Regardless of the sport, teams need to learn how to win.
The first time I met Joe Paterno I asked him if Penn State was recruiting a kid I had played against and thought was one of the best players in New Jersey.
He knew who I was asking about, but said that no, Penn State wasn’t looking at him.
I guess my face registered a look of surprise, so he explained why. He said that Penn State only recruited players from teams with winning records.
The theory was, when games were on the line late, he only wanted players that expected to win. That were already used to winning.
I don’t know if he held firm to that policy throughout his career. What I do know is over 40 years of watching Penn State football there have been countless times that I’m sure a team has walked off a field after losing to the Nittany Lions thinking, "How did we lose? We’re better than them."
Before Tony Bennett is finished with coaching I believe there will be countless times that will be the case here.
I can’t speak to his Washington State teams, but I’ve seen a number of times since coming to UVA I’m sure teams have left the court after losing to the ‘Hoos with that thought in their heads.
The difference is, it wasn’t because Virginia has learned how to win, it was because neither team knew how to win.
"Bennettball" will always win games where it appears the less talented team has emerged victorious.
It’s a matter of styles.
What the current edition of Virginia basketball hasn’t learned to do is win. And time is running out.
The common expression is, "There’s no substitute for experience." Often, "experience" is simply another word for having been through a situation a number of times and coming to know what to expect and how to handle the possible scenarios.
The nature of "Bennettball" creates a lot of close games because it limits the number of possessions in the game. The fewer possessions, the fewer opportunities to score. The fewer opportunities to score, the less likely the margin will be large.
The ‘Hoos have played eight games that have been decided by three points, or a single possession, thus far this season. They have won three and lost five. The three victories have come against teams decidedly lower in the Sagarin Rankings (a quick note: This time of year you hear a lot about RPI and SOS. I’ve always found the Sagarins to be extremely accurate. http://sagarin.com/sports/cbsend.htm). The losses have come to three teams lower in the Sagarins (Virginia is No. 22, by the way) and of course North Carolina and Duke.
In other words, Virginia has split six games that according to any ranking system other than the Associated Press they should have won. The AP Poll is made up of sportswriters. There is no group involved in sports that is more misleading, or misled, than sportswriters. (We’ll revisit that statement in a little bit.)
So, with those eight games, plus another handful that were close in the closing minutes, the Cavaliers have gained a great deal of experience.
With the ACC tournament a week away and the NCAA’s right behind that, expect that experience to be a valuable asset.
I think Virginia is ready to win a couple the "experts" think they shouldn’t.
Before I close this missive I think a couple of things you’ve read, or heard over the airwaves recently, should be addressed.
First, a couple of local scribes continue to pose Virginia as in a "life or death" struggle to make the NCAA tournament. It’s simply not true. There has been no time since the "Who’s In and Who’s Out?" discussions have begun that Virginia has not been squarely in. In fact, the only thing that would prevent the Cavs from returning to the Dance for the first time since 2007 would be to lose both remaining regular season games and their first round ACC tourney game.
I don’t want to boggle your mind, but probabilities are one of my passions. Anticipating what the point spreads will be on those three games, the odds of Virginia losing all three are roughly one in 18. In other words it’s not even worth discussing at this point.
Second, let’s look at the North Carolina game before and after. Back to the writings of the senior spokesman in this area, whom I respect and enjoy reading. On game day he wrote that "On paper, Virginia doesn’t have much of a chance" and that Coach Bennett and his staff needed to "figure out a way to beat the odds (and) prove everyone wrong." Again, simply not true.
He did acknowledge that the line on the game was lower than he expected (it was still too high — people who wagered on Virginia won the game "with the points"), but apparently put no weight on that indicator.
I’m here to tell ya, forget sportswriters and forget broadcasters. You want the best indicator of an upcoming sporting event? Look to the people who are literally putting their money where their mouth is (by allowing you to wager against their opinions).
What those folks were telling you last Saturday was that if Virginia and North Carolina played that game 13 times Virginia would win five and lose eight. Sound like a team without "much of a chance?"
Lastly, after the game, one of the two local broadcasters placed strong emphasis on the "disparity" of the number of foul shots taken by each team. Now I understand that these two gentlemen are employees of the university and in the case of the particular broadcaster I’m referring to, an ex-player (and a very good one).
But the impression he gave listeners after the game was that the referees had somehow done UVA a disservice by calling the game in such a lopsided manner. Once more, simply not true.
In football games, where most coaches, players and fans agree that penalties can be called on most every play, it appears that referees make a conscious effort to keep the penalties called against each team reasonably even.
That’s not the case in basketball.
North Carolina’s strategy against Virginia is to pound the ball inside to take advantage of their decided height edge. When one team is shooting a high percentage of their shots from within eight feet of the basket and the other is shooting more than half their shots from long range, what would you expect?
UVA fans were irate at the fouls called on Mike Scott, in particular his fourth foul. Credit Roy Williams for putting in the refs’ minds (before the game) that Scott fends people off with his left arm a lot (which he does) and John Henson for selling every possible opportunity to display it.
But enough.
Let’s finish on a very positive note: This Cavaliers basketball team has grown up a great deal in the past couple of weeks.
I know of no one who, told Mike Scott would score just six points and play only 22 minutes against the vaunted Tar Heels, would have given Virginia the remotest chance of winning. Yet, there they were with three chances in the final minute to first take the lead and then tie the game.
Learning to win almost always begins with losing.
These Cavs have had plenty of lessons.
Don’t be surprised if they pass a couple of tests in the next few weeks.