"In the Game", or "Back in the Game"

[DiehardClone]

I never thought they were back. Fred was giving guys rests when the other teams were trying to crawl back. Insert starters...boom.

Not sure we're talking about the same game. I believe we had about a 27 point lead midway thru 2nd half Sunday against Southern, Fred put in a few subs, including Custer. Over the next few minutes the lead was cut down to about 14-15 or so. Fred put our staters back in by the 5 minute mark. We won by 10. In other words, reinserting the starters did not expand the lead.

 

[agrabes]

I've noticed that after our main demolishings of the season so far (Ark., hoks) that some people are of the opinion that Ark and the hoks were at some point in the 2nd half of these respective games "back in the game" or "in the game" again.

I'm interested to see what people consider "back in the game"? I think Arkansas got the lead down to 11 points and no closer, that's not back in the game for me, that's never being in the game. For Iowa in the second half I think they got the lead down to 13, which is certainly not "back in the game".

I would like to call for a compromise that unless what had been a 20+ point lead gets back down to single digits, the other team was not in fact "in the game" or "back in the game".

I would disagree. Arkansas was never "out of the game", imo (except when time was running low and there was a huge lead). Out of the game to me means that the team has no reasonable chance of winning. Had we taken a few plays off or made a few sloppy mistakes, they could have taken advantage and our lead would have been gone. I'm not worried about the Arkansas game because that is just the nature of their team to capitalize on small mistakes.

On the other hand when Southern cut it to 10 in the second half after leading almost all the first half, that is a different story. It was pretty clear that Coach Hoiberg was worried, considering that he uncharacteristically had the team slow down and run out the clock with over 2 minutes left to stem the bleeding and end the game. That alone means Southern was in the game if we had to change strategy to beat them or maintain the lead.

 

[pulse]

Not sure we're talking about the same game. I believe we had about a 27 point lead midway thru 2nd half Sunday against Southern, Fred put in a few subs, including Custer. Over the next few minutes the lead was cut down to about 14-15 or so. Fred put our staters back in by the 5 minute mark. We won by 10. In other words, reinserting the starters did not expand the lead.

I guess we aren't. I was thinking about the OP who mentiones Iowa and AR, not Southern.

 

[DiehardClone]

I guess we aren't. I was thinking about the OP who mentiones Iowa and AR, not Southern.

You're right. My bad.

 

[VeloClone]

I hope we have this problem all year long.

Agreed. After the UMKC game I commented to Mrs. Velo how nice of a change it was to be just a little disappointed in a 17 point win. It was a bit of a joke, but at the same time there is some truth to there being much higher expectations for our program than there were just five years ago - and they are still very attainable.

 

[Gunnerclone]

Thanks, but I'll keep the emotion, it's what separates the college game and the NBA.

Lol wut???

 

[twocoach]

Let's say ISU is down by 20 at Allen Fieldhouse, and we go on a run to make it an 11 point game with 8 minutes left. I would think most Cyclone fans would feel that the game is not over, that we still have a a chance. If you polled this fanbase at that particular moment, I'm gonna guess that a majority would say "Yes, we are back in this game."

100% agreed. It doesn't matter what happened before or what speed a team plays. Weird stuff happens. I've seen teams erase 10 point leads in two minutes so anything is possible.

 

[LivntheCyLife]

To me, with a 20 point lead at some point in the game one should be able to empty the bench. If a coach doesn't feel comfortable emptying the bench, then I think you let the team back in the game. Did you feel comfortable emptying the bench and feel like Fred should have done it in those games?

 

[twocoach]

To me, with a 20 point lead at some point in the game one should be able to empty the bench. If a coach doesn't feel comfortable emptying the bench, then I think you let the team back in the game. Did you feel comfortable emptying the bench and feel like Fred should have done it in those games?

Replace "at some point" with "and under two minutes left in the game" and I agree with you. ISU has had 20 point leads in the first half before. I think we'd all agree that this is not the time to bring in the scrubs and roll with them for the rest of the game.

 

[Tailg8er]

We are Iowa State. No lead is safe. I've seen too many games that we end up losing after being up by 20.

Really? How many since Fred has been here??

(I legitimately don't know)

 

[LivntheCyLife]

Replace "at some point" with "and under two minutes left in the game" and I agree with you. ISU has had 20 point leads in the first half before. I think we'd all agree that this is not the time to bring in the scrubs and roll with them for the rest of the game.

Sorry, should have been more clear. Not that scrubs should be brought in at that point but if you get a big lead the goal should be to maintain that lead so you can bring in the scrubs with 2 min left. If you let the team outscore you the rest of the way so you can't get the scrubs in, then I define that as you let the other team back in the game.

 

[CyHawk7]

Arkansas got it to 11 with 8 minutes left. That's absolutely "in the game". They were just not able to take advantage of it and never got closer. Get some stops (which Arkansas was never able to do), force some turnovers (the vaunted Arky press only forced two the last 8 minutes) and make some threes (Arkansas went 0-4 in the last 8 minutes) and you're in it. They had themselves close enough at the 8 minute mark that then had enough time to win the game if they executed. They just didn't. Hats off to ISU for keeping them at arm's length and never letting them get any closer.

Here's my issue with your argument. If being "in the game" is merely having the ability to make up the deficit then why are teams like Arkansas or Iowa who can make up an early second half 20+ point deficit considered out of it to begin with? Weren't they always in the game?

One team having control of the game and the other team being in the game are two different things.

Arkansas and Iowa did a nice job of staying in the game but they never truly threatened ISU's control of the game.

I think the OP is more about if the Arkansas or Iowa ever threatened to comeback and to that I would say no. Just because you're in the game doesn't mean the other team isn't in control of the game.

 

[JohnnyFive]

As an Iowa State fan.. I always think the opponent is still in the game.

This. Being a lifelong ISU fan, I would dare to say up 25, two minutes left, is about the only time I would ever say a team wasn't "in the game." Otherwise, anything less than 25 points means my blood pressure is going to ride that beautiful roller coaster for the entirety of the remaining 120 seconds.

 

[CoKane]

100% agreed. It doesn't matter what happened before or what speed a team plays. Weird stuff happens. I've seen teams erase 10 point leads in two minutes so anything is possible.

Exactly. I think it was Ohio State that won a game after trailing by 10 with less than a minute to go last season. anything can happen in sports.

 

[andymhallman]

Really? How many since Fred has been here??

(I legitimately don't know)

The biggest lead I can remember us blowing off the top of my head is 12 points, and that was in the second half at Kansas in 2012. We also gave up a late 10-point lead at Oklahoma State in Fred's first year in 2010-11.

 

[CoKane]

The biggest lead I can remember us blowing off the top of my head is 12 points, and that was in the second half at Kansas in 2012. We also gave up a late 10-point lead at Oklahoma State in Fred's first year in 2010-11.

We blew an 11 point lead against Texas in the Big 12 tournament as well in Hoiberg's 2nd year.

 

[Clonefan32]

In both Iowa and Arkansas they were back "in the game." I can't pinpoint an exactly definition of "in the game" but in both games I did find it plausible that we could blow our lead. Against Iowa, Oglesby had an open 3 to cut the lead to 11 with 4 minutes left. It would not be all that hard to blow an 11 point lead with 4 minutes left. Same thing with Arkansas, they had the capacity to come back from what was it, a 14 point deficit with ample time left on the clock. I'm not suggesting the odds were in their favor, but it was plausible they could have come back.

 

[CyHawk7]

In both Iowa and Arkansas they were back "in the game." I can't pinpoint an exactly definition of "in the game" but in both games I did find it plausible that we could blow our lead. Against Iowa, Oglesby had an open 3 to cut the lead to 11 with 4 minutes left. It would not be all that hard to blow an 11 point lead with 4 minutes left. Same thing with Arkansas, they had the capacity to come back from what was it, a 14 point deficit with ample time left on the clock. I'm not suggesting the odds were in their favor, but it was plausible they could have come back.

It was also plausible for Iowa to comeback when they were 24 down with 13 minutes. If the definition of "in the game" is an erasable deficit than Iowa was never out of the game?

Do none of you see how faulty your logic is with this "back in the game" crap? Going by the definition determined in this thread. If a team is in the game with 4 minutes left then they were in the game the whole time up until that point. How can you have an achievable deficit with 4 minutes left but not one with 10 minutes left?

 

[DiehardClone]

It was also plausible for Iowa to comeback when they were 24 down with 13 minutes. If the definition of "in the game" is an erasable deficit than Iowa was never out of the game? Do none of you see how faulty your logic is with this "back in the game" crap? Going by the definition determined in this thread. If a team is in the game with 4 minutes left then they were in the game the whole time up until that point. How can you have an achievable deficit with 4 minutes left but not one with 10 minutes left?

I think the simple answer is:

 

[TedKumsher]

I say Arkansas was back in the game ... or at least getting back in the game. But don't get carried away -- as coach says "everybody makes a run".