ShareThis Page
Other Local

Drexel's epic comeback breaks record set by Dick Groat's Duke team

Jerry DiPaola
| Friday, Feb. 23, 2018, 7:54 p.m.
Dick Groat, guard on the Duke University men's basketball team, class of 1952.
ASSOCIATED PRESS
Dick Groat, guard on the Duke University men's basketball team, class of 1952.

Contacted Friday morning, Dick Groat didn't know one of his records had been erased from the NCAA basketball record books the night before.

These days, he's more concerned with two other teams, Pitt, for which he offers analysis on the radio, and Franklin Regional, coached by his grandson, Steve Scorpion.

But Groat was excited to learn Drexel set an NCAA Division I record Thursday night, rallying from a 34-point deficit to defeat Delaware, 85-83.

He was excited because it gave him a chance to reminisce.

Prior to that, the largest deficit overcome to win a game was 32 points on Dec. 30, 1950, when Groat scored 32 points to lead Duke over Tulane, 74-72.

"Everything we did was right, and everything they did was wrong," said Groat, recalling the consolation game of the Dixie Classic in Raleigh, N.C.

"We played solid defense, and we just kept scoring and scoring and the momentum picked up, and we got better and better."

Over these past 68 years, Groat, 87, remembers distinctly Duke coach Hal Bradley's halftime speech.

"He said, 'As badly as you played in the first half, I don't know if you have any chance to win. But let's go out there and don't embarrass ourselves.'

"What else was he going to say as badly as we were playing?"

Still down 20 with 11 minutes to play, Duke scored the game's final 22 points to win on a basket by big man Dayton Allen with 10 seconds left.

Later in life, when Groat was playing shortstop for the Pirates, he became especially familiar with rallies. The 1960 Pirates were famous for their stirring comebacks on their way to a World Series title.

"(Manager) Danny Murtaugh always said," Groat recalled, " 'No use coming to see a ball game before the seventh inning the way you guys are playing.' "

Drexel coach Zach Spiker's halftime speech was a bit more analytical and detailed than what Bradley told his team.

Drexel assistant coach Justin Jennings, who played at Seneca Valley and Penn State Behrend, said Spiker had an appropriate message.

"You could easily lose your mind on the team because of the poor performance," Jennings said of the 56-29 deficit that had been 53-19 with 2:36 left in the half. "But he kept calm and told them we have to just come out and represent what Drexel is right now and what it's going to become. Our guys bought into that."

Knowing the loser would fall into last place in the Colonial Athletic Association, Spiker told his players to cut the second half into five segments, divided by timeouts, and try to win each one. They won four and tied one. Drexel won when Tramaine Isabell hit two foul shots with 2.2 seconds left.

"We got a couple of turnovers, and guys just started believing," Jennings said.

Overall, Drexel had nine steals and something Groat didn't have in 1950: 10 3-pointers.

The Drexel press was the key, however. After one steal in the backcourt, Jennings said a Drexel player, who was protecting the rim, ran the length of the court to set a screen.

That's the kind of hustle Groat appreciates.

Jerry DiPaola is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach him at jdipaola@tribweb.com or via Twitter @JDiPaola_Trib.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me