marcvols

All I know is that Coach Weeks does an outstanding job; maybe the talent is down.

Individualism and egos

I really don't think that the N-S has any idea who sits where in District standings or who has played who during the season, unless it is the obvious rivalry games. The poll is for entertainment and readership; wouldn't put too much in it.

Anderson Co. Schools are closed today and Friday, but the Clinton Oak Ridge game will be played Friday night.

I would think that the majority of the newspaper readership is in Knox Co. so one would expect that the Knox Co. teams would get the benefit of the doubt with regard to rankings. Let's face it, there certainly is better high school coverage available in other areas. Standings in the districts, regions, etc. Mark Burgess always did a pretty good job, but with his promotion, the high school coverage has been a little bit in limbo. With all the UT coverage, I guess high school basketball will not be a big priority. Rankings really don't mean a thing (state or local); that's the great thing about basketball being a tournament sport - that's what really counts.

Karns and Powell use Knox South Association; all others in District 3 use Knox Ridge Association. Knox Ridge has the District 3 tournament. That's why you see some familiar/unfamiliar faces. The referees are assigned by the association that the home school uses.

May I add that we had nine offensive fouls called on us when we played at Cumberland Co.; it seemed like an unusually high number, but who knows.

Hiawassee, I know you graduated from Clinton - no problem here.

The official said it was a 3, so it was a 3 - Game Over.

Thanks, I just looked it up on the TSSAA site myself. 13 3's would be sixth on the list - a great night nonetheless.

No, I'm not crazy - the kid scored 81 points and hit all of his team's threes. I believe it was a AA team out of Memphis - the kid was suspended from the team a few weeks later for substance abuse. His individual record was also the team record (I know because they broke our record of 23 threes set in 1997),

Now, Now HiawasseeVol - we know where you graduated and we know where your loyalties are now (not that there is anything wrong with that). Karns was 15-19 from the FT line and Clinton was 10-15. To have more attempts on the road and complain about it is a little bit suspect. Jody was phenomenal tonight. The kid lit it up, often with 2 men with hands in his face. To call Whitt a non-factor is also a little bit of a stretch. As I've said before, recently teams have been faceguarding him with little help off of him; that is helping Dye and Dixon with their driving lanes and pull-up jumpers. Additionally, Whitt will typically take up the opponent's best perimeter defender, leaving the 2nd and 3rd to Dye and Dixon. I believe that the recent increases in Dye's production have a lot to do with how teams are choosing to defend Whitt. Bottom line is the Dragons found a way to win despite a huge night from Fersner. Maybe the Dragons are the 4th or 5th best team in the district and yes there is still a lot of basketball to be played, but as of right now the standings say the Dragons are the 2nd best team (and those are what matter) - we'll see how things shake out because anything can and has happened in this district.

This may be a Virginia record, but the Tennessee record was set a few years back by a kid from Memphis who hit 25 in one game.

We have played both teams and both are very good. In rivalry games, anything can and usually does happen. Score comparisons mean nothing as each game is new every night.

Mocs, I'll take a stab at the standings. Oak Ridge 6-1 Karns 6-3 Clinton 4-3 Powell 4-3 Halls 2-3 Central 2-7 CCHS 1-6 I may have a mistake but I think those are right. Oak Ridge - host Karns, Clinton, Halls; at Powell, at Central Karns - host Halls; at Clinton, at Oak Ridge Powell - host Clinton, Oak Ridge, Campbell Co.; at Central, at Halls Clinton - host Karns, Halls; at Powell, CCHS, Oak Ridge Halls - 2 with CCHS; at Clinton, Oak Ridge, Central, Karns; host Powell Again, corrections if I'm wrong - I'm going by simple memory Should be interesting.

Campbell County chose to faceguard Whitt most of the night with no helpside defense coming from his defender; this allowed Dye to go for 32 as he was the beneficiary of the driving lanes opened with this method; Dandrus played within himself for the benefit of the team (bottom line is Clinton won). The CCHSClinton game was also more of a controlled tempo for a half, but the Dragons wore down the Cougars with their pressure. Halls is more comfortable with an uptempo game, as are the Dragons, so there are more possessions and more opportunities to score. Whitt can flat out score; his average is legit and he scores from the perimeter and by driving. In 21 games, he's been under 20 points three times and all were Clinton wins.

Whitt with 36 and Dye with 29 (17-19 from the line) lead Clinton and Dixon chips in 14. Sharp with 26 and May with 19 (boy was he a monster) led Halls. Both teams had chances to win the game. Overall, Clinton 27-40 from the line and Halls 23-34. Very exciting ball game.

The Clinton vs. Halls game is at Halls, not at Clinton; Halls requested that the games be switched this year as far as who plays where first, but that would have left Clinton with only one home game in their last six so it wasn't possible. Anyway, the game is at Halls on Friday.

They can reduce the number of teams, increase the number of teams, etc.; it doesn't matter. They will not make more money until they create interest in the sport. They can make excuses about the NCAA tournament being at the same time, too high of rent,etc., but the fact remains that people are not coming to watch the teams there under the current format. If the format isn't working, it needs to be changed. People can talk about college tournaments (where teams lose and advance), but don't lose sight of the fact that it's usually the conference tournament champion that gets the automatic bid. The interest in the NCAA tournament is not created by hoping that the best two teams on paper play for the title. Most would agree that the interest in the tournament is created in the first and second rounds when most anything can and usually does happen. Having to play a team 4 or 5 times in a year to win a regular season title, and various tournament titles is ridiculous. In my opinion, that scenario is not good for the game - because it cheapens early victories. I know that last year Bolivar had to beat Jackson Northside multiple times; Temple and Grace were on the same path. Tournaments are not about having the "so-called" best teams playing for the championship; they are about the hottest teams with the survive and advance mentality playing. I also remember several years ago when White County and Columbia Centeal were in the same scenario; Columbia had beaten White Co. three times in a four week span and then lose to them in the state finals (10 days later) and White Co. is State Champions. That is a crazy outcome to me; a team shouldn't have to repeatedly beat the same team and that's what happens in the Tennessee system. I'm all about second chances, but this is ridiculous. Usually the teams that advance are the very talented teams from the metropolitan areas; the fact is that they will not have large followings. Anybody that has been to the state tournament knows who has the large followings and who doesn't. Our system does not follow a traditional format of others and reportedly is not being successful. Bottom line is that these tournaments do have to generate money and evidently ours is not. Many other states run successful tournaments with different, more traditional, formats than Tennessee. The question to ask is, "If our format is so fair, well-attended, and fiscally positive, why aren't other states doing the same thing?"

You want interest?? Create a system where there is an opportunity for a cinderella. Tournament play is not about the best two teams on paper or on talent playing for the championship; it's about survive and advance. I've said it before and I'll say it again; allowing teams to lose and advance is silly. Given multiple opportunities, the most talented teams will eventually win. Typically, these teams are from metropolitan areas, and the fact is: these schools do not typically have much fan support. Fan support comes from teams who have not been to state in a while and from smaller communities. I've never seen a state where you can practically pick half the eight team field or more in each classification before the tournament starts, as you can in Tennessee. Upsets in the early rounds don't matter, because of the multiple chances given to advance.

Dandrus Whitt from Clinton at 28ppg thru 11 games.

I certainly see the morale issue. What one poster has mentioned is losing a HOF game and not counting it; I guess I have more of a concern with counting a "W" but discarding a "L" when playing more than 1 HOF game. That is not consistent nor does it have anything to do with morale. It has to do with accountability - not accountability to the TSSAA, but accountability from the program to the players and the players to the program. Again, certainly nothing illegal here as far as the loose rules in our state, but more of a "moral" issue. And aj, I also coach at the high school level; I think that it is also important that our athletes learn to deal with both success and failure and learn that "you can't have your cake and eat it too".

I am in no way calling them cheaters; I used that in the topic header to grab attention of readers and it looks like it has worked. If people feel that I have called any program cheaters, I certainly apologize as that is not my intent. My intent is to show that there is an obvious contradiction in "right" and "wrong", regardless of what the TSSAA says. If one robs a bank, but doesn't get caught - there is still a sense of right and wrong. I just believe that if you are going to count a win in a HOF game on your record, then you should also count a loss in a HOF game on your record (or don't count either) - is that cheating? - I say no; but if you ask me if it is "right", I will also say no.

The following principles are taught in the Clinton defense: stance, denial, helpside, strong foot close out, no middle drive, and blocking out. I think that you'll find that most successful programs teach much the same. Is Clinton's "D" unorthodox? - it would appear that way at times because of the good deal of trapping that appears random to the casual eye. I can assure you that the defense is not random as there are rules for the traps (based on opponents personnel, scouting reports, and general philosophy rules); I would compare this defense to teaching the true motion offense, where there are rules (depending on the program), but some freedom is allowed. I would agree it is not conservative (much like Oak Ridge), but it is fundamental as far as the philosophy of the coaching staff goes. I'm sure that Powell also has similar defensive rules. I agree that Oak Ridge, Powell, and Clinton typically play very hard on the defensive end.

I understand that the TSSAA doesn't have a particular stand on this, but one would hope that the programs doing this would have more integrity instead of being told what to do/not do. I just think that if you play these games, you either count them or don't; you don't cherry pick the wins and discard the losses. It matters because we live in a society where perception matters and the message of the teams that are doing this is that deception is OK. Just my opinion. I'll bet that you will also see the people involved preaching integrity, character, etc. It seems sad to me that some don't think that this practice is wrong. Simply put, if you don't like the result - don't count it; translation in the real world - if you don't like what happens at work, it's not your fault (never happened).