Muffet Energized by Challenge

[Plebe]

If only I had a time machine and the ability to brainwash a young Breanna Stewart.

Well, if it helps, she was 0-3 vs. Notre Dame through March 2013.

 

[TheFarmFan]

To me the difference between Muffet and Geno is deeply rooted in their psychology. Muffet sees things in a very zero-sum way, is extremely loss-averse, and I think is very consciously aware of expectations. So the perception that her team is "supposed to win" make it feel like there is nothing to gain and everything to lose, and that, obviously, is less fun.

I actually don't think Geno cares about winning, per se, as crazy as this will sound. And he definitely doesn't care about what other people think. I think he cares about execution, performance, and pursuit of perfection - winning will happen when those things are in place. But it's those things, not winning, that is what motivates him. And it's why when he loses to a team that out-executes, he credits the team and is remarkably sanguine. In his mind, his players didn't do what they were supposed to do - of course they'll lose from time to time when they don't get the execution right. But the not getting it right is the problem, not the losing. By the time the clock ticks zero, he probably sees the outcome as just, in a weird kind of way.

This is why I am a huge Coach Geno fan and something of a Coach Muffet hater - on court, Geno cares about execution, while Muffet cares about winning, and I find it grating and exhausting. In that respect, Geno is a lot like Tara, and Muffet a lot like Mulkey - neither Geno nor Tara wave their hands around like air traffic controllers or toss their clothes on the court like adult dancers in Vegas. The easiest way you can tell if a coach cares more about winning or execution is how they react to questionable calls. Execution-focused coaches focus on executing the next play - they can't control every call, but they can control every subsequent play. Winning-focused coaches focus on arguing with the refs, because they want to win that argument, along with everything else.

Off the court, however, I respect Muffet a ton. And off the court, Geno is a bit too brash for my taste. But I really can't stand Muffet during the only 40 minutes I actually care about - the basketball.

 

[Plebe]

To me the difference between Muffet and Geno is deeply rooted in their psychology. Muffet sees things in a very zero-sum way, is extremely loss-averse, and I think is very consciously aware of expectations. So the perception that her team is "supposed to win" make it feel like there is nothing to gain and everything to lose, and that, obviously, is less fun.

I actually don't think Geno cares about winning, per se, as crazy as this will sound. And he definitely doesn't care about what other people think. I think he cares about execution, performance, and pursuit of perfection - winning will happen when those things are in place. But it's those things, not winning, that is what motivates him. And it's why when he loses to a team that out-executes, he credits the team and is remarkably sanguine. In his mind, his players didn't do what they were supposed to do - of course they'll lose from time to time when they don't get the execution right. But the not getting it right is the problem, not the losing. By the time the clock ticks zero, he probably sees the outcome as just, in a weird kind of way.

This is why I am a huge Coach Geno fan something of a Coach Muffet hater - on court, Geno cares about execution, while Muffet cares about winning, and I find it grating and exhausting. In that respect, Geno is a lot like Tara, and Muffet a lot like Mulkey - neither Geno nor Tara wave their hands around like air traffic controllers or toss their clothes on the court like adult dancers in Vegas. The easiest way you can tell if a coach cares more about winning or execution is how they react to questionable calls. Execution-focused coaches focus on executing the next play - can't control every call, but can control every subsequent play. Winning-focused coaches focus on arguing with the refs, because they want to win that argument, along with everything else.

Off the court, however, I respect Muffet a ton. And off the court, Geno is a bit too brash for my taste. But I really can't stand Muffet during the only 40 minutes I actually care about - the basketball.

Nomination for Post of the Week right here. Elegant, articulate, well layered, insightful op-ed piece.

 

[Wbbfan1]

Muffet McGraw on Future of ND Basketball

Muffet McGraw on the future of Notre Dame women's basketball

Notre Dame head coach Muffet McGraw reviews last season and talks about the future of the program.

247sports.com

 

[rjp172]

Nomination for Post of the Week right here. Elegant, articulate, well layered, insightful op-ed piece.

To me the difference between Muffet and Geno is deeply rooted in their psychology. Muffet sees things in a very zero-sum way, is extremely loss-averse, and I think is very consciously aware of expectations. So the perception that her team is "supposed to win" make it feel like there is nothing to gain and everything to lose, and that, obviously, is less fun.

I actually don't think Geno cares about winning, per se, as crazy as this will sound. And he definitely doesn't care about what other people think. I think he cares about execution, performance, and pursuit of perfection - winning will happen when those things are in place. But it's those things, not winning, that is what motivates him. And it's why when he loses to a team that out-executes, he credits the team and is remarkably sanguine. In his mind, his players didn't do what they were supposed to do - of course they'll lose from time to time when they don't get the execution right. But the not getting it right is the problem, not the losing. By the time the clock ticks zero, he probably sees the outcome as just, in a weird kind of way.

This is why I am a huge Coach Geno fan and something of a Coach Muffet hater - on court, Geno cares about execution, while Muffet cares about winning, and I find it grating and exhausting. In that respect, Geno is a lot like Tara, and Muffet a lot like Mulkey - neither Geno nor Tara wave their hands around like air traffic controllers or toss their clothes on the court like adult dancers in Vegas. The easiest way you can tell if a coach cares more about winning or execution is how they react to questionable calls. Execution-focused coaches focus on executing the next play - they can't control every call, but they can control every subsequent play. Winning-focused coaches focus on arguing with the refs, because they want to win that argument, along with everything else.

Off the court, however, I respect Muffet a ton. And off the court, Geno is a bit too brash for my taste. But I really can't stand Muffet during the only 40 minutes I actually care about - the basketball.

Except it's a bunch of crap. Muffet cares so much about winning over execution that every single in game interview when her team is clobbering the opposition she complains about what they aren't getting right. The morphing of Geno/Tara and Mulkey/McGraw is suspect as well. There is only one of those coaches that throw clothing and it's not McGraw. As far as in game ref complaints. McGraw doesn't even register on the scale of Geno and Mulkey. Actually trying to create a narrative that the Geno doesn't wave his arms around and get animated is ridiculous. Tell me how many times Chris Daley has gotten the brunt of his behavior during a game. Ever seen one of ND's assistant coaches have to hold McGraw back? The notion that Geno doesn't care about winning can be discounted by just doing a quick review of when Geno wasn't winning against ND in the last days of the BE. He didn't handle it like you're trying to portray.

You basically summed up your own article "Coach Geno-fan" "Coach Muffet-hater"...then just made up.

 

[Reypl21]

Except it's a bunch of crap. Muffet cares so much about winning over execution that every single in game interview when her team is clobbering the opposition she complains about what they aren't getting right. The morphing of Geno/Tara and Mulkey/McGraw is suspect as well. There is only one of those coaches that throw clothing and it's not McGraw. As far as in game ref complaints. McGraw doesn't even register on the scale of Geno and Mulkey. Actually trying to create a narrative that the Geno doesn't wave his arms around and get animated is ridiculous. Tell me how many times Chris Daley has gotten the brunt of his behavior during a game. Ever seen one of ND's assistant coaches have to hold McGraw back? The notion that Geno doesn't care about winning can be discounted by just doing a quick review of when Geno wasn't winning against ND in the last days of the BE. He didn't handle it like you're trying to portray.

You basically summed up your own article "Coach Geno-fan" "Coach Muffet-hater"...then just made # 2 up.

I was going to say..... MM doesn't really get that heated towards the refs. Grouping her with Mulkey is not correct IMO. Mulkey and Waltz seem like a pair that like to work the refs and yell at them more. Geno can get very pissed at the refs, but he doesn't work them. McGraw and Tara seem to be more like one another in that regard.

 

[JoePgh]

… Geno can get very pissed at the refs, but he doesn't work them.

Do you actually believe that? What about his baiting of Arike in last December's UConn - ND game? He wasn't "working" the refs in that particular case, but he was using them to "work" Arike (and to do so successfully).

In other instances, he definitely works the refs to maximize the chances that if one call goes unfavorably, the next similar one will go UConn's way.

 

[Plebe]

Do you actually believe that? What about his baiting of Arike in last December's UConn - ND game? He wasn't "working" the refs in that particular case, but he was using them to "work" Arike (and to do so successfully).

In other instances, he definitely works the refs to maximize the chances that if one call goes unfavorably, the next similar one will go UConn's way.

Are you serious? "Baiting"? That was Muffet's dishonest spin on the incident.