul, and a flagrant foul 2, since that elbow could of caused a serious injury, including a possible concussion considering how hard the blow was to the head.
 
Last edited:
#111      
I will say that it was likely the worst refereed game I’ve ever seen in person. Bright side is my 13 year old learned a new chant from the orange crush. “Something these refs!” Forget what that first word was...
 
#112      

Deleted member 29907

D
Guest
It's pretty simple in this case. All three players (Feliz, Jordan and the Penn State player) went for the rebound. The ball came off the rim and the Penn State player grabbed it, before the two Illini players, and immediately cleared out Feliz with his elbow. The arc rule wasn't in play, since all three players were jumping to get the ball, so it wasn't a blocking or charge in the arc situation. Instead, it was a clear out, with the elbow, by the offensive player. A text book offensive foul, and a flagrant foul 2, since that elbow could of caused a serious injury, including a possible concussion considering how hard the blow was to the head.
Correct. And the arc rule does not apply to the primary defender which Feliz was at that point.
 
#113      
Those calls make absolutely no sense together. I don’t see how it can be a foul on Feliz and be a flagrant on the PSU player. Has to be one or the other. Counting the basket that didn’t go in made the whole thing more ridiculous.

This is exactly what I was screaming at the game. These are completely incompatible calls. Also, unbelievable that they called it on the shote.
 
#114      
That’s how the rules are written. You can’t overturn a foul call. However you can assess a flagrant/technical that might have been missed.

I have actually seen them overturn calls a number of times. Didn't it just happen against WI and Happ on the hook and hold? Also, happened last year (against PSU maybe?)
 
#115      
Definitely a disappointing loss. I was watching I believe the ND-Va Tech game and one of the announcers (can't remember who) said Notre Dame needs to hit their layups and free throws to win. That goes triple for the Illini. They also need to get Ayo going in the first half. I believe he had no points against PSU and 3 against Wisky in first half. Previous 3 games he had averaged 9 points in first half. I love that he's a great finisher, but we need him to be at least a good starter too.
 
#116      
Definitely a disappointing loss. I was watching I believe the ND-Va Tech game and one of the announcers (can't remember who) said Notre Dame needs to hit their layups and free throws to win. That goes triple for the Illini. They also need to get Ayo going in the first half. I believe he had no points against PSU and 3 against Wisky in first half. Previous 3 games he had averaged 9 points in first half. I love that he's a great finisher, but we need him to be at least a good starter too.
Teams have made adjustments to defend Ayo better. Now it's time for Underwood to counter.