HOF tournament thoughts

[msf22b]

This weekend was delicious.

I loved it too

 

[vtcwbuff]

It's not about scheduling top 25 teams. It's about not scheduling OOC teams ranked 157th, 212th, 307th (out of 343 ranked) in some sort of trumped up "tournament" where only one of the teams has a chance of winning. That's especially true this season with an in conference schedule that will include only one or possibly two competitive teams. Why not just declare UConn the tournament winner without playing the games and avoid the risk of injury?

I played baseball on a couple of crappy teams. I played in a lot of games where we expected to lose but I never played in a game where I knew we had zero possibility of winning. I just know what my reaction would have been had that happened.

 

[Icebear]

- you think they play enough top teams. i don't. they're uconn. play as many of the best as possible.
- i think playing , say georgia,or iowa st., or marist, just to name a few, would be more competitive than monmouth or boston u. i expect you won't dispute that. they would win by 20, but it would be far more preferable.

is your point that uconn is already playing enough of the better teams, or do you think that it's just not possible to schedule more of the better teams?

It has been said numerous times by Geno and others that programming is not anything like you portray it. UCONN tries to play as many of the best as possible; sometimes schedules and calendar openings don't mesh, sometimes others are simply afraid of getting an embarrassing thumping, sometimes personalities grate, sometimes obligations already exist, sometimes it is about budgets, sometimes it is about where the game gets played ... There are many, many reasons. We get it, you simply don't get. Neither is going to change anything. Face it Geno and the team are not hiding from anyone.

 

[RockyMTblue2]

It's not about scheduling top 25 teams. It's about not scheduling OOC teams ranked 157th, 212th, 307th (out of 343 ranked) in some sort of trumped up "tournament" where only one of the teams has a chance of winning. That's especially true this season with an in conference schedule that will include only one or possibly two competitive teams. Why not just declare UConn the tournament winner without playing the games and avoid the risk of injury?

I played baseball on a couple of crappy teams. I played in a lot of games where we expected to lose but I never played in a game where I knew we had zero possibility of winning. I just know what my reaction would have been had that happened.

For about the 9th time in this thread: UConn did not schedule the other teams. UConn agreed to be in the tournament and took pot luck. That is a fact.

 

[trisailin]

I'm not sure several posting here understand who/what is the opponent for UCONN. For Geno and the entire crew, the opponent is "PERFECT BASKETBALL" (you play against the game - not the other team). In fact, I dare say the coaching staff uses that metric INSTEAD of the score.

 

[meyers7]

I played baseball on a couple of crappy teams. I played in a lot of games where we expected to lose but I never played in a game where I knew we had zero possibility of winning. I just know what my reaction would have been had that happened.

Well 1) Baseball is completely different, you get 1 pitcher who has a hot game and yea almost anyone can beat anyone else 2) you probably had games where you had zero possibility, you just didn't realize it.

 

[UcMiami]

It's not about scheduling top 25 teams. It's about not scheduling OOC teams ranked 157th, 212th, 307th (out of 343 ranked) in some sort of trumped up "tournament" where only one of the teams has a chance of winning. That's especially true this season with an in conference schedule that will include only one or possibly two competitive teams. Why not just declare UConn the tournament winner without playing the games and avoid the risk of injury?

I played baseball on a couple of crappy teams. I played in a lot of games where we expected to lose but I never played in a game where I knew we had zero possibility of winning. I just know what my reaction would have been had that happened.

For Uconn this season, it really doesn't matter if you are ranked 307th or 37th - you have no chance. And for the last decade it hasn't mattered if you were ranked 50th or 100th - you had no chance. In fact, only once in the last 20 years or so has a team ranked below 25 won a game against Uconn and that team had spent some part of the year in the rankings if I remember correctly. That happens to be the state of the game at the moment and the quality of Uconn coaching that the team does NOT lose or play down to its lower ranked competition. The same can not be said for other top ten teams, but in a general way is true. (Just ask Ball State!)

 

[Phil]

I'm not sure several posting here understand who/what is the opponent for UCONN. For Geno and the entire crew, the opponent is "PERFECT BASKETBALL" (you play against the game - not the other team). In fact, I dare say the coaching staff uses that metric INSTEAD of the score.

The discouraging thing is, this means we are 0-984.

 

[DavidinNaples]

The discouraging thing is, this means we are 0-984.

And oddly enough, Geno won't quit and accept reality.....he just keeps showing up and reaching for perfection...

 

[hoophuskee]

They can tell their grandchildren that UConn beat us by 60, we scored the first 2 points of the game, then UConn scored the next 30 straight, we were never in the game, the final outcome was decided before the opening tip, it was a great learning experience: we learned that our coach should not have scheduled the game. The school got a nice payday and we have the lasting memory of a humiliating loss. But we got to play on the same floor as Stef, Stew, Moriah and Brianna. And if Morgan and KML had played, things would have been worse. But we got to play UConn, what a wonderful memory.

I played against a player that was an All-Amercian, an Olympian, and played in the NBA for a long time. He crushed us. I got a real chance to pit my strengths against his and got thoroughly annihilated by him throughout. I still "brag" about it to this day.

 

[hoophuskee]

It's not about scheduling top 25 teams. It's about not scheduling OOC teams ranked 157th, 212th, 307th (out of 343 ranked) in some sort of trumped up "tournament" where only one of the teams has a chance of winning. That's especially true this season with an in conference schedule that will include only one or possibly two competitive teams. Why not just declare UConn the tournament winner without playing the games and avoid the risk of injury?

I played baseball on a couple of crappy teams. I played in a lot of games where we expected to lose but I never played in a game where I knew we had zero possibility of winning. I just know what my reaction would have been had that happened.

How many teams do you think have a real chance of beating UCONN? So let's not play most games within the conference too? Lets change the rules for that too to satisfy your wishes of "chance to win?" And why bother with some of the bottom teams in the NCAA tourney who know they'll be a crap seed even playing in the NCAA. After all, it's about you and the poster "44 . . ." that don't want to see blowouts. When the kids win and get the chance to play in NCAA- aren't they so silly for celebrating so much getting in the NCAA knowing they will get thoroughly crushed? They don't have a shot to win. They seem ok with it, don't they?

 

[cohenzone]

Everyone knows UConn overmatches 99.9% of the teams. And clearly it isn't UConn's "fault". The perfection thing is true, but it isn't particularly put to a stern test by a lot of the opponents. I'm not "bored", which is not the point. I just think it's a lot more fun and interesting to see how they handle a team able to make "perfection" much more difficult. When Shea and company back-doored Tennessee to death, that was a little unexpected and a treat. Watching them throttle ND in the tournament last year was great. When all of our bigs come close to a double double 3 games in a row in games won by 40 or more, it shows how disciplined they are to seek perfection, but not much else. Clearly there are are very few teams in a given year able to test UConn, and the need to fill a schedule makes certain that there will be a bunch of blow-outs, predictable in advance. I go or watch on TV anyway. There is no reasonable way UConn can add that many more top 25 teams to its schedule, and for the most part, adding a couple more might make the difference between a few more 25 point wins and a few less 40 point wins. Understanding how this particular "tournament" was devised doesn't particularly make the games great as athletic contests. But as I said, I go any way and cheer all the stuff we do. Romans went to watch lions devour Christians, and I'm pretty sure the outcome was never in doubt.

 

[pap49cba]

Is there any way to put a thread on Ignore?

 

[hoophuskee]

Everyone knows UConn overmatches 99.9% of the teams. And clearly it isn't UConn's "fault". The perfection thing is true, but it isn't particularly put to a stern test by a lot of the opponents. I'm not "bored", which is not the point. I just think it's a lot more fun and interesting to see how they handle a team able to make "perfection" much more difficult. When Shea and company back-doored Tennessee to death, that was a little unexpected and a treat. Watching them throttle ND in the tournament last year was great. When all of our bigs come close to a double double 3 games in a row in games won by 40 or more, it shows how disciplined they are to seek perfection, but not much else. Clearly there are are very few teams in a given year able to test UConn, and the need to fill a schedule makes certain that there will be a bunch of blow-outs, predictable in advance. I go or watch on TV anyway. There is no reasonable way UConn can add that many more top 25 teams to its schedule, and for the most part, adding a couple more might make the difference between a few more 25 point wins and a few less 40 point wins. Understanding how this particular "tournament" was devised doesn't particularly make the games great as athletic contests. But as I said, I go any way and cheer all the stuff we do. Romans went to watch lions devour Christians, and I'm pretty sure the outcome was never in doubt.

I got to run but I disagree wiht what YOU wantto see. It's not about YOU. First off, why should small schools not have a chance? Secondly, Md and Penn state were at home. What hppens to teams number 16-25 when theyplay UCONN at home? It's a 30 point plus game, isn't it?

 

[cohenzone]

I got to run but I disagree wiht what YOU wantto see. It's not about YOU. First off, why should small schools not have a chance? Secondly, Md and Penn state were at home. What hppens to teams number 16-25 when theyplay UCONN at home? It's a 30 point plus game, isn't it?

UM, how can you disagree with what I want to see? How old are you? Actually, it is about me to decide what I prefer to see. See, these games are known as "spectator" sports. They are meant to be a form of entertainment. Every person in attendance is going because they "prefer" to be there as opposed to chopping wood. If I go knowing a blow it is likely, that is my choice, but it doesn't mean I am more entertained by a predictable blow out than I am by a real contest. If I want total relaxation, I'll go to a spa. If I want athleticism with no one but the athlete to test themselves, I'll go to a track meet. Ask the UConn football fans how enjoyable it's been to be on the receiving end this year. Betcha the players haven't enjoyed it one bit, even if a few certain future pros were on the other team.

 

[hoophuskee]

UM, how can you disagree with what I want to see? How old are you? Actually, it is about me to decide what I prefer to see. See, these games are known as "spectator" sports. They are meant to be a form of entertainment. Every person in attendance is going because they "prefer" to be there as opposed to chopping wood. If I go knowing a blow it is likely, that is my choice, but it doesn't mean I am more entertained by a predictable blow out than I am by a real contest. If I want total relaxation, I'll go to a spa. If I want athleticism with no one but the athlete to test themselves, I'll go to a track meet. Ask the UConn football fans how enjoyable it's been to be on the receiving end this year. Betcha the players haven't enjoyed it one bit, even if a few certain future pros were on the other team.

I got to disagree. The game is college basketball game. There are differences between "spectator sports" from high school to pro sports. Blowout games are still in some form entertainment to some. Some fans hate to be worried for example- thus they enjoy blowouts.

My issue with you is how you look at things- and by the way I'm pretty old. What did your first post say on this thread? You think these games were/are of marginal value? THAT is an issue I have with your opinion (not with YOU personally). No need to go off on me. I guess my capitalization of some words make it sound like "I'm yelling" or "dislike you" in some manner. That isn't the case at all. For example, I've mentioned on this thread or another that when I was younger I got destroyed by a player that was an all-amercian, Olympian, and played a long time in the NBA. Our team got wiped out. But I had the chance to pit my strengths against his and I got toally annihilated. To this day I still "beam" about that opportunity. This is just one example of how you and I differ.

So I am sorry if i am going to "aggravate you" in some manner (it is not personal. You and I just differ.) by disagreeing with your context but we are complete opposites of what we want to see and/or what we believe is of value. For eample, in the prime of Hoya Paranoia the John Thompson Sr. era, he regularly scheduled dog teams early in the year and was criticized for it. He didn't care. But you'd see by the end of year his teams were peaking. So was he getting marginal value of playing dogs? Dwayne Wade spoke of the 2008 Olympcis were fantastic for him. He said he regained his confidence (the prior year in NBA he had his worst year since his rookie year.). The blowouts helped him regain his confidence which he admitted was waning due to his injuries the prior 2 years and sub-par play before the 2008 Olympics. IMO these blowouts have helped a player like Brianna Banks. So I'm just offering an alternate appreciation from your opinion. I've recently seen Stokes make a move against one of these teams I never saw her make. Even Meghan remarked on it and said the same thing. I'm not so sure Kiah would have the guts to make that move vs a top tier team. I'm excited to see that move again. I'm excited that now I see her as a potential legit WNBA prospect. This type of thing doesn't always have to come from playing against "the number 2 team" in the nation. So I disagree with your "marginal value" comment. We can agree to disagree.

Have a great rest of Thanksgiving! Let's go Huskies!

 

[Zorro]

1.
Connecticut (32) 8-0800
2Duke5-0761
3Louisville6-0715
4Tennessee5-0702
5Stanford4-1664
6Notre Dame4-0657
7Kentucky6-0616
8Maryland5-1567
9Baylor6-0534
10Nebraska5-0509



Of the nine non-UConn teams currently ranked, we have scheduled Duke, Stanford, Maryland, Baylor and Louisville twice. (6 games). We also scheduled PSU (14) and Cal, which was expected to be in the top ten. Tennessee, of course, refuses to play us and for whatever reason Muffett did not want to schedule us this year either. So that is six games against competition ranked ninth or higher, plus PSU and Cal. and leaves only KY and Nebraska as top ten teams that could (maybe) have been scheduled but weren't.

Duke, to their credit, has five games against top ten competition, Md and KY four each, UT, Md and Lvl three each, Stanford and Baylor 2. Nebraska has none. And really, once you get past the top ten, who would have a realistic chance of putting up a good fight, much less winning, against the current UConn team? Mostly it's blowouts or nothing, y'all. If blowouts dampen your spirits, you have picked the wrong team to watch. Personally, I enjoy watching the Huskies compete against perfection. (Or will, as soon as I get my first shipment of dvds.)

 

[vtcwbuff]

For about the 9th time in this thread: UConn did not schedule the other teams. UConn agreed to be in the tournament and took pot luck. That is a fact.

So you are saying that UConn had no choice in this? That Auriemma and the UConn AD have nothing to say about what teams they play OOC?

Who scheduled the games?

 

[vtcwbuff]

1.
Connecticut (32) 8-0800
2Duke5-0761
3Louisville6-0715
4Tennessee5-0702
5Stanford4-1664
6Notre Dame4-0657
7Kentucky6-0616
8Maryland5-1567
9Baylor6-0534
10Nebraska5-0509



Of the nine non-UConn teams currently ranked, we have scheduled Duke, Stanford, Maryland, Baylor and Louisville twice. (6 games). We also scheduled PSU (14) and Cal, which was expected to be in the top ten. Tennessee, of course, refuses to play us and for whatever reason Muffett did not want to schedule us this year either. So that is six games against competition ranked ninth or higher, plus PSU and Cal. and leaves only KY and Nebraska as top ten teams that could (maybe) have been scheduled but weren't.

Duke, to their credit, has five games against top ten competition, Md and KY four each, UT, Md and Lvl three each, Stanford and Baylor 2. Nebraska has none. And really, once you get past the top ten, who would have a realistic chance of putting up a good fight, much less winning, against the current UConn team? Mostly it's blowouts or nothing, y'all. If blowouts dampen your spirits, you have picked the wrong team to watch. Personally, I enjoy watching the Huskies compete against perfection. (Or will, as soon as I get my first shipment of dvds.)

It's not about a strong schedule against top teams it's about scheduling true bottom feeders. There were probably 300 teams better than Monmouth that UConn could have scheduled. An athletic contest is supposed to be a competition between opposing teams not an exhibition.

I also found the Harlem Globetrotter "games" boring after an exhibition or two.

 

[Forty_four]

How many teams do you think have a real chance of beating UCONN? So let's not play most games within the conference too? Lets change the rules for that too to satisfy your wishes of "chance to win?" And why bother with some of the bottom teams in the NCAA tourney who know they'll be a crap seed even playing in the NCAA. After all, it's about you and the poster "44 . . ." that don't want to see blowouts. When the kids win and get the chance to play in NCAA- aren't they so silly for celebrating so much getting in the NCAA knowing they will get thoroughly crushed? They don't have a shot to win. They seem ok with it, don't they?

You have lumped me in on a point I did not say or make. I expect to see UConn blow teams out, as I watch every game. My point was if you are the victim of a beatdown then you receive little to no benefit from it other than a paycheck for the university. As far as the NCAA tourney, those sixteen seeds have no say in the matter. Your conference statement holds no water as well, they must play UConn. These teams had a choice, they could have said no, like many other teams say no to a UConn matchup.

If you think you are a competitive athlete and you take a trouncing like UConn gives out and then you go Brag about it, then I would not want you on my team. You take losing to lightly.

 

[pinotbear]

So you are saying that UConn had no choice in this? That Auriemma and the UConn AD have nothing to say about what teams they play OOC?

Who scheduled the games?

It has been said, repeatedly, that UConn did not choose the other teams in this round-robin event. I have no reason to doubt that - in fact, given that these teams are an anomaly to the usual OOC schedule, I tend to believe it.

Now, saying that "Auriemma and the UConn AD have nothing to say abut what teams they play OOC?" is a strawman argument, because it sets up a false absolute, using the word "nothing". Of course they have "something" to say, but "something" is just that - it is not everything. As has been said - repeatedly - other teams have agendas, preferences and conflicts, too. Just 'cause we're interested doesn't mean they are. And, even if they are, they've got their own issues and obligations to work around.

It's amazing how simple folks think somebody else's job is...

 

[cohenzone]

I got to disagree. The game is college basketball game. There are differences between "spectator sports" from high school to pro sports. Blowout games are still in some form entertainment to some. Some fans hate to be worried for example- thus they enjoy blowouts.

My issue with you is how you look at things- and by the way I'm pretty old. What did your first post say on this thread? You think these games were/are of marginal value? THAT is an issue I have with your opinion (not with YOU personally). No need to go off on me. I guess my capitalization of some words make it sound like "I'm yelling" or "dislike you" in some manner. That isn't the case at all. For example, I've mentioned on this thread or another that when I was younger I got destroyed by a player that was an all-amercian, Olympian, and played a long time in the NBA. Our team got wiped out. But I had the chance to pit my strengths against his and I got toally annihilated. To this day I still "beam" about that opportunity. This is just one example of how you and I differ.

So I am sorry if i am going to "aggravate you" in some manner (it is not personal. You and I just differ.) by disagreeing with your context but we are complete opposites of what we want to see and/or what we believe is of value. For eample, in the prime of Hoya Paranoia the John Thompson Sr. era, he regularly scheduled dog teams early in the year and was criticized for it. He didn't care. But you'd see by the end of year his teams were peaking. So was he getting marginal value of playing dogs? Dwayne Wade spoke of the 2008 Olympcis were fantastic for him. He said he regained his confidence (the prior year in NBA he had his worst year since his rookie year.). The blowouts helped him regain his confidence which he admitted was waning due to his injuries the prior 2 years and sub-par play before the 2008 Olympics. IMO these blowouts have helped a player like Brianna Banks. So I'm just offering an alternate appreciation from your opinion. I've recently seen Stokes make a move against one of these teams I never saw her make. Even Meghan remarked on it and said the same thing. I'm not so sure Kiah would have the guts to make that move vs a top tier team. I'm excited to see that move again. I'm excited that now I see her as a potential legit WNBA prospect. This type of thing doesn't always have to come from playing against "the number 2 team" in the nation. So I disagree with your "marginal value" comment. We can agree to disagree.

Have a great rest of Thanksgiving! Let's go Huskies!

Just was reacting to your emphatic statement that it isn't what I prefer that matters when it comes to, well, what I prefer. Seemed rather odd to be told I can't have a preference. I might not get my preference, but I like shrimp better than I like hot dogs, so given a choice that is what I prefer. It doesn't mean I don't like hot dogs. I do agree that a stretch of games like these can boost the confidence of someone like Kia who has struggled to find consistency. The true significance will come when she is challenged.

As far as spectator sports go, they charge a fee to watch, it qualifies as a spectator sport. Don't take this the wrong way, but I think it should be understood that watching a team like UConn dismantle a team like St. Bonaventure is not necessarily a thing of beauty, if only because as artistic as it might appear to be, given the huge skill differential, not beating them every which way til tomorrow would make us look like Tennessee. Geno's team trademark is that his teams pretty much never play down to the level of their competition. It is to his credit that his players play full out no matter the score. I get the feeling that a lot of UConn's women's fans are not big fans of the men's team or at least the men's game in general. There is scarcely a game the men play that the margin of victory can be predicted in advance. I think a lot of people would have heart failure watching them play. Can it be aggravating to the fan, yes. But it sure makes every shot important, every turn over big, every foul shot possibly the difference. Of course that's a function of the fact that a lot of mid-level to lower level teams are capable of throwing a scare into a good team unexpectedly in ways that are far more rare in the women's game. Good teams can be disrupted by lesser teams much more frequently in the men's game, so long stretches of beautiful basketball don't happen very much.

As for teams that are trounced enjoying the trouncing, the memory of playing against a lot better teams and super star players certainly will be cherished by some of the players. But just a little part of me suspects that kids on a St. Bonaventure who have lost only one game, have some hope of acquitting themselves better than they did even if they had no expectation of winning. If they feel rewarded and feel it was a growth experience, its possible they were only going through the motions or someone has done a good job of getting them to consider the trouncing to be a positive of some kind. I understand that the coach can say "see what it takes to play winning basketball". Or maybe it's the coach that has the learning experience.

We all want them to win, and we all know that they will annihilate a number of teams even in a non-NC year. We can marvel at their margin of victory even over some of the better teams. I suspect that the UConn players, as competitors, don't mind a stern test, because they think they are up to it. We know the "regulars" love to see the end of the benchers (this year that is limited to walk-ons) get in and contribute. We all do. I think we are lucky to have a Geno as coach, that he is so good, we are a spoiled fan base. I think that if there had never been a Geno, UConn women would probably be as much a second thought as the women's teams are at a very big number of schools. Just my humble opinion and it does not represent the views of this website. Go Huskies and Happy Holidays.

 

[hoophuskee]

You have lumped me in on a point I did not say or make. I expect to see UConn blow teams out, as I watch every game. My point was if you are the victim of a beatdown then you receive little to no benefit from it other than a paycheck for the university. As far as the NCAA tourney, those sixteen seeds have no say in the matter. Your conference statement holds no water as well, they must play UConn. These teams had a choice, they could have said no, like many other teams say no to a UConn matchup.

If you think you are a competitive athlete and you take a trouncing like UConn gives out and then you go Brag about it, then I would not want you on my team. You take losing to lightly.

Well you and I have to agree to disagree. We look at the game totally differently. You wouldn't want me on your team because you look at me as a loser. I wouldn't want you to coach me because I'd look at you as a coward. Even though you aren't. But if I were a kid I would believe it.

When you say the follwoing:
you are the victim of a beatdown then you receive little to no benefit from it
But one of the greatest reg. season non-ncaa tourney upsets in sports history was by TCU vs Kansas on 2/6/2013. A team ranked about 278 (TCU) beat a team ranked about 13 (Kansas).
http://collegebasketballtalk.nbcspo...gest-upsets-of-the-college-basketball-season/

So according to below per this article they say the following: "The benefactor of Bill Self's generosity was TCU, which has lost Big 12 games by 26 (twice), 27 and 34 points so far this season."
http://www.sbnation.com/college-basketball/2013/2/28/4040442/penn-st-michigan-upset-big-10


So according to you- teams can't learn anything/little from getting blown out? So TCU learned little to nothing? We can agree to disagree. Anyhow, you would be a coach I would have no interest to play for because I'd feel it's all about you and your being scared. I would believe if you could you would have cowered away from the Kansas game because your team got blown out in previous games vs lesser competition. That was why I brought up the other "in-conference games" as a reference. And for you to want to take away an opportuntiy that I would have going against a far superior team because you are scared I'd also consider that to be to an extent selfish on your part. I would want to play against the best to see what I got. You'd take that away from me. I would never consider going to your team.

 

[hoophuskee]

Just was reacting to your emphatic statement that it isn't what I prefer that matters when it comes to, well, what I prefer. Seemed rather odd to be told I can't have a preference. I might not get my preference, but I like shrimp better than I like hot dogs, so given a choice that is what I prefer. It doesn't mean I don't like hot dogs. I do agree that a stretch of games like these can boost the confidence of someone like Kia who has struggled to find consistency. The true significance will come when she is challenged.

As far as spectator sports go, they charge a fee to watch, it qualifies as a spectator sport. Don't take this the wrong way, but I think it should be understood that watching a team like UConn dismantle a team like St. Bonaventure is not necessarily a thing of beauty, if only because as artistic as it might appear to be, given the huge skill differential, not beating them every which way til tomorrow would make us look like Tennessee. Geno's team trademark is that his teams pretty much never play down to the level of their competition. It is to his credit that his players play full out no matter the score. I get the feeling that a lot of UConn's women's fans are not big fans of the men's team or at least the men's game in general. There is scarcely a game the men play that the margin of victory can be predicted in advance. I think a lot of people would have heart failure watching them play. Can it be aggravating to the fan, yes. But it sure makes every shot important, every turn over big, every foul shot possibly the difference. Of course that's a function of the fact that a lot of mid-level to lower level teams are capable of throwing a scare into a good team unexpectedly in ways that are far more rare in the women's game. Good teams can be disrupted by lesser teams much more frequently in the men's game, so long stretches of beautiful basketball don't happen very much.

As for teams that are trounced enjoying the trouncing, the memory of playing against a lot better teams and super star players certainly will be cherished by some of the players. But just a little part of me suspects that kids on a St. Bonaventure who have lost only one game, have some hope of acquitting themselves better than they did even if they had no expectation of winning. If they feel rewarded and feel it was a growth experience, its possible they were only going through the motions or someone has done a good job of getting them to consider the trouncing to be a positive of some kind. I understand that the coach can say "see what it takes to play winning basketball". Or maybe it's the coach that has the learning experience.



We all want them to win, and we all know that they will annihilate a number of teams even in a non-NC year. We can marvel at their margin of victory even over some of the better teams. I suspect that the UConn players, as competitors, don't mind a stern test, because they think they are up to it. We know the "regulars" love to see the end of the benchers (this year that is limited to walk-ons) get in and contribute. We all do. I think we are lucky to have a Geno as coach, that he is so good, we are a spoiled fan base. I think that if there had never been a Geno, UConn women would probably be as much a second thought as the women's teams are at a very big number of schools. Just my humble opinion and it does not represent the views of this website. Go Huskies and Happy Holidays.

Great post cohen. Thank you. Too late for me to respond on just a few of your points. I love most of them. However, I don't think you'll like me as a fan. And it's not that you're "wrong." I just think you might judge me as being wrongheaded. I've just changed how I look at things these past 15 years.

 

[Forty_four]

Well you and I have to agree to disagree. We look at the game totally differently. You wouldn't want me on your team because you look at me as a loser. I wouldn't want you to coach me because I'd look at you as a coward. Even though you aren't. But if I were a kid I would believe it.

When you say the follwoing:
you are the victim of a beatdown then you receive little to no benefit from it
But one of the greatest reg. season non-ncaa tourney upsets in sports history was by TCU vs Kansas on 2/6/2013. A team ranked about 278 (TCU) beat a team ranked about 13 (Kansas).
http://collegebasketballtalk.nbcspo...gest-upsets-of-the-college-basketball-season/

So according to below per this article they say the following: "The benefactor of Bill Self's generosity was TCU, which has lost Big 12 games by 26 (twice), 27 and 34 points so far this season."
http://www.sbnation.com/college-basketball/2013/2/28/4040442/penn-st-michigan-upset-big-10


So according to you- teams can't learn anything/little from getting blown out? So TCU learned little to nothing? We can agree to disagree. Anyhow, you would be a coach I would have no interest to play for because I'd feel it's all about you and your being scared. I would believe if you could you would have cowered away from the Kansas game because your team got blown out in previous games vs lesser competition. That was why I brought up the other "in-conference games" as a reference. And for you to want to take away an opportuntiy that I would have going against a far superior team because you are scared I'd also consider that to be to an extent selfish on your part. I would want to play against the best to see what I got. You'd take that away from me. I would never consider going to your team.

Never called you a loser, Don Quixote mine set hoping for that one miracle, willing to badly lose 99 out of 100 games for the satisfaction of one miracle win.
Your TCU example again is not apples to apples: (1) it is a men's example, we all know the potential for upsets in the men's game, rare in the women's games. (2) it is a game that TCU had to play, conference game. (3) we are talking UConn here, almost im possible that they lose a OCC game to an unranked foe.

So I agree to disagree also, if you want to keep hitting your head against the UConn wall, well its your head not mine.