I think it's important that folks who don't always see the bottle half (or more) full
are encouraged to voice their concerns.
All of the above quantitative positives, still allowed for a very shaky start of the 3rd quarter; the negatives of which were much more than poor marksmanship.
I remember, not so long ago on another board, a contributor put up a similar set, to which I replied, that despite the positive statistics, the team seemed ripe for an upset.
Like last night, a loss to ND didn't happen, but I haven't had such unsettling sensations since the St John's season and the Notre Dame losses. the former of which I also telegraphed to much amusement and derision at the time
The board can be just an uncritical cheer-leader but that would be sad and boring. I agree that jumping all over individuals is not productive and I try not to do it, being a generalist, attempting to view the team through a wide-angle lens.
And right now, I see a team that for all the wonderful pieces, has not yet discovered
a clear identity; that is somewhat limited by the unanticipated lack of growth of our #2 and 3 sophs, and a slower than usual development of the freshman class, for which we had such high hopes. And can be taken off their game by controlled aggression.
That only six (one absentee) were deemed ready to play against a team outside of the top-25 is not overwhelming positive.
That the team has the ability and talent to overcome these hiccups is without question. And even if things do not significantly change, they still may get by on sheer talent alone.
But vintage UConn BB is not yet consistently present. During the Stewie/Tuck/Mo years, they could cut the heart out of their opponents often just by showing up.
And even earlier, strong teams, virtually with a similar degree of talent going at them, would find themselves (metaphorically) smacked in the face...
What I miss is controlled aggression along with finesse.
Enjoy Christmas in Connecticut for an example.
Ding Dong.