OK, for all you guys who think fouling with 1.1 seconds left was a good idea

[denverMU]

please answer this question.  Why didn't we use the same concept on the prior possesion?  With 7.5 seconds left USF inbounds and get off a 3 point shot with 5 seconds to play.  I was yelling at the tv to foul before Gilcrest took the shot.  I am on the side of fouling late so they can't tie the game but once you don't foul why do you foul at the opposite end of the court with 1.1 seconds left?  I think they should have done the opposite on the 2 possesions.  Also, for you guys who keep bringing up the Villinova game, Villanova lost because they did the worst of both worlds and fouled a guy while he was taking the game tying 3 point shot.

[Pakuni]

Also, for you guys who keep bringing up the Villinova game, Villanova lost because they did the worst of both worlds and fouled a guy while he was taking the game tying 3 point shot.

Well, isn't that the danger of strategy you advocate ... that you foul and the guy still gets off the shot, leading to three FTs or a possible four-point play? Or that you're so concerned with prevent the shot at all costs, you commit an intentional foul, giving a team two FTs and the ball?
There are risks either way, and cases to be made for both strategies, which is why it's a subject of debate.

And why did we need another thread on the same subject?

[PuertoRicanNightmare]

What? Do you realize we'd missed 8 free throws in a row? Fouling with that much time left would inevitably put us back at the FT line if you presume two made FTs by South Florida.

Whatever...it was an awful game to watch, an awful ending and some awful play by MU (first half) and SF (second half). I'm sorry I even watched it.

[Warrior1969]

Fouling the guy with 1.1 sec to go 90 FEEt from there basket was just insane!  Tell me how USF could have been in a worse situation, down 3, 90 feet from there basket with 1. sec to go?  So what does Buzz do?...he INCREASES there odds by taking them to there end of the court.  USf at best had a 0.05 percent chance of making that 90 footer - anyone ever seen this kind of shot made in a college game?  Certainly the other scenario has happened, maybe that was a 5% chance hard to say?  But why INCREASE the odds to where they had a chance?  Absolutely stupid