University of North Carolina Athletics
Lucas: MBB Asked & Answered
March 11, 2003 | Men's Basketball
March 11, 2003
By Adam Lucas
Will somebody please tell me why Jackie Manuel is on this basketball team? I've watched him all season and can't understand why he plays as much as he does. He should be way further down the bench, if on the team at all. I understand that with Sean May out we need height, but come on. I hope that since a simpleton as myself can see it that Matt Daughtery [sic] sees it. Anyway, just letting off some steam.
Jason Smith, Pikeville, NC
It's really not fair to Jason to dredge up this question, since he sent it to us before the Duke game, but Jason, if you're still wondering why Jackie Manuel is on the team, check out J.J. Redick's stat line from Sunday. The sharpshooter was 4-of-13 and even with the Blue Devils running him off some occasionally movable triple screens, wasn't able to draw a breath late in the game, when Duke could have used a big basket from him.
And even if you still don't see his value, his teammates do. "Jackie did a great job on Redick, that was big," said Jawad Williams. "He did a great job of chasing him around all those screens."
This brings up a perplexing point, since Manuel was completely left off the ACC All-Defensive team, which is voted on by the same sportswriters who last year couldn't spell Ilian Evtimov's name correctly and therefore left him off the All-Rookie team. However, one player included on that team was Duke's Dahntay Jones, the man who spent a good bit of Sunday watching Rashad McCants dribble by him into the lane for a basket.
As long as we're talking about snubs, the one on Manuel was only slightly more egregious than the fact that Jawad Williams was left off all three All-ACC squads. Among those making the list ahead of him with inferior credentials include Chris Duhon and J.J. Redick (who received more votes than Raymond Felton). Those types of snubs sometimes work out, however. In just one example, Hubert Davis was left off all three All-ACC teams in 1991 and then went to Charlotte with a point to prove, making first team All-Tournament as he led the Heels to a league championship.
I've thought about this before in the past and for some reason have always been curious to know which teammates room/live together. I always like to find out little tid-bits about the players that you're not going to read in the paper. Also, which player is the practical joker, the serious one, the quiet one, etc.
Wendell Zeigler, Wilmington, NC
Sean May and Byron Sanders are roommates, as are Raymond Felton and David Noel. Damion Grant and Rashad McCants share a room, and so do Jackie Manuel and Jawad Williams. Melvin Scott, Will Johnson, Jonathan Holmes, Damien Price, Phillip McLamb, Jonathan Miller all live with non-players.
We haven't conducted any scientific polls on the other types of questions you mentioned, but Damien Price and Melvin Scott would probably share the title of being the practical jokers. Although part of the personality built into big-time athletes seems to be an outgoing nature, Jawad Williams would probably be the first to tell you that if there's a quiet one in this bunch of Tar Heels, it's him.
Given the loss to Wake last night, it is apparent that our slim hopes of an NCAA bid are gone (unless we win the ACC tourney, of course). So, as I see it, WHEN we win at home against Duke, we will stand at 16-14 overall. Even if we lose the first round game of the tourney, we would be above the necessary mark to get into the NIT. Given that, do we get an 'automatic' bid to the NIT? And if so, we will take it, correct? I have heard rumblings about how we shouldn't, but my personal opinion is the more practice time we can muster out of this season the better. Heck, just use the NIT as a stepping stone, and return of postseason basketball at Carolina, right? We could be the first team to win both the preseason and postseason NIT if I'm not mistaken, that has never been done.
Mike Hadden, Greenville, NC
We've got to give credit to Mike for predicting the win over Duke before it happened. It would be hard to envision a scenario where the NIT would decline to take North Carolina. The Tar Heels carry an extremely prestigious name and television appeal, and they've got a fairly strong New York City fan base that would buy tickets if the Heels advanced to Madison Square Garden.
There have been some rumblings about Carolina not "stepping down" to play in the NIT, but that just sounds like spoiled fans. Much like accepting a lower-tier bowl slot in football, it's foolish to give up the opportunity for more game and practice experience, especially with a young team.
I think Carolina's current basketball uniforms have run their course. I wish they would go back to the uniforms of the late 1960s during the Larry Miller/Charlie Scott era. The "North Carolina" lettering was displayed in a much more circular pattern, the short sides featured triangles with the Tar Heel foot emblem embedded in the center, and they were simply Carolina Blue and white (no navy additives!). I think the Tar Heel foot emblem should be prominent on all Carolina sports uniforms -- it was a mistake to abandon this. Do you think there is any chance Carolina will return to this classic look of the late 60s?
Gray Amick, Greensboro
If Carolina really wanted to cause a stir, they could go back to the uniforms they wore when they won the 1957 national championship--those jerseys included red trim. It's a little difficult to imagine the Heels taking the floor with any red on their uniforms today.
Given the outcry the last time the Heels changed jerseys (the ill-fated one-season switch to the interlocking "NC" on the front), it would be surprising to see any substantial change in the near future. But this does give us an opportunity to point out that the current fashion craze for athletes is vintage sports jerseys. Raymond Felton and Rashad McCants, for example, were big shoppers at the NBA store when the Heels went to New York over Christmas, as they stocked up on retro jerseys and jackets. Melvin Scott, however, has his own unique vintage style--he left the locker room Sunday night wearing a "retro" Brian Bersticker home jersey with the interlocking NC.
I watched the 1984 ACC tournament semi-final between Duke and Carolina on ESPN classic last night. My question is two-fold. First, do the current players watch these games, especially the games with their coach playing. If so, what do they think? Are they impressed with his ability? Second, in your opinion, which is the best over-all Carolina team in history? One of the title teams of 1982 or 1993? There seems to be a consensus for that 1984 team as far as talent level, but what about over-all?
Ken Morse, Casper, WY
Some of the players watched those games, but ESPN Classic isn't part of the cable package received in Hinton James North, a fact that miffed players like David Noel and Byron Sanders, both of whom said they missed all of last week's classic games. Sean May, however, somehow figured out a way to see them, and he made sure to grade his coach's performance. "Sean May told me, 'Man, you were getting schooled,'" Matt Doherty said recently. "Some of the guys were killing me, saying I missed a bunch of box outs and things like that. I told them I wasn't very good, especially on the ball defensively."
Your second question is a bit tougher and could probably take up a whole column all on its own. Since you're not asking for most talented, but instead for best overall team, we'd probably have to go with 1993. That squad wasn't outrageously talented, but completely understood the meaning of team offense and defense, which enabled them to beat a significantly more talented Michigan squad in the national championship game. "Person-for-person, we weren't more talented than Michigan," Eric Montross said recently. "But our team and our concept of how to play was invincible."
Other teams that would have to be considered include the 1957 and 1982 championship squads, plus the 1977 team that likely would have won a title were it not for injuries. Even the 1998 Final Four team deserves mention, but their lack of depth probably prevents them from being "the perfect team."
y the way, tarheelblue.com will have a retrospective on the 1993 team in the coming days that includes exclusive interviews with key players and coaches from that squad.
In college hoops, referees apparently can consult the replay monitor(s) for matters regarding timing issues (among other issues) to determine "correctable errors," and subsequently adjust the rulings on the court accordingly.
At the very end of the UNC-GaT game that same Saturday, it seemed apparent that a GaT player called timeout while attempting to inbound a pass (when GaT had no TO's remaining), well before the 5-second clock had expired. For some reason, the referee ruled the 5-second clock HAD expired prior to the TO request. As it would have been a technical foul against GaT, it was a crucial call, and had Carolina lost the game, it would have been an issue of considerable contention throughout the ACC and the press.
My questions are these:
1. Would that call not fall under the domain of a potential "correctable error,'" and be reviewable and correctable?
2. If not, why?
3. If so, was it incumbent on the UNC coach to demand a replay review, or was the decision to review or not review solely a judgment to be made by the referee?
The bottom line question is this: Assuming that the call was reviewable, which logically it should have been, whose fault was it that it was not reviewed? Doherty's, or the head official's?
Ira Miller, Columbia, SC
The NCAA Men's Basketball Rulebook requires that television replays can be used only in the following situations:
1. To prevent or rectify a scoring or timing mistake involving the game clock or shot clock or--as happened on Sunday against Duke--to evaluate what penalties should be handed out for participation in a fight.
2. To determine whether a shot is a two- or three-point attempt.
3. To determine if a potential end-of-game shot was released before the sounding of the horn.
The Rulebook (Rule 2, Section 5, Article 4) specifically states that replay may not be used for judgment calls, such as goaltending or which player committed a foul. Calling a timeout (or not) would certainly fall into that category.
In most game-winning or game-tying situations, referees will automatically consult the tape to make sure they are making the right call. In situations where it's disputed whether a shot should count for two points or three, however, it's up to the coach to request the review.
None of the above changes the fact that, yes, the Tech player did signal for a timeout and no, it wasn't recognized by the game officials.
Adam Lucas will answer your questions about the Carolina men's basketball program this season in an exclusive column published each Tuesday. Lucas, editor of the Tar Heel Monthly, will answer your questions on personnel, strategy, opponents and anything on your mind about the Tar Heels OTHER THAN RECRUITING SPECIFICS. Please send your questions to Adam at alucas@tarheelmonthly.com, and include your first and last names and your hometown.
