AJC > Sports > Tech > Blog > Archives > 2007 > January > 07 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USNext game is huge for Jackets
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Back from Clemson, watching Sportscenter, where I see my first-ever favorite team, the Cowboys, choked.
Tech didn’t choke the game away this afternoon. The Jackets, though, gagged the final play, which some might say is enough to call it all a choke. Not me.
Any time, and I mean ANY TIME, a team loses a close game, it’s piece of cake to go back and analyze several possessions and look at what didn’t go right.
Just enough things, and I mean just barely enough, happened for Tech to lose. Javaris Crittenton, who has more to do than any player or coach in changing the culture around this Tech team from last year, hit his first eight free throws, and played a whale of a game. But he missed his ninth free throw, the front end of a one-and-one, with 59 seconds left. That hurt.
He and Jeremis Smith, an average free throw shooter, each made a pair down the stretch, and Tech hit 13 of 16 from the line. These are examples of differences between last season’s team and this one.
But Clemson hit 19 of 26, and in a game where the Jackets sorely missed the outside shot of Lewis Clinch (Tech hit just 3 of 9 3-pointers, none in the first half), the Jackets still had a very good chance against the only undefeated team in the nation.
Tech won on the boards, by one, but Clemson had 26 offensive rebounds and had an edge in the second half overall (Dickey had seven in the first half, none in the second, when the Jackets’ big men were handicapped by fouls and Zach Peacock was ejected for elbowing fellow freshman Trevor Booker - who tape review will reveal to be a dirty player). The offensive rebound edge was big, but misleading. Clemson missed 41 of 66 shots, after all, so there were a bunch of offensive rebounds to get (Tech had 25 defensive rebounds). Still, that hurt Tech. A 14-1 run up to halftime, though, led to a 34-29 lead.
But when foul trouble and the ejection of Peacock (why not give Alade Aminu a few minutes down the stretch; he wouldn’t have to be tenuous?), Paul Hewitt started calling zones. The Jackets rarely play zone, are not comfortable playing it, and that’s a big reason Clemson hit 50 percent from the field in the second half after hitting just 28.9 percent in the first.
Still, the Techsters were right there, rallying from a four-point deficit in the waning moments. This NEVER happened last year, especially not on the road. Tech’s down double digits in the first half last year in this game, and everybody’s playing garbage time the last four minutes by the end.
That said, two first-year players slacked on the game’s final play.
Whether or not you agree with the decision to defend the in-bounder with 6.5 seconds left (remember, Clemson called a timeout to set up a final play; Hewitt had none left for his after the Jackets called two in the first half from the bench when ball handlers were trapped, and one in the second half rather than fail to inbound in five seconds), the greater breakdowns came behind that.
James Mays received that pass at half court too easily. If Mouhammad Faye can’t get a hand on that ball (likely tipping it away to end the game), then he probably should’ve retreated to limit Mays’ drive opportunities.
He was fairly close to Mays, though. Worse, although Mays turned left, to his weak hand, Faye retreated then, rather than hedging up on Mays, or defending, and at a poor angle.
Mays blew right to the basket.
Faye caught up enough to hack Mays, but didn’t. Jeremis Smith was close enough to foul, too. And Crittenton was in a spot - arms down in standard take-a-charge position — to take a charge on the low left block. So, you say, he’s not going to get a charge call there (on the road)? Maybe, maybe not (it looked to me like Crittenton was in position to get crushed, and if he was to get leveled like I think he would’ve, it seems to me it would have been hard not to call a charge).
Crittenton had, by my figuring, five options: stay put and try to get a charge call; put his hands up and defend; slide step and try to block the shot from the side (very low percentage chance for success; hammer Mays (best chance? as Mays is a 53.3 percent free throw shooter); or get out of the way (the worst option).
It looked like he merged Nos. 1 and 5. He didn’t exactly bail out, but he leaned or slid just enough to his right to give Mays more of a lane. “I didn’t want to take the chance of not [getting] a charge [call against Mays], and he hit the layup, and then get a foul shot,” he first told me.
Then, “I was there, he just moved.”
The second comment may have been revisionist, although Mays did kind of wiggle the other direction. I think this was a youngster being young upon being questioned. Crittenton was really, really, really upset afterward. He’d just finished talking to Hewitt, who was pep-talking him left and right, already talking about Wednesday’s game with Duke.
This season’s far from over, but Tech’s up against it. After Duke, the Jackets face a much-improved Florida State team and then go to North Carolina and Maryland.
For my two cents, while Crittenton’s obviously going to have his hands on every possession down the stretch, Thaddeus Young was not involved enough late, and I say that even though he hit a huge 3-pointer from a tough angle in the corner with the shot clock running down. The ball needs to go through him in crunch time. Not only is he a ridiculously gifted (although sometimes tentative) scorer, he can pass big-time.
One possession. That’s life in the ACC. Last season, it was usually over when there were dozens of possessions left. Saturday, the Jackets were on the road playing one of two undefeated teams in the nation, in a ridiculously loud arena, and were right there. Yes, they made mistakes. But they have enough talent, and heart, to make noise this season. It’s more mental than usual for the next couple weeks.
This time of year, you see a lot of good teams, and some really, really good teams, go play their first true road games of the season (Tech’s not one of those teams), or their first road game against a good team, and get smoked (Alabama, Notre Dame come to mind) because it’s such a culture shock to be in an arena where you’re like a lamb in a coliseum of fans looking for blood at the hands of the home team. The Clemson environment was that way today, and the Jackets didn’t flinch. They just didn’t make the last critical play of the game.
Nonetheless, while every Duke game is big, the next one is huge.
Permalink | Comments (68) | Post your comment | Categories: Basketball
Comments
By gtguy96
January 7, 2007 01:52 AM | Link to this
Duke game is the season. GT is mentally fragile right now, and lose another game to start 0-3 in conference with road games at UNC and Maryland for probably a 1-5 ACC start. Lose to Duke and the Jackets will be toast.
By GTRules
January 7, 2007 02:01 AM | Link to this
Agreed. The next game is our whole season. Lose it….and we will most likely be nit bound. THWG
By OP Fan
January 7, 2007 09:27 AM | Link to this
Matt,
Please make those sour grapes useful and go make some wine. Trevor Booker is a physical player that plays hard and is not “dirty” at all. What is “dirty” is flagrantly throwing an elbow to the face of an opponent as they run down the floor.
Maybe you should spend less time putting down opponent’s players and more time documenting the total lack of control and discipline Hewitt’s players have (see Clinch’s cheating also). Have fun going 0-3 after Dook rips Hewitt.
Don’t bring that weak stuff into the LJ. That’s 3 in a row.
Love, OP Fan
By Big Blue
January 7, 2007 10:12 AM | Link to this
Matt,
I am not a GT alum, but avid ACC fan. My observtaion is that when you look in the eyes of the players (generally speaking) from FSU, Clemson, Maryland and VA Tech, there is a void. There is not a light of intelligence. These so-called “student athletes” are hired guns, disposable products, used by these less-than-stellar schools to amp up there sports programs.
Booker is of the same ilk that Rick (The Lick) Barnes brought to CU. Barnes was hated by fellow ACC coaches for dirty play, and could not win. Clemson has a club with little character and will fold like a lawn chair when they hit Tobacco Road
By OP Fan
January 7, 2007 10:18 AM | Link to this
I smell that fear. And I like it.
By marcos
January 7, 2007 11:39 AM | Link to this
One thing I didn’t read was how great of a basketball game this was.Tech’s FT shooting,composure in a hostile environment and ball control was excellent.This team is so young that they will only get better as the season unfolds.Even a Duke loss,this early in the year,won’t be overly signifigant.Sweet 16 this year for Tech.A run at the Natl.Championship for the next 3 years.
By Art
January 7, 2007 11:57 AM | Link to this
I’m surprised to see a comment like “Trevor Booker - who tape review will reveal to be a dirty player)”, even I somewhat agree with it. I don’t know if he’s dirty. He was just doing what the officials let him get away with. What’s happened to ACC officiating? It used to be the best. I watched a lot of b-ball yesterday and the ACC games semed to be the worst officiated. At least in the Duke VT game the officiating seemed to be merely mediocre. The Clemson game the officials seemed to have 2 seperate rule books and one of the rule books said it’s not a foul if it’s a Clemson player.
By Ga_Tech_92
January 7, 2007 12:02 PM | Link to this
Good blog as usualy Matt, thanks. I think the ‘big picture’ is that we have a PG and others who seem to so far have heart and want to win. They have the talent to do it.
I think the play that lost the game was clearly the Ejection. About the same time, we had RDickey and JSmith with 4 fouls each. The big guys can’t play 110% for fear of picking up that last foul, so effectively, we loose our best three space hoggers. That alone is huge. Tigers get two shots, the ball, tons of momentum, ball game.
I hope we will find out more about what inspired the elbow. I love the energy Peacock brings, but of course throwing an elbow like that is never appropriate. He’s a human being and I have no doubt he was taunted on some level into doing it; however, it was not the smartest reaction and it do doubt hurt the team.
Turn it into something else team. You guys are right on the brink. Keep up the great work. I think these guys are on the brink of a great season; however, I do not look at beating Duke as the SEASON or the END ALL. There are a hell of a lot of ACC games to go and even if we loose to Duke, I would personally encourage placing as much value on every game as that which is placed on the Duke game.
Sorry if this was messy today, but I’m in a hurry. Go Jackets and can I get a THWG!?!?!?!!*
By stings to lose
January 7, 2007 12:05 PM | Link to this
recommendation…change the in-bound method!!!
By Will
January 7, 2007 12:08 PM | Link to this
I guess anybody can write for a paper now a days. Give me a break about Booker being a thug and a dirty player. Peacock threw the elbow, GET OVER IT. Show me one thing that Booker did that was illegal. You Can’t. End of story. You got beat, get over it, and act like a man instead of crying about your loss. This story’s headline should be “Bully steals Matt’s lolipop!!!
By john
January 7, 2007 12:14 PM | Link to this
we do not play at chapel hill this year. Oliver Purnell coach of the YEAR
By Cam
January 7, 2007 12:18 PM | Link to this
I’m a Maryland fan and have serious problems with someone who calls an opponent’s player, who when reviewed by tape is seen to take a viscious blow that was enough to kick a Tech player out of the game and fail to retaliate, dirty. What that young man did was neither dirty nor cheap it was self-control.
By Otis
January 7, 2007 12:19 PM | Link to this
Hopefully Peacock learned a hard lesson in life yesterday, and will grow up as a result. Take away the ejection and GA Tech wins by 10. The next game is the key to the rest of the season. Win this and and we can’t be stopped. Lose and we’ll be hoping for the NIT…
By OP is the man
January 7, 2007 12:21 PM | Link to this
Funny how most of the schools in the ACC have the same academic requirements to get kids in school, but once a player signs with Duke, UNC, or Tech, their IQ is suddenly 50 points higher.
Tech (and for that matter Duke and UNC) is signing the top basketball players they can find…period.
To say that the players at VT, MD, and Clemson “have not a light of intelligence in their eyes” is another way of saying that you think black kids aren’t smart unless they go to your school.
I believe I see a light in your eyes and it is likely a reflection from the cross you just lit in some family’s yard.
By BuzzardBeater
January 7, 2007 12:23 PM | Link to this
“Booker is of the same ilk that Rick (The Lick) Barnes brought to CU. Barnes was hated by fellow ACC coaches for dirty play, and could not win. Clemson has a club with little character and will fold like a lawn chair when they hit Tobacco Road.”
Dear Baby Blue,
Wow, you are a piece of work cheif. Give it up, Booker is a great kid. How many young kids would of retaliated after the elbow? Booker kept his cool. This Clemson club has tons of character. We were picked 9th in the ACC and right now we are proving every one wrong. OP is an outstanding coach who is doing great things for our basketball program. Deal with it ACC.
By Matt
January 7, 2007 12:30 PM | Link to this
Why am I not suprised?
This reeks of sour grapes and elitism…. but mostly just sour grapes.
You don’t know Booker from Adam. Booker is a tough, physical player that plays hard until the last echo of the whistle has faded. He more than likely will take advantage of anything the referee will give him… which he SHOULD do. This is basketball, sport, not ballet.
The fact that you spout such vitriolic rubbish about Clemson and Booker’s “ilk” is laughable. Buckner, McIntyre, Jamison…these were all stand up guys in Barnes program… something you would know little about. Almost a little as you know about Booker.
The fact that you so non-chalantly dismiss a sucker punch to the head from your Hannibal-Lecter-resque thug, and instead make unfounded assumptions about our player, reveals: A) Your obvious lack of intelligence B) You never played sports C) You’re a wimp or D) Some combination of the above.
You sound very much like the little kid that got dunked on in high school then cried about it to the gym teacher.
Listen, here is an idea. Take off your pocket protector and coke bottle glasses. See if you can’t get your mom and dad out of the house. Leave your Star Wars poster plastered room- then go and actually PLAY some sports. I know, it is a challenge.
I just think that before you go spouting off half-assed, condescending comments that equate to below the belt jabs insulting the intelligence of players you know nothing about, perhaps you should see the way the game is actually played.
We won… for the third time in a row. Get over it.
By Clemfan
January 7, 2007 12:33 PM | Link to this
Not sure which is worse, the unfounded accusation calling Booker dirty, or the post from typical tech fan (nerd who thinks he is a lot smarter than he really is) about the “void” in the eyes of Clemson, Maryland, etc. players……..I was at the game and watched Booker and Peacock battle for position all game. One of those men kept their composure while one of the obviously highly educated, intellectually superior, further up the evoluntionary chain Tech players threw a dangerous elbow. All you Techsters are the same. Your players don’t automatically assume your SAT score just because you went to tech no more than the their atheltic ability changes the fact that you were the last kid picked on the playground. That’s three in a row. Deal with it.
By Matt`
January 7, 2007 12:41 PM | Link to this
Exactly, Clemfan.
Here is a shock for you, Mr. GT (cough), er, “ACC fan.”
MOST college basketball players are something less than Biochemists.
As a matter of fact, there is a pretty solid chance that two of the players on your team are the “one year and done” type. So much for the high educational values that all of your players OBVIOUSLY hold so dear.
Clemfan is right; you are the prototypical GT nerd that equates watching the highlights on sportscenter as “game film,” and passes off horribly oversimplified generalizations and passes them off as fact.
Oh well. I guess we will just keep on winning.
Oh, and by the way, you say there is no “light of intelligence” in Booker’s eyes when you look into them.
When did you get the chance to look into them? From the 15th row in Littlejohn, or the highlights on Sportscenter? And how exactly were you able to surmise so much from either one of those about his character and/or intelligence?
By Adam
January 7, 2007 12:48 PM | Link to this
Clemson has hired-guns? Just how many one and done players has Georgia Tech had in the past few years? Marbury? Bosh? Carolina? Duke? Come on..
And you don’t even want to see the amount who have left early for the NBA…
Sounds like the rest of the ACC has the hired-guns…
By Clemfan
January 7, 2007 12:48 PM | Link to this
Here’s a closer look into that “void” in James Mays’ eyes if you smart guys care to gander.
http://www.shoelessworks.com/films/bball/gt07clips/maysfollow.wmv
By Bob
January 7, 2007 12:56 PM | Link to this
If this were a game Matt Winkeljohn would have just been dunked on by the Clemson fans! Ouch!
By Tigerfan
January 7, 2007 01:09 PM | Link to this
JUST LIKE FOOTBALL..CLAP..CLAP..JUST LIKE FOOTBALL..CLAP..CLAP..JUST LIKE FOOTBALL..
By anon
January 7, 2007 01:17 PM | Link to this
Booker is dirty? What? Peacock throws a high elbow at the face (and brilliantly does it right in front of Purnell and a ref), Booker exercises professionalism and self-control and doesn’t retaliate, and you call Booker dirty?
By anonTiger
January 7, 2007 01:30 PM | Link to this
Admittedly, basketball players constantly walk the line between physical play and “dirty” play, but I simply cannot comprehend Winklejohn’s defense of Peacock’s elbow-to-the-face play, particularly in light of Booker’s self-control after the play. Some might argue that Booker wasn’t really hit or hurt, but, generally speaking, as we’ve seen way too much in the NBA, dirty play often results in retaliation and the “second punch” often gets seen when the first one doesn’t. Fortunately, the ACC refs were on the ball, reviewed the tape and made the right call. Tech played a fine game (Peacock excepted) and deserve some respect, but Winklejohn’s comments are hard to understand. I suppose the author has learned from politicians that if you repeat a lie often enough, people might start believing the lie.
By P Hewitt
January 7, 2007 01:34 PM | Link to this
Folks, we techsters got punked plain and simple. If I cared about the “student athletes” as Matt talks about, I would have prevented clinch from doing what he did. So let’s not make excuses, we lost and that’s that. Luckily since we’re GTech, we won’t lose peacock for more than the time he was ejected for.
Go Bees!!!
By TigerDMan
January 7, 2007 01:40 PM | Link to this
Wow, who ist this loser writing this stuff? Booker is a smart kid and a good kid and he did not fight back though he would have been justified to do so. Just another Nerd who never played sports crying in his column. 16-0!!!
By Dan
January 7, 2007 01:40 PM | Link to this
Where’s that tape that will show Booker to be a dirty player, Matt? I’m sure you’ll be providing that for us.
By Randy Miller
January 7, 2007 01:40 PM | Link to this
Booker dirty? You are a complete freakin MORON! You have your own blog? What a complete IDIOT! YOU must be Catholic? You get caught throwing a flagrant elbow o the face or moletsting an 8 year old boy and it’s Bokker or the 8 year old boys fault. Dang…I didn’t know Michael Jackson had his own blog.
By BA
January 7, 2007 01:43 PM | Link to this
“who tape review will reveal to be a dirty player”
I guess this is the sort of libelous garbage that passes for journalism at your rag Matt. Will reveal? You’re kidding right?
By Steve
January 7, 2007 01:49 PM | Link to this
You gutted a good article on a good Tech team that I dred playing again next month in HotLanta! Crittendon is a top candidate for rookie of the year and he kicked off his campaign with a bang against us last night. In this era of retaliation Booker should be commended for his composure. I for one was betting he was going to come back at Peacock and both players would have regretted the incident. The only thing that is regrettable is your article!
By BC
January 7, 2007 01:51 PM | Link to this
Someone call the Waaaaambulance, it seems somebody stole Matt’s candy.
By Matt Winkeljohn
January 7, 2007 01:52 PM | Link to this
Didn’t defend Peacock’s elbow. He deserved to be ejected. Booker deserved a couple of foul calls away from the ball leading up to the ‘bow. He was kidney-jabbing Peacock, Dickey, and Smith. He and Peacock were both warned at least once. Booker handled it better, but he’s not innocent.
By Bettina
January 7, 2007 01:56 PM | Link to this
Oh, I get it. Matt’s pocket protector leaked? Several really stupid comments in his rant. A player running down court elbows another player in the face, but the recipient is dirty. Uh….okay…
By Clemfan
January 7, 2007 02:03 PM | Link to this
Then say that the first time Matt……Don’t label a player “dirty” if you meant to say that the two were scapping or battling all day. You said he is a “dirty” player in a lame attempt to justify an elbow to the face. Physical? Yeah. Tough? Yeah. Dirty? No sir, that would Peacock. Nice try though Matt.
By corey
January 7, 2007 02:06 PM | Link to this
for the poster that was talking about clemson, maryland, vt and others having hired guns… how many starting players on your team are majoring in architecture with above a 3.0 gpa (as cliff hammonds of clemson is doing)
By Tigerfan
January 7, 2007 02:06 PM | Link to this
Matt, you’re a crybaby. Plain and simple.
By Winkeljohn is stupid
January 7, 2007 02:25 PM | Link to this
Matt, you are unprofessional in your writing. Just say they were battling all day and Peacock lost his cool. I am sure Peacock’s only transgression was when he threw the elbow. It’s one thing to be biased, it’s another to be unprofessionally biased. You are the latter. Next time, I hope Booker plays as dirty and Clemson wins its 4th in a row over the basketball school from Atlanta.
By RBTiger
January 7, 2007 02:45 PM | Link to this
You guys are hilarious. You have two guys on your team that will likely be in the NBA in 1-2 years (both of whom may have entered out of high school if that was still an option)…those are student athletes? Taking players like that seems to be the defition of “hired guns”.
As for Booker being dirty and likening this team to Barnes…that is crazy. Have at least a little bit of perspective. Barnes came in and won right away the only way he could. Purnell is building, slowly getting the players and improving his team. Very different situations and very different personnel. Peacock should be suspended another game for that garbage (by the way…take off the mask if you are going to elbow others, punk). As big a cheap shot as you’ll see and if I were a Tech fan, I’d be embarrassed by his actions. If he was provoked, at the very least handle it like a man not a (starts with p, ends with y—you get the picture). I can still remember Alvin Jones doing that same thing at LJ to Terrell McIntyre coming around screens about 3 times before he got called back in the late 90s against our “dirty” Barnes teams. What a punk that guy was too.
You lost. Deal with it. You haven’t won on the road in forever—maybe it’s time you start looking in the mirror and worrying about your guys instead of assuming one of our “void in the eyes” players must be to blame. I think you’ve got plenty of your own issues to worry about without vilifying one of our players—who frankly, did an unbelievable job of showing poise and composure and not demolishing Peacock.
By Bring Reeves Back!
January 7, 2007 02:47 PM | Link to this
that elbow helped clemson get back in the game. And crintenntion should of hacked the crap out of the guy, hes a 50 % free throw shooter!! that last effort on defense was just pitiful! that said this is a great tech team and everyone on espn talks about the talent on this team and how were a top level team. But if we dont start winning these acc games were not going to make the NCAA’s. Even thou were definitly a top 15 team if you ask me.
By Coby DuBose
January 7, 2007 02:56 PM | Link to this
Winkeljohn, brother.
Listen. I’m in the newspaper business. I’ve covered Clemson hoops for the better part of this year. I sat beside your teammate Chip Towers when we played against UGA. I’m just wondering if you went and asked Trevor about his dirty play? He’s always pretty accessible in the tunnel. He’s a pretty well spoken young man, as well. He’d have certainly answered any questions you had about his play.
My guess is that you didn’t do that. You spoke to Hewitt and got out of dodge. Then you made an off-base assumption that has prompted comments from other morons who are describing Booker as a brainless lurch who plays dirty.
Here’s the deal. I know the kid. I know all of them. Booker is soft-spoken and he’s never been in a bit of trouble. He’s big enough to have hit Peacock hard enough that he’d have been in a mask for life if he’d wanted to. What did he do? Nothing. He didn’t retaliate. He didn’t lose his head. He composed himself and helped the Tigers win a good, close basketball game.
Booker has never been accused of any sort of “dirty” play until your accusation. If you’re going to make a comment like this, at least have something to back it up. Don’t depend on some phantom “game tape” that you or everyone else will never see. In the end, you just floated that bullcrap out there and it will be stuck to Booker for the rest of his career. And why? Because he got elbowed in the chops by some blowhard from GT? Give me a break…
As for our guys not having a bit of intelligence in their eyes…Maybe the guy who made that comment could make the team, then. One of our “hired guns”, Cliff Hammonds, was the valedictorian of his high school class and he’s dean’s list in archetecture at Clemson. He was recruited by Duke and Stanford for football. I bet he’s smarter than you, but I could be wrong.
There’s plenty of guys like that on this team, too. James Mays has worked his butt off in the last year in order to improve in the classroom. If you can’t respect a guy for that, you’re an idiot.
By Matt
January 7, 2007 02:58 PM | Link to this
Winkeljohn getting absolutely owed.
I love it.
By Rusty Old Tiger
January 7, 2007 03:19 PM | Link to this
If Trevor Booker were doing something contrary to the rules, the referees would have stopped it (how many fouls did Booker have called on him? Two, I believe). Zach Peacock was ejected for a flagrant foul. No one knows if the game’s outcome was changed by that. All that aside, I do resent the disparaging remarks about Clemson’s student athletes. Have you checked Clemson’s ranking in the NCAA academic standings lately? I’d say their student athletes are doing pretty well academically.
By bigitme
January 7, 2007 03:39 PM | Link to this
No class at Clemson? Dirty players? Apparently non of you have ever played basketball. After reviewing game tapes Travis is not a dirty player. He is strong and at times dominate. Peacock couldnt take being DOMINATED by a freshman. A team that has to resort to throwing bows and kicking a player out of school for honor code violation shouldnt throw stones when they themselves live in a glass house. The best TEAM won that basketball game. And Clemson will go .500 against those teams on Tobacco road. Will beat UNC at home 1-17-07 in front of a sell out crowd. Meanwhile GT will not be .500 as a team in the ACC play. HAHAHAHA NATS. Basketball like football DOMINATION
By OP Fan
January 7, 2007 05:38 PM | Link to this
By Matt Winkeljohn
January 7, 2007 01:52 PM | Link to this
Didn’t defend Peacock’s elbow. He deserved to be ejected. Booker deserved a couple of foul calls away from the ball leading up to the ‘bow. He was kidney-jabbing Peacock, Dickey, and Smith. He and Peacock were both warned at least once. Booker handled it better, but he’s not innocent
Winklejohn,
Labelling Booker as a “dirty” player and stating that Booker somehow deserved an elbow to the face (“he’s not innocent”) is completely irresponsible journalism. I once thought the AJC was a respectable media source. It has lost a ton of credibility by the mere fact that it would allow such a hack as yourself to write for it. I will be cancelling my subscription.
Just some future advice if this incident doesn’t end your career: try to have some solid evidence before you start making personal attacks on the character of student athletes. You should be ashamed of yourself.
Sincerely, OP Fan
By Ga_Tech_92
January 7, 2007 07:15 PM | Link to this
I would like to say that Matt writes great articles, but probably would word things a little different in this one if he had it to do over. Hindsight and all that…I love the emotion…he cares…that fire is exactly what we need…without the ‘bow…
positive: Peacock is the sort of kid who will turn this into something positive and will be a beast the rest of the year, mark my words.
By Talatu
January 7, 2007 07:32 PM | Link to this
Matt,
As a first time reader of your column, I was amazed at your inablity to cover this atory accurately and without bias. Hopefully there won’t be a next time.
By GreenJacket
January 7, 2007 07:51 PM | Link to this
Weird to see all the Clemson fans coming out of the woodwork and onto the Tech Blog. Congratulations on the win and having a very good b-ball team this year. Can’t say as much for your underachieving football team ( Tech underachieved as well). Very funny how most Tiger fans don’t acknowledge or realize that the Jackets own Clemson in football all time and even have won 6 of the last 10.
By UGA - the Cesspool of the South
January 7, 2007 07:54 PM | Link to this
Coach K won’t lose 2 games in a row, unfortunately, and we will fall to 0-3 in the ACC. This will not be overcome unfortunately. The Miami loss sealed our doom. They are one of the worst teams in the country. What does that tell us? What I have said for a few years now. Coach Hewitt suffers from the same ills as Coach Cremins did - a very likeable guy - a great recruiter - but just an average coach. We seem to have a lot of that at GT these days.
By great Scott
January 7, 2007 08:22 PM | Link to this
Matt Winklejohn you are the man. Your firey pen is something GT fans can appreciate. I also see some life in the GT basketball program for the first time in a couple of years. Crittenton will slowly take over the leadership role of this team. I can see the fire in his eyes that says “I hate to lose.”
By Mr. Sad Truth
January 7, 2007 08:59 PM | Link to this
Hewitt is 47-61 in ACC play since arriving 6+ seasons ago. 43% winning pct. He is 13-37 on the road in ACC play. Tech has lost 14 in-a-row at home overall. Tech has only been ranked (for a period of time) in the top 25 only once in 10 year (from 2004 thru 2005) How bad must things be before people realize what a total unequivocal and complete waste of time it is following TECH Hoops.
By UGA - the Cesspool of the South
January 7, 2007 09:42 PM | Link to this
great Scott, you’re on glue. Hewitt is just average. read what Mr Sad Truth wrote - numbers don’t lie. I didn’t need the numbers to figure it out though - and I figured it out a few years ago. i am a smart guy - after all - I graduated to Tech.
By Creminshasonenutsohescalleduno!
January 7, 2007 10:15 PM | Link to this
To quote Tom Cruise, …. “Matt, Mat, Matt” …. Booker’s not dirty, you know it, the refs know it, Peacock knows it, we all know it. Maybe you were reaching to spice up your article? Journalism?
Tech fans – no more crying about fouls and so many front court guys having four fouls. Anybody who has been watching ACC games for any length of time realized long ago that fouls go against you and with you. No need to discuss the officiating after each game. The refs are part of the game, like it or not. Life’s tough.
Clemson sat James Mays for all but 5 minutes in the 1st half. Maybe that’s why James wasn’t in foul trouble so quickly like Tech’s guys. Maybe that’s why the game was closer than it could have been? Who knows? You lost.
Crittenton is a flat out stud. Reminds me of Johnny Dawkins. Give him the ball and he will score. You just gotta hope he stays for a few years.
By Mike
January 7, 2007 10:44 PM | Link to this
Matt:
If you grew up in my neighborhood we’d give you the ball and tell you to run up the middle every play so we could beat the crap out of ya. Dirty? No. Fair? No. Part of life? Yes.
By this time next year you’ll be writing for the Home & Garden section.
Mike
By Anthony Serna
January 7, 2007 11:44 PM | Link to this
Matt, thanks for getting rid of “OP Fan.” I like how he signed off, “sincerely.” What a genuine individual. Actually, a total tool. Good riddens.
By Tommy Jay
January 8, 2007 08:17 AM | Link to this
Clemson fans talking smack about hoops? When is the last time you even made it to Saturday of the ACC tournament? Ever won in Chapel Hill? Shut up Tiger fans and go back to your tractor!
By GTracy
January 8, 2007 09:28 AM | Link to this
Wow where did all the Clemson basketball fans come from? Owning Tech in basketball or football, we all know that is a complete lie. Before Tech’s loss on Saturday Tech had won 9 of 13 in bball. That sure sounds like owning to me. Congrats on literally scratching out a win and on having a decent team this year. Good luck down the stretch, you are going to need it. By the way, I’m looking forward to the rest of Tech’s season. They are playing so much better than last year minus a few mistakes that can be corrected. Go Jackets! Clemson’s over. Time to suit up for the Dukies.
By Tigerfan
January 8, 2007 04:23 PM | Link to this
GTracy, it’s all relative sweetheart. 9 of 13? You’re right. However that is now 3 in a row for us. Now, get back in the kitchen and fix me some dinner.
By Tigercub
January 8, 2007 09:10 PM | Link to this
Tommy Jay,
Are you trying to say you’re only allowed to talk smack if you’ve had success in the past? That really makes sense - I guess FSU & Miami fans should have been talking it up this football season despite their subpar records then. No, we haven’t won in Chapel Hill, but I don’t see how that’s relevant to Georgia Tech.
And GTracy, most of us didn’t come here to talk about owning Tech. We heard about Winkeljohn’s ridiculous “dirty player” comments & came here to set the record straight.
By TB
January 9, 2007 09:47 AM | Link to this
Seriously….where’s the footage that shows his dirty play?
Replay it looks as though Dickie is constantly grinding and hammering on the kidney area…but I wouldn’t call that dirty…hard low post play. Booker absolutely bodied up and abused Peacock about 90 seconds before the elbow…I think Peacock just didn’t like getting worked.
Seriously, have you watched the tape?
By yellow fever
January 9, 2007 10:52 AM | Link to this
To all of you Tech Fans!!! You are only cursing your team with the negative words you speak over these players and coaches!!!! It is a fact you get what you say,whether you choose to agree with this or not. I have found this to be true whether you are a Christian or not. Reggie would not have played as bad as he did if our fans had spoken postive words over his play! I have a found out these truths in a book called THE POWER OF YOUR WORDS! This also effects your family as well. Sound silly but it is the truth!!!!!
By Rick 91
January 9, 2007 11:18 AM | Link to this
In the ACC turnament in 2005, Vernon Hamilton and Cliff Hammands of Clemson had the half time advantage over UNC.
That UNC team had Felton, Jamison, and Marvin Williams. Clemson is a legitimate contender in the ACC. That takes nothing away from Tech.
The ejection of Peacock was not a factor in the outcome. Tech shouldn’t have allowed the layup with 2.2 seconds to go.
Tech is very talented, but equally as young. Expect a few growing pains.
GT alum 89,91
By TWR
January 9, 2007 01:52 PM | Link to this
OP Fan, check your tiny brain. You big mouthed hillbilly. In case your mommy didn’t teach you how to spell I’ll help you out. You spell Duke like this: DUKE. You inbread redneck.
By Tigercub
January 9, 2007 07:07 PM | Link to this
Hahahaha! Nothing funnier than seeing someone call out another poster’s spelling & have a spelling mistake of his own. FYI, it’s spelled “inbred.” At least OP Fan was purposely spelling his word incorrectly.
By Societa
January 19, 2007 10:52 PM | Link to this
http://frenkel.other-italy.info/index.html >societa [url=http://frenkel.other-italy.info/index.html]societa[/url] http://baker.italyfinance.org/index.html >associazioni [url=http://baker.italyfinance.org/index.html]associazioni[/url] http://corley.italy-news.info/index.html >europa [url=http://corley.italy-news.info/index.html]europa[/url]
By Pietra Dura
January 20, 2007 03:26 PM | Link to this
http://fischer.newitaly.info/index.html >pietra dura [url=http://fischer.newitaly.info/index.html]pietra dura[/url] http://bassin.italyfinance.org/index.html >spettacolo [url=http://bassin.italyfinance.org/index.html]spettacolo[/url] http://burbank.i-t-a-l-y.info/index.html >curriculum [url=http://burbank.i-t-a-l-y.info/index.html]curriculum[/url]
By Riccardo
January 20, 2007 11:57 PM | Link to this
http://batle.italyfinance.org/index.html >riccardo scamarcio [url=http://batle.italyfinance.org/index.html]riccardo scamarcio[/url] http://fodor.other-italy.info/index.html >foto ragazza [url=http://fodor.other-italy.info/index.html]foto ragazza[/url] http://frame.other-italy.info/index.html >giochi it [url=http://frame.other-italy.info/index.html]giochi it[/url]
By Grandi
January 21, 2007 08:07 AM | Link to this
http://cleland.i-t-a-l-y.info/index.html >serena grandi [url=http://cleland.i-t-a-l-y.info/index.html]serena grandi[/url] http://gammer.other-italy.info/giochi_strategia_pc.html >giochi strategia [url=http://gammer.other-italy.info/giochistrategiapc.html]giochi strategia[/url] http://clements.i-t-a-l-y.info/index.html >trucchi giochi pc [url=http://clements.i-t-a-l-y.info/index.html]trucchi giochi pc[/url]
By Giochi
January 22, 2007 02:24 AM | Link to this
http://antonio.virtuale.org/video_giochi.html >video giochi [url=http://antonio.virtuale.org/videogiochi.html]video giochi[/url] http://antonio.virtuale.org/giochi_avventura.html >giochi avventura [url=http://antonio.virtuale.org/giochiavventura.html]giochi avventura[/url] http://franchesko.virtuale.org/index.html >gioco azione arcade [url=http://franchesko.virtuale.org/index.html]gioco azione arcade[/url]