The zero game

Loyola of Maryland wasn’t going to beat Davidson Tuesday night, probably not, almost certainly not, so why not try something really, REALLY different? What was there to lose?

Some might say a lot.

Pride.

Dignity.

Reputation.

Respect from the players on your team.

Folks are talking about this all over the place today. Most all of them are using words like “dumb” and “ridiculous” and phrases like “an embarrassment to his profession” and “continues to lose his mind.”

For now, from here, two thoughts:

1. It’s a coach’s Hippocratic Oath of sorts to prepare his players, and to give those players a chance, the very best possible chance, to compete and to win. That is not what happened here. Jimmy Patsos did not do that. Maybe he thought at some point, the day before the game, the morning of the game, at the start of the game, that this was in fact his team’s best chance to win -- that’s totally possible -- but he HAD to realize by at least halftime that it wasn’t working. Davidson finished the half on a 35-8 run. Not working.

2. Seasons and the games that add up to seasons are all about adjustments. One team does this, the other team does that, the one team does something different, the other team tries to counter, and so on and so on. It never stops. To do one thing, and only one thing, for a full 40 minutes -- no matter what that thing is -- is a pretty good way to lose. I once was having beers with an attorney whose cases I used to write a good bit about and I asked him what made somebody good in his line of work. A malleable mind, he said. A good thinker is a flexible thinker. Loyola was losing 39-17 at the break. It got worse from there: 46-22, 52-24, 60-31, 71-38. And STILL: two men face-guarding Stephen standing in the corner. Rigidity is stupidity.