Duke 71, Belmont 70

Wow.

Belmont has nothing to hang their heads about.

For one, they came from 10 down in the second half to take a late lead.

Final 5 seconds notwithstanding, Belmont coach Rick Byrd coached Mike Krzyzewski under the table. Belmont has been a team known for it's 3-point shooting all year. Knowing that Duke would want to deny the 3, Belmont ran Princeton-style back-cuts the entire first half. Once Duke adjusted, Belmont was able to get open 3's in the second half.

Abso-smurf-ly brilliant.

Also brilliant? Not shorteneing their bench late in the regular season and postseason. Belmont played 10-deep against Cincinnati and Alabama in November. They played 10-deep against East Tennessee State and Lipscomb in February and March. And they played 10-deep against Duke.

Thus, when All-conference performers Shane Dansby and Justin Hare were held in check most of the night, Andy Wicke, Alex Renfroe, Matthew Dotson, and Henry Harris were able to step up.

A couple of comments about the 104.5 The Zone broadcast. Memo to Kevin Ingram -- there is no "Y" in Duke. The middle two letters are pronounced "OO," not with a long "U." Here's a hint: It rhymes with "Boo."

On another note, the Belmont Media Relations guy was doing the color commentary. Between the grunts and moans, we got to hear the occasional complaint about the referees. Is it just me, or did he soound just like Tim Thompson calling a Vanderbilt basketball game? Or maybe it was Bob Kesling's color guy from Tennessee football season? Either way, welcome to the big time.

This next part is just for me, but you can read it if you want to:

Mike Krzyzewski proved yet again why none of his assistant coaches ever succeed much as head guys. Simply put, his teams and coaches rely on him entirely too much.

Exhibit A -- When Coach K had his hip surgery in the mid-90's, his team went 14-16. With him the previous year, they won 25 games. With him the next year, they won 26. If a coach makes that big a difference to his team, they rely on him way too much. The best thing you can say about Dean Smth is not that he won 879 games, nor is it that his coaching tree is do wide and fruitful. After Dean Smith retired, Bill Guthridge took the next 3 North Carolina teams to the Final 4. Dean Smith built a program that could go on (for a while) without him.

Exhibit B -- In the 2002 Final 4, Duke is playing Maryland. Jason Williams is dribbling near half-court as time winds down in the first half. He turns to the bench behind him to get the play. Meanwhile, the Caner-Medley for Maryland jumps in, steals the ball while Williams' head is turned, and gets a break-away lay-up. The point: If Williams doesn't know what to do late, that's the fault of the coach.

Exhibit C -- Last year, VCU hits a shot to go ahead late in the first-round NCAA game. Rather than hurrying up the floor to get a shot against an unsettled defense, Duke calls time-out. My beef is not that they did the wrong thing, it's that they simply didn't know what to do. They needed Coach K to tell them.

Exhibit D -- Yesterday, Coach K had the flu. For most of the game, his team played like they all had the flu. Never mind that Byrd coached him under the table. Krzyzewski's team needed him, and he didn't "have it" last night. And it almost cost them.

The point: Duke without Coach K is mediocre at best. This is a significant leadership flaw. The difference between a competitor and a leader is how your team does in your absence. Whether this is an intentional part of the Krzyzewski personality or coaching style, or it's simply an overlooked flaw, I don't know.

The paradox of leadership is that the most effective leaders are the ones whose people can live without them. Creating an enviornment where you are indispensible ultimately sets up your organization for failure.

Everybody eventually goes away. What will the people you leave behind do then?