Shumphert holds against Weatherford

I've taken a couple of days and did a little bit of research before I chimed in on this thread. Anadarko had lost 5 out of the last 7 games played going into the Weatherfod game. They had lost to Newcastle (4A) #5 48-38, Purcell (3A) #3 50-37, Kingfisher (4A) #2 50-27, Blanchard (4A) #18 50-40, Tuttle (4A) #10 54-37. In the Tuttle game Anadarko had a 37-33 lead going into the 4th qtr and failed to score. 

Now thats the the stage going into the game in which they now face Weatherford (4A) #3. Nobody can say that Anadarko hadn't "PLAYED BALL" in the games leading up to this contest and in their game against Tuttle, had been outscored 21-0 in the final qtr. 

Its not not unreasonable to think that a coach in that situation would try to bring something different to the table to have a different outcome than what they had been getting in the games previously mentioned. 

Weatherford's base defense is a 1-3-1. It fits Weatherford very well with the long wingspan their players have. It's a very hard defense to crack when they have the personnel that they have. I'm sure Anadarko wanted to force Weatherford out of that defense and into a man to man and also if Anadarko could shorten the game some and limit Weatherford 's possessions that would be a benefit also. 

So for Anadarko to start the game by holding the ball was smart. 1. Considering their offensive production in previous games, they don't have the firepower of Weatherford. 2. Worst thing for Anadarko would have been to get behind early and have to play catchup all night long. You only have one chance sometimes to hold the ball and dictate terms, and that's at the start of the game. 3. By holding the ball early Anadarko 's coach could gauge Weatherford 's coach and how he is going to handle this situation. He could use this for future reference either in this game or the playoffs. 

What happened with Weatherford choosing to stay back and not pressure much, they came out a couple of times but Anadarko easily handled the token pressure, was that obviously both coaches dug their heels in and this situation played out like it did. To put all the blame, if there is any blame to be put, on Anadarko is unfair. Weatherford  chose to let Anadarko hold the ball and that's within their rights. Anadarko chose to hold the ball and that's within their rights. Anadarko had lost 5 out of their last 7 games and was playing the 19-1 #3 ranked team in the state and they missed a good look at a 3pt shot at the buzzer to win the game. 

So to say that Anadarko's coach did a disservice to his players or that he insulted them, or doing this stall ball was a travesty to all involved is not imo true at all. He gave his guys the best chance to win under the circumstances. And to be honest Doug Schumpert doesn't care what I think or anybody else either.