A Case for Co-Outstanding Players in the NCAA Tournament

[PvP]

I am aware that the NCAA has, in its wisdom, never awarded two deserving players the designation of Co-Outstanding Players in its National Championship Tournament. But, not to take a bit of well-deserved credit from Azzi, I personally believe that there was very little to argue that Sarah didn't have a remarkable tournament, one that was equally contributive to the great Huskie triumph.

While Azzi had more total points, made 3s and steals, Sarah had a better percentage of field goals and 3s made, more than double Azzi's rebounds, considerably more assists and blocks. I am not saying Sarah should have been awarded the MOP title but that any overall difference in either player's contributions were so miniscule that precedent be damned, and that fairness demanded Co-awardees.

 

[bballnut90]

I am aware that the NCAA has, in its wisdom, never awarded two deserving players the designation of Co-Outstanding Players in its National Championship Tournament. But, not to take a bit of well-deserved credit from Azzi, I personally believe that there was very little to argue that Sarah didn't have a remarkable tournament, one that was equally contributive to the great Huskie triumph.

While Azzi had more total points, made 3s and steals, Sarah had a better percentage of field goals and 3s made, more than double Azzi's rebounds, considerably more assists and blocks. I am not saying Sarah should have been awarded the OSP title but that any overall difference in either player's contributions were so miniscule that precedent be damned, and that fairness demanded Co-awardees.

I don't think they've ever issued Co-MOP before, so it'd be a first.

Not to take anything away from Fudd, but Strong's numbers were almost universally better across the board in the Final Four, and the award is Final Four Most Outstanding Player. In 2 Final Four games:

Strong: 46 points, 23 rebounds, 7 assists, 3 steals, 4 blocks, 3 TOs, 19-28 FG (67.8%), 6-9 3pt (66.7%), 2-3 FT (66.7%)
Fudd: 43 points, 5 rebounds, 2 assists, 6 steals, 0 blocks, 3 TOs, 16-29 FG (55.2%), 4-11 3pt (36.4%), 7-7 FT (100%)

Both were outstanding defensively.

Sometimes the committee doesn't always get it right, with 2023 (Reese getting it over Alexis Morris) and 2015 (Stewart winning over Jefferson) being 2 notable examples where the big name player was picked over an (arguably) more deserving teammate.

 

[HuskyNan]

I am aware that the NCAA has, in its wisdom, never awarded two deserving players the designation of Co-Outstanding Players in its National Championship Tournament. But, not to take a bit of well-deserved credit from Azzi, I personally believe that there was very little to argue that Sarah didn't have a remarkable tournament, one that was equally contributive to the great Huskie triumph.

While Azzi had more total points, made 3s and steals, Sarah had a better percentage of field goals and 3s made, more than double Azzi's rebounds, considerably more assists and blocks. I am not saying Sarah should have been awarded the MOP title but that any overall difference in either player's contributions were so miniscule that precedent be damned, and that fairness demanded Co-awardees.

Most Outstanding implies more outstanding than everyone else, so no “co-“. I’d bet money that Sarah could not care less

 

[bbfanLA]

With Paige and Sarah getting so many national and conference awards, I thought it was nice that Fudd got her own individual award.

 

[Centerstream]

Personally I want to believe that we had 3 Most Outstanding Players in the Final Four.
I also believe that Azzi gave us a boost when we needed one, no matter the score. Her break away steals and layups really, really helped UConn break SoCar's spirit. Toss in a couple of dagger 3s and mid range jump shots, well there you go.

 

[PvP]

Most Outstanding implies more outstanding than everyone else, so no “co-“. I’d bet money that Sarah could not care less

I understand the implication of the adjective Most, but what happens when there is one who is more outstanding than everyone else except only one equally outstanding other player?

Just as a "dead heat" happens in horse racing, or in the case where MLB chose to crown "Co-MVPs" when the situation called for it, this situation cannot be ignored and in the case of Azzi and Sarah may well have just occurred according to a number of observers?

Isn't it better to give both equal recognition in such a case than to arbitrarily elevate one just because someone decades ago chose a singular adjective? MLB didn't allow such an injustice, why should WBB?

As far as whether Sarah cares, I wouldn't presume to know how a clearly shy teenager feels about anything, but maybe you know her inner feelings better than me

 

[meyers7]

I thought Fudd, along with most of us, was surprised when they called her name.

But Strong has another 3 years to get one. (or two )

 

[coachcap]

Why is this even an issue? Do you want the committee to pass out feel good participation trophies? As the commercial says: "There's only one..."

 

[Dugway]

I’m fine with Azzi receiving the award.

FWIW, she gave an outstanding thank you speech at the Victory Rally as well. Certainly happy that she will be returning to the team next season!

 

[meyers7]

Why is this even an issue? Do you want the committee to pass out feel good participation trophies? As the commercial says: "There's only one..."

I think because it was just unexpected. I think most people thought, well Strong has had the best tournament, but they might give it to Bueckers, just...because. (Like they did with Stewart.)

 

[SCNCHuskie]

I am aware that the NCAA has, in its wisdom, never awarded two deserving players the designation of Co-Outstanding Players in its National Championship Tournament. But, not to take a bit of well-deserved credit from Azzi, I personally believe that there was very little to argue that Sarah didn't have a remarkable tournament, one that was equally contributive to the great Huskie triumph.

While Azzi had more total points, made 3s and steals, Sarah had a better percentage of field goals and 3s made, more than double Azzi's rebounds, considerably more assists and blocks. I am not saying Sarah should have been awarded the MOP title but that any overall difference in either player's contributions were so miniscule that precedent be damned, and that fairness demanded Co-awardees.

I disagree with the Sarah as Co-MVP. I clearly give it to Azzi. I do not want to take anything away from SS’s performance, which was unbelievably good. However,I did not look at the statistics, I look at the fact that Azzi did her damage in the first half of both final four games, when both games were highly in doubt, and she set the tone for the entire game each time.

 

[Stagnant]

I don’t believe in co-awards. Not ever. I can always make a choice. And in this case, I would have cast my ballot for Sarah Strong.

 

[AzzisBraids]

Fudd deserved this one, I agree they were both equally amazing contributors but it was the timeliness of Azzi's buckets that, in my view, made her the most outstanding player. From what she did to UCLA in the first half ensuring UCLA was not in the mix and her picking Fulwileys pocket, popping threes and breaking ankles.

 

[Cornell Lt]

I thought Fudd, along with most of us, was surprised when they called her name.

But Strong has another 3 years to get one. (or two )

A lot of people said the same thing about Paige. Just sayin'.

 

[Just.A.Fan]

... I look at the fact that Azzi did her damage in the first half of both final four games, when both games were highly in doubt, and she set the tone for the entire game each time.

And that fact is most likely why Azzi was given the award.

 

[DEFCONN1]

When exactly did it go from MVP, most valuable player, to MOP, most outstanding player ?

 

[Rowdy831]

I understand the implication of the adjective Most, but what happens when there is one who is more outstanding than everyone else except only one equally outstanding other player?

Just as a "dead heat" happens in horse racing, or in the case where MLB chose to crown "Co-MVPs" when the situation called for it, this situation cannot be ignored and in the case of Azzi and Sarah may well have just occurred according to a number of observers?

Isn't it better to give both equal recognition in such a case than to arbitrarily elevate one just because someone decades ago chose a singular adjective? MLB didn't allow such an injustice, why should WBB?

As far as whether Sarah cares, I wouldn't presume to know how a clearly shy teenager feels about anything, but maybe you know her inner feelings better than me

To me Co is short for copout. I want them to have to make a decision so if it is wrong we have something to talk about. Azzi is my favorite player and she gets credit or her offense but her defense is also very good. With that said if I had a vote, which I didn't, I would have gone with Sarah. To me she was outstanding in very tournament game this year and did the hard work inside against some real tough and tall girls.

 

[tchalla1]

When exactly did it go from MVP, most valuable player, to MOP, most outstanding player ?

It's always been the MOP award. Lew Alcindor won the MOP award back in '67, and Jerry West in '57.....

 

[PvP]

I want to restate my initial premise, that I in no way believe that Azzi should have been replaced as tournament Most Outstanding Player. She had a great tournament and was vital to our dominance over SC.

My goal was to have Sarah's tremendous contributions also be recognized as, in my view, essentially equally outstanding to Azzi's and that I felt compelled to advocate for them both to be recognized as equally outstanding by being named Co-Outstanding Players.

Based on an entirety unscientific survey of the responses and associated likes, it seems significantly more BYers have chosen to argue for one or the other with my proposal getting the least support.

Interestingly the question has reached beyond the illustrious Bone Yard, as illustrated by a lead article in today's New York Times's sports daily The Athletic in which their panel also decided to take sides, agreeing unanimously that Sarah deserved to be named the MOP.

I think the decidedly divided opinion argues to my original point that both were fabulous and perhaps equally deserving of equal recognition.

Perhaps I should have posed this as a poll?

If there is an interest, that can still be done.

 

[fomalhaut]

Once again, MOP was only for the two Final Four games in Tampa. Strong or Bueckers would have won if it was for the entire tournament, but Azzi's award was well-deserved for the last two games.

 

[Bald Husky]

I thought the winner would be Azzi or Sarah, with the slight nod to Sarah. I watched the game again, and I believe it was Azzi that was really getting us going with Sarah backing her up. I could see why they picked Azzi. Actually, I was really worrying that they would pick Paige, and I only bring it up because I believe it was in either 2015 or 2014 Stewie won the second or third of her MOPs, but I truly believe Moriah should have won it. BTW, Stewie said the same thing.