The Daily Pennsylvanian is a student-run nonprofit.

Please support us by disabling your ad blocker on our site.

[Fred David/The Daily Pennsylvanian] Senior guard Eric Osmundson (left) and junior forward Steve Danley (right)

DALLAS -- For Penn, the strategy was simple.

Texas was bigger, faster and stronger. The Longhorns had a starting lineup full of future NBA players.

The Quakers couldn't beat them at their own game.

So coach Fran Dunphy and his staff devised a gameplan to make Texas play at another pace -- Penn's. And it almost worked.

On offense, the Quakers milked the clock on each possession, only shooting in the first few seconds if they had a perfect look at the basket.

This shortened the game, meaning that Penn wouldn't have to run with the best of the Big 12 for all 40 minutes.

Texas coach Rick Barnes said he expected the Quakers to do this and wasn't looking forward to a slow-paced game.

"Sitting around all day thinking about Penn, they did exactly what I thought they were going to do, shorten the game," the coach said. "You get the feeling it's like going to the dentist. It's going to be a long experience. You wanted Novocaine, but they didn't have any."

But Dunphy contends that his strategy of using up the 35 seconds of the shot clock had less to do with shortening the game and much more to do with keeping control of the ball.

"I think [it was] more, 'Let's take care of each possession,' and I think that's how the game was dictated early," Dunphy said. "I think it was hard-fought early and well-played defensively early, so each possession became critical, and it did wind up that we were taking care of the basketball."

Indeed, Penn was excellent at preventing turnovers, which would have led to easy transition buckets for Texas. The Quakers turned the ball over just eight times in the game, tying their second matchup against Harvard for the fewest turnovers against a Division I opponent this season.

On those rare occasions when Penn did turn the ball over, however, Texas was able to capitalize.

The Longhorns scored nine points off turnovers, while Penn only scored four points off of Texas' 11 giveaways.

Another key element of Dunphy's offensive game plan was the three-point shot.

It was an interesting move by Dunphy, since his team shot only 32 percent behind the arc this season.

But it was certainly understandable, as Texas boasted what junior forward Mark Zoller called the "best frontcourt in the country" in 6-foot-10 center LaMarcus Aldridge and 6-8 forward Brad Buckman.

Penn's big men, the 6-8 junior forward Steve Danley and the 6-7 Zoller, were expected to have difficulty scoring inside on the Longhorns duo which blocked a combined 114 shots this season.

By shooting the three, Penn wouldn't just avoid Buckman and Aldridge, it would also be able to get its players back on defense faster and would need a lower shooting percentage.

The Quakers took a 23-22 lead into halftime after shooting 43 percent from three-point territory (6-for-14). In fact, the team only made one two-point shot in the first half while missing 10.

But Penn cooled off in the second, shooting just 31 percent of its threes (4-for-13). Had a few more three-pointers fallen, the Quakers could very well have found themselves in the second round.

The decision to avoid taking the ball inside proved to be a smart one. After all, Penn shot a dismal 27 percent for two in the game.

On defense, Dunphy seemed content letting Aldridge shoot jumpers a step or two away from the basket if it meant preventing quick transition buckets and shutting down Texas' other scorers -- especially swingman P.J. Tucker.

This proved to be a good strategy in the first half.

Texas only scored two fast-break points in the first 20 minutes, and Tucker had just two points.

In the second half, however, the Longhorns were able to push the tempo a lot more. A big part of the turnaround was Texas point guard Daniel Gibson's more aggressive play. He had all nine of his points in the second half.

In the first half, "we weren't getting a lot of movement," Gibson said. "A lot of things were stagnated. They do a great job of packing the middle and stopping a lot of the drives to the inside. Once we got moving, it was a lot easier for us to get baskets."

This opened things up for Tucker, who had 15 points in the second half.

It was Texas' ability to get things moving in the second half that allowed the Longhorns to win the game.

Zoller said he didn't think Penn's fatigue on defense had anything to do with this. But no matter the cause, had the Quakers prevented Texas from running, the team would likely have pulled one of the greatest upsets in NCAA Tournament history.

Comments powered by Disqus

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.