Huskies of Honor: I'm With Stewie

[Jimbo]

You're right Geno is the decider. And he has changed his mind in the past on other issues and I was in agreement with Stewie - "put her on" - with me -- "if she wins." She'd be a relevant part of HISTORY that no class has ever experienced. I think eventually he would have done it. Can't prove it. But he is getting softer. Lobo and Wolters have said it- I think other player's too.

I do disagree big time with "equally deserving" of all the other players you mentioned vs Morgan Tuck if they win title 4. There is no way I consider those players as good as Morgan Tuck. I put Tuck in the Swin and Shea tier. That surpasses every player you have mentioned. IMO to not put Tuck in the tier of Cash/Ralph - if she wins title number 4- is to not give her her just due. What has so far been done here these past 4 years is historic. In that case as time went by I would have been more and more disappointed he didn't put her on the wall in some way because he already had allowed for an exception. But as you say it is his wall and I'm only a fan.

Nobody has allowed for any "exceptions" to anything. The sole criterion for a student-athlete to be inducted is first-team All-America status. That's always been the rule, it's always been adhered to, and it didn't magically change this year. That rule doesn't apply to Chris Dailey at all because she's never been a UConn student-athlete, so no "exception" was necessary to put her name up on the wall. She is, and always was, outside the scope of that rule. You don't need to make "exceptions" to rules for people when those rules don't even apply to them in the first place.

Now, maybe some exceptions or loosening of the All-America rule should be made for certain players or ex-players, or maybe not. That's a debate that might be worth having, but using CD to argue anything one way or the other is a non-sequitur. Her induction into the Huskies of Honor had nothing to do with that rule and did not affect its applicability whatsoever.

 

[Kibitzer]

Had Morgan not qualified by making AA, some here would have sought that an exception be made to get her on that Wall of Honor. Had that occurred (highly unlikely IMO), Morgan's selection would have become a major source of resentment and a permanently tainted honor. Let's look forward to the next honoree, OK?

 

[Jimbo]

I have been in the camp of, "Let's do it by the book and let the chips fall where they may, but maintain the integrity of the 'Huskies of Honor' distinction." I'm super glad that the chips fell for Morgan and she got in, because I think she deserves it.

But I also think we should recognize that, regardless that she got a ring for her redshirt year, technically she was not an active player on the roster that year and therefore didn't "win" 4 championships. She could attempt to rectify this, however - as well as try to get a 5th ring

It's crossed my mind as well that Morgan wasn't active for the 2014 title run, but she was still active for eight games that season before redshirting. So she did contribute to a handful of the 40 victories. So I don't know, where do we draw the line as far as who "wins" a championship? If UConn is fortunate enough to win tomorrow night, I think Lou still wins a championship even though she's not active for the championship game itself. Maybe a player who redshirts is different? Or maybe just a player who redshirts for the entire season is different? Or maybe everyone wins it regardless? It's an interesting philosophical question, I think.

 

[j66kicker]

It's crossed my mind as well that Morgan wasn't active for the 2014 title run, but she was still active for eight games that season before redshirting. So she did contribute to a handful of the 40 victories. So I don't know, where do we draw the line as far as who "wins" a championship? If UConn is fortunate enough to win tomorrow night, I think Lou still wins a championship even though she's not active for the championship game itself. Maybe a player who redshirts is different? Or maybe just a player who redshirts for the entire season is different? Or maybe everyone wins it regardless? It's an interesting philosophical question, I think.

I'm sure Lou "wins" a championship, as she is on the active roster. Re. Morgan, did Butler "win" an NC last year? I guess it's neither here nor there, and I'm not losing any sleep over it - just my take.

 

[Kibitzer]

I'm sure Lou "wins" a championship, as she is on the active roster. Re. Morgan, did Butler "win" an NC last year? I guess it's neither here nor there, and I'm not losing any sleep over it - just my take.

Everyone on the roster gets credit and an NC ring - including Heather Buck for her redshirt (mono) year and Natalie last year. I am sure there have been others.

The only one that completely floored me was when many of us attended a championship celebration gala at the AquaTurf in Southington. Geno was in good form and among his sharpest zingers were those aimed at poor Heather Buck. NC rings were distributed not only to players but also to key school officials and wcbb staff. I saw no harm in this but I was completely dumbfounded when Geno (publicly!) gave one to Doris Burke! I swear it to be true!!

Other Boneyarders were there and I hope they will back me up on this. Or someone ask Doris herself.

 

[j66kicker]

The only one that completely floored me was when many of us attended a championship celebration gala at the AquaTurf in Southington. Geno was in good form and among his sharpest zingers were those aimed at poor Heather Buck. NC rings were distributed not only to players but also to key school officials and wcbb staff. I saw no harm in this but I was completely dumbfounded when Geno (publicly!) gave one to Doris Burke! I swear it to be true!!

Other Boneyarders were there and I hope they will back me up on this. Or someone ask Doris herself.

One of the items in the 2002 audit of the UCONN Foundation was one year they bought 60 championship rings at a cost of $263,000

 

[hoophuskee]

Nobody has allowed for any "exceptions" to anything. The sole criterion for a student-athlete to be inducted is first-team All-America status. That's always been the rule, it's always been adhered to, and it didn't magically change this year. That rule doesn't apply to Chris Dailey at all because she's never been a UConn student-athlete, so no "exception" was necessary to put her name up on the wall. She is, and always was, outside the scope of that rule. You don't need to make "exceptions" to rules for people when those rules don't even apply to them in the first place.

Now, maybe some exceptions or loosening of the All-America rule should be made for certain players or ex-players, or maybe not. That's a debate that might be worth having, but using CD to argue anything one way or the other is a non-sequitur. Her induction into the Huskies of Honor had nothing to do with that rule and did not affect its applicability whatsoever.

When they first began to put up the player's jersey's, what did they say? I remember them saying it was for the 1st team all-americans. You heard different?

 

[hoophuskee]

Geno reiterated for the XXths time 2 days ago that Morgan was robbed last year. I am so happy that this has become an academic question for Morgan. But it will arise again (if we are lucky) and I am firmly of the belief that the penultimate prize for UConn Husky WCBB Greats should not be left to the AA process. Hell, put another bunch of banners up for AAs, but how UConn WCBB defines greatness is up to UConn. Who knows better the contributions toward greatness, legacy, dynasty.

That's why it's great that it's out of the NCAA's hands. Geno can do as he sees fit. Hopefully when he reties 25 years from now with 20 more championships, they've have to build a new arena with all the jersey up on the wall.

 

[hoophuskee]

I have been in the camp of, "Let's do it by the book and let the chips fall where they may, but maintain the integrity of the 'Huskies of Honor' distinction." I'm super glad that the chips fell for Morgan and she got in, because I think she deserves it.

But I also think we should recognize that, regardless that she got a ring for her redshirt year, technically she was not an active player on the roster that year and therefore didn't "win" 4 championships. She could attempt to rectify this, however - as well as try to get a 5th ring

The thing is- I can recall one time I knew someone that won and he was nothing more than a bench player. At the banquet that player was also s spoken of well plus during some of the trying times during the season some of the players made some very good comments of that bench player. And I do hear from Geno teams and many others that speak of their bench as vital even though they don't play.

DO you think Morgan did nothing for the team that year? If that is the case, why was she even at the games? And when I hear about "all players on the bench" are needed even if they aren't playing, that's not just words is it? It especially wouldn't be words for Tuck, would it?

 

[hoophuskee]

Had Morgan not qualified by making AA, some here would have sought that an exception be made to get her on that Wall of Honor. Had that occurred (highly unlikely IMO), Morgan's selection would have become a major source of resentment and a permanently tainted honor. Let's look forward to the next honoree, OK?

I don't think it would have been tainted. Others don't either. It would have been something I agreed with. There is a reason why Geno said -- "There are NO exceptions on the wall at this time."

He is clearly keeping the door open imo. So to me I find it odd "There would be "resentment" from anyone on here. What difference does it make to them? While someone could be annoyed for a short time -- people on here would really lose sleep over it and end up being very resentful? Really????? A UCONN award like this is so important that they need to resent it on here? Again- I can see okay - frustration for a day or two etc.

 

[j66kicker]

DO you think Morgan did nothing for the team that year? If that is the case, why was she even at the games? And when I hear about "all players on the bench" are needed even if they aren't playing, that's not just words is it? It especially wouldn't be words for Tuck, would it?

No I don't think she "did nothing for the team" during her redshirt year. Just like I don't think Butler "did nothing for the team" during her ineligible year. If they're going to give out 60 rings (including one to Doris Burke), then those redshirt players certainly deserve one. Just more of a "rules" question I guess. To me it seems like, by definition, that in her redshirt year - since that year did not count toward her eligibility - she was not officially eligible to compete.

 

[hoophuskee]

[

No I don't think she "did nothing for the team" during her redshirt year. Just like I don't think Butler "did nothing for the team" during her ineligible year. If they're going to give out 60 rings (including one to Doris Burke), then those redshirt players certainly deserve one. Just more of a "rules" question I guess. To me it seems like, by definition, that in her redshirt year - since that year did not count toward her eligibility - she was not officially eligible to compete.

I don't understand your issue? You just said you think she did contribute to the team, right? I don't understand why then you want to even mention Doris in this conversation if you think she did something for the team? And if she did, then why can't you say she earned 4 rings?

 

[j66kicker]

I don't think it would have been tainted. Others don't either. It would have been something I agreed with. There is a reason why Geno said -- "There are NO exceptions on the wall at this time."

He is clearly keeping the door open imo. So to me I find it odd "There would be "resentment" from anyone on here. What difference does it make to them? While someone could be annoyed for a short time -- people on here would really lose sleep over it and end up being very resentful? Really????? A UCONN award like this is so important that they need to resent it on here? Again- I can see okay - frustration for a day or two etc.

To me resentment on here is irrelevant. The resentment I think would be totally justified would be it it were from past great players who didn't get on the wall because they didn't qualify by the well-defined rule.

 

[j66kicker]

I don't understand your issue? You just said you think she did contribute to the team, right? I don't understand why then you want to even mention Doris in this conversation if you think she did something for the team? And if she did, then why can't you say she earned 4 rings?

I'm fine with the 4 rings to Morgan - no problemo. My comment about Doris is to illustrate that rings, if they give out 60 of them (reportedly including one to Doris) are not representative of officially being on the active roster of record on a team that won the NC.

 

[hoophuskee]

I'm fine with the 4 rings to Morgan - no problemo. My comment about Doris is to illustrate that rings, if they give out 60 of them (reportedly including one to Doris) are not representative of officially being on the active roster of record on a team that won the NC.

This is off-topic - nothing to do with our subject I have to say - with what Doris has said lately by going after Dan. I am so thrilled with her-- so thrilled - that she is standing up against a bully -- I can't explain. After she has done this this past week - whatever she has gotten - that's okay by me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[j66kicker]

This is off-topic - nothing to do with our subject I have to say - with what Doris has said lately by going after Dan. I am so thrilled with her-- so thrilled - that she is standing up against a bully -- I can't explain. After she has done this this past week - whatever she has gotten - that's okay by me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Give her another ring!

 

[hoophuskee]

To me resentment on here is irrelevant. The resentment I think would be totally justified would be it it were from past great players who didn't get on the wall because they didn't qualify by the well-defined rule.

I find it hard to imagine any of them would be resentful. Their entire career at UCONN is about team and selflessness. All these championships, all these conference titles etc. How they play and conduct themselves. We the fan (abbreviation for fanatic) can be much worse but still . . . "resentful?"

 

[j66kicker]

I find it hard to imagine any of them would be resentful. Their entire career at UCONN is about team and selflessness. All these championships, all these conference titles etc. How they play and conduct themselves. We the fan (abbreviation for fanatic) can be much worse but still . . . "resentful?"

While I do agree with Kib's assessment that making an exception for Morgan could have become a source of resentment and made this a tainted honor, fortunately it's a moot point now (whew!). So you know my opinion - that's all I need to say on this.

 

[Jimbo]

When they first began to put up the player's jersey's, what did they say? I remember them saying it was for the 1st team all-americans. You heard different?

Well I went back last night and rewatched the original ceremony from 2006, and no, they didn't actually mention anything about that being a requirement. In any case, since Geno was a member of that inaugural class of inductees, despite (shockingly) never being named a first-team All-America, I think it should have been fairly obvious from the get-go that no All-America requirement ever applied to non-student-athletes.

What they have said in more recent ceremonies, verbatim, is exactly what I posted earlier in this thread: "The UConn women's basketball program has just one qualifying criteria [sic] for induction as a student-athlete into the Huskies of Honor program. That criteria [sic] is first-team All-America status."