Before we get started, Mr. C is a participant in the Capital One Video Challenge. Enjoy this video of the 16 mascots and make sure to vote for Mr. C. He's currently trailing Oregon's "The Duck." Damn state school and their "numbers."
Rodger Sherman at Sippin' On Purple has a phenomenally detailed account of the illustrious Vanderbilt-Northwestern football rivalry: a 3-0 Vanderbilt victory and a 20-20 tie. He has proposed a suicide pact in the event the game ends 3-0 in either direction. I have obviously accepted and have nominated seppuku. Here is a practical guide.
Caldwell pointed to the last time Vanderbilt had an extended break between games prior to the 2008 Music City Bowl win over Boston College. "Everybody is like, 'Wow!' Well, it wasn't a big secret," he said. "We got some people healed up. We got better."
So, to put it simply, two teams are tied at the end of the game. If the offense calls a timeout, it has less of a chance of scoring than if it simply took the ball out of the hoop and went down the court as quickly as possible. This seems like something coaches should probably know.
Ezekowitz also looked at whether teams on average scored more points by not calling a timeout, and they did. Teams that called timeout scored an average of 0.773 points per possession whereas teams that did not call timeout scored an average of 1.06 PPP. [...] Thus teams that do not call timeout not only score more often, but also score more points on their possessions than teams that do.
It would be interesting to see if the numbers hold true with Vanderbilt. Coach Stallings is widely considered by his fellow coaches to be an excellent tactician [see Calipari's post game comments from UK@VU last season]. I would imagine that the coaches who are excellent tacticians most likely benefit more from the timeout than mediocre tacticians. It would also be interesting to see if those numbers held true for all the NCAA Tourney teams last season. I suspect they would not.