Thanks CLK, and I will respond with LOVE!  I guess one can make the point that we lost because of his outburst at the end, but I really wasn’t saying that either.  My point was just that I thought he got outcoached the second half in the areas I mentioned.  I felt that PSU adjusted the second half to what we were doing, and as we were winning, you keep doing what you were doing until a team stops it.  Well, they did stop it.  Look at the points and the rebounds minimally, in the first half of the second half.  Then, maybe Dambrot did try to adjust to their adjustment, but he didn’t pull off the press when they were beating it.  I totally agree with you on their physical play and some questionable calls, but the fact is, our scoring was abysmal in the first 10 minutes of the second half and that is based on of course the players, but also on how PSU adjusted.  BTW, the whole time I was watching this I thought:
1.  I did not like the negative Ferry chants by a few students
2.  If we came back near the end we would win.

Last edited by FAM (12/20/2018 11:55 am)

ElDuque wrote:

Where is this "out-coached" crap coming from? Point out some examples, or don't say such stupid crap.

Are you outcoached when your team takes bad shots or doesn't hit its shots? Or when the refs make bad calls that decide the outcome? Are you outcoached when your best post player is limited by a knee injury?

This board - "we should be able to have frank discussions about players." Also this board - "You dare insult the coach? Pistols at dawn!"

I did point out some examples though  in my initial post. 

Duquesne's persistent inability to handle zone defenses is a coaching issue. It had a lot to do with taking bad shots, turning the ball over, or not getting a shot off at all. When your opponent makes an adjustment and you can't counter it -  that is coaching. All three losses have the same common factor - Duquesne plays well or well enough for the first half, and after the half, they're unable to match the adjustments their opponents make. In all three cases, granted, the opponents have some physical advantages. There needs to be a game plan for that. 

Dambrot is a very good coach, but when he is coaching against teams with better physical talent, though, he needs to be less stubborn, and prepare for the inevitable zone wrinkles or whatever surprises they will see.  

PSU took 14 more shots than Duquesne did - that is what decided the game, not a bad call at the end. Getting out rebounded, and allowing PSU to dominate the paint did. PSU is a bigger team, but I didn't see an attempted counter for when PSU went big. 

As far as the Hughes injury, if you don't adjust your game plan based on your player's injuries coming into the game, of course, that is a coaching issue. 

 
 

CLK wrote:

And yet with all that perceived horrible coaching the Dukes were in a position to win against that "better physical talent" but for some horrendous officiating.  
 

They shot 32 free throws so I guess live by the refs, die by the refs.

ElDuque wrote:

Where is this "out-coached" crap coming from? Point out some examples, or don't say such stupid crap.

Are you outcoached when your team takes bad shots or doesn't hit its shots? Or when the refs make bad calls that decide the outcome? Are you outcoached when your best post player is limited by a knee injury?

Chambers made a subtle adjustment to their press breaking scheme, Dambrot was slow to react to the shift resulting in just a few easy buckets that were pivotal in changing momentum. Chambers also sent 5 to the offensive glass for the entire 2nd half. Dambrot neither went very big nor sent his guys on run-outs for cheap points.

Neither coach devastated the other in the chess match but Chambers' choices were more effective in the 2nd half. For what it is worth, Dambrot had the much better game plan to start.

Phil, I watched several different versions of what happened,  What I saw was KD outside the coaching box and saying "that's bull" as he turns to walk back he was hit with the first "T".  It was quick.  The "cussing, ranting, jumping came after the quick "T".    

Take another look

https://twitter.com/Steve82939049/status/1075892692012412928

 

I've been hitting a bunch of boards to see if there was any reaction to what happened. One of the best takes was Pitt board from a guy named Sabotuer.

https://pittsburgh.forums.rivals.com/threads/a-completely-disgusting-display-of-officiating-at-the-end-of-this-psu-duq-game.143898/#post-2540267

phil95 wrote:

As I was watching live with my 11 year old daughter I said, just before it was called, that he was going to get "teed-up". (she asked what that meant) Just to make sure, I went back to confirm my earlier observation. After re-watching the last minute or so of the game, Dambrot totally deserved the first T. He was cussing, ranting, jumping a bit, & clearly out of the box. 

Earning the second T, his needing to be physically restrained by both coaches & players, & failure to leave the floor like a gentleman were, in my opinion, a horrible example for his team & an embarrassment to the program. His unacceptable behaviour was exacerbated by his lack of humility & accountabilty in his post-game comments. He did not ACT like a champion. It is one of the few times I can recall a basketball coach taking definitive, specific action that resulted in a team losing its opportunity to compete for victory.

I have lost count of the friends & haters that have contacted me today to ask WTF. There has been plenty of press to make KD out to be a raving lunatic. Even Deadspin picked it up.)

Before last night I suspected  the coincidental conclusion of EW's lesson learning before the most winnable of meaningful games was more about winning than teaching. I now know KD is way more interested in winning than developing. Put that together with his poor judgement at Central Michigan, on-air bullying of Ray, & last night's unfortunate events & you have a guy I probably don't like.

Having written that, I really don't care if he is likeable or not. He is a very good coach & this program is lucky to have him. Provided he doesn't break any laws or get in trouble with the NCAA, I am super-high on Coach Dambrot. I just expect more from a guy that is 60 & is being paid 7 figures to be the face of the program.

 

You hate him then, oh wait, you love him -- no cajones?

09dukes wrote:

What are thoughts on the attention that the game drew Duquesne?  The game was trending on multiple outlets.  If the game ends any other way (no matter who won) you would not hear a peep on ESPN, etc.

I don't love the outburst but at least KD wants to win and showed his players he has their back.  A lot of the outlets I saw made mention to how close the game was throughout evidencing the growing competitiveness of the program.  I'm not saying I agree that he should have lost his mind but I don't think the story line a few weeks from now will be what a disgrace the outburst and ending to the game was.  We may remember it differently once we are able to distance ourselves from last night.

The reaction was a big reason for the national coverage. I took the time to listen to a lot of different outlets take on the game and the four biggest takeaways I got across all outlets were:

1. That was an offensive foul.
2. The first technical was a joke.
3. Keith should not have reacted the way he did but if I was a recruit, I would sure as hell want to play for KD because he has passion and DEFINITELY has my back.
4. The Dukes are on the rise.

Spot on that this would not have got the same coverage had we won. People were saying after the first bs tech, the game was basically over so why not get your moneys worth at that point.

He was heavily lauded throughout the day on 93.7 the fan, which Duquesne never gets coverage there unless it’s negative. They played his post game presser and made a great point.

KD said something to the effect of “Coach k would never get that T”. They loved it and I freakin loved it because it is true. As others mentioned, the Holy coach K is known to be a ranting raving f bomb machine in basically every game. Doesn’t get a lot of techs. This is a mans game, and that sh*t happens everywhere so saying he should act more “professionally” is a joke. I played a sport at Duquesne, and there weren’t a ton of “pleases and thank you’s” being thrown around there either. It’s part and parcel with playing at this level and should be expected.

Repeating what I said elsewhere -

I didn't see the game because I was working and only heard a very minimal amount of the play by play.
 
Not that anyone will care, but after reading stuff here and seeing a brief shot of an angry coach, I don't feel embarrassed for the school or as an alum.  What is more embarrassing:
 
1. Decades worth of losing without apparent concern on the part of anyone at Duquesne for most of them despite being considered a solid school with a very good academic reputation that can't seem to make one of its departments and programs successful
2. willingness to accept defeat and the embarrassment that came with it and not understanding the perception that many people had of Duquesne because it let one of its most well-known programs languish in mediocrity and worse
3. The lack of any passion on the part of past presidents starting with Nesti that allowed a marque program to go to hell
4. The lack of passion on some of its coaches who seemed to accept the inevitable
5. The lack of responsiveness and sociability on the part of some of its AD's (unless possibly if you had a few more bucks than the average alum)
6. The view of some friends that you were invested in a losing cause and why would you support the school you attended and from which you graduated.  Aren't they second rate in everything?
 
No, I'm not happy that the game ended as it did or that coach made a slim chance to win into a certain losing cause.  But I'm not embarrassed in the least and, in fact, think it's about time we had someone with this program that has that kind of passion and drive.  It's about freaking time.
 

I supported the decision to hire Keith Dambrot.

After meeting and speaking with him my support increased.

His reaction to the calls at the end of the game has only served to strengthen my support.

Let's Go Dukes!!!

I could not agree more. We need passion. We need a coach that gets mad as hell when we lose. What is embarrassing to the university is the 200 people that come to home games.   

Crosseye, case in point on what this referee would do against an ACC coach in a similar situation.

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/1099351-ref-allegedly-tells-nc-state-coach-shut-your-fing-a-up-during-loss-to-unc


 

09dukes wrote:

What are thoughts on the attention that the game drew Duquesne?  The game was trending on multiple outlets.  If the game ends any other way (no matter who won) you would not hear a peep on ESPN, etc.

It is this question for which I am the most torn, and I havent dug in on my opinion about it yet.

Of the handful of national press I've watched/read, I think Scott van pelt was the closest to being the most neutral/positive about it. Mostly, including deadspin that you mentioned, there is a drawn in conclusion that he cost his team the game with his madness and he's a lunatic, etc, etc.

But, and I didn't realize how 93.7 applauded him, it seems the local guys are reporting it more neutrally/accurately, and maybe with more nuance.

I follow all the players on Twitter. TDM and Mike Hughes (the akron transfers) and Maceo Austin are singing his praises *heavily*. They loved the passion. They loved everything about it.

This game became bigger than the ultimate result.

So what I *hope* is, is the dormant fan base of Duquesne and its students see all this, get heated, and become more engaged when they see this. Because we have a coach who breathes the soul of Duquesne. But in order to think that, they would have to come away with a different opinion than many national sports outlets are trying to convey.